Legal Penguins

Not as opposed to illegal penguins but as opposed to legal eagles, that is. I've never been in jail but, I'm familiar with the term "jail house lawyer". A JHL is a convict who has usually been arrested so many times for so many different things that he fancies himself to be sort of a legal expert. You can certainly get good advice from people who have made mistakes. If you are taking on a home improvement project and your neighbor has tried to do a similar project in the past, and tells you: "Don't do what I did...", it behooves you to listen. When we're not learning from our own mistakes, we need to be learning from those of others. A JHL who has spent a lot of time talking to lawyers about his mistakes in banking or liquor hold-ups mightcould know a thing or two about the law. But, real lawyers probably know more.

Yesterday I got some friendly, un-solicited advice from an unemployed guy whose daddy knows a lawyer. His daddy "built the guy's law firm", he said. I like carpenters because I get to paint and stain the work that they do. Carpenters like me because I can fix or mask their short-comings.

A little caulk, a little putty, a little paint/makes a carpenter what he ain't.

But, I digress. In regard to the conflict with the "psychologist", this guy gave me some, well, irrational (BUT FRIENDLY!) advice about how he was ready to launch a lawsuit against me (at my expense, mind you) that would culminate with me having to pull down my pants and expose myself to a judge and jury. The result of this exposure would be public Topix exposure of my private shame. That, and the girl would get millions of dollars for defamation of character plus millions more for my having what he so technically called "(a) little pink willy". I wonder if the court would legally recognize "shrinkage" citing the precedent of COSTANZA v JERRY'S GIRLFRIEND (Ep 7, Sea 4)? The guy said that nothing would please him more than my having to do this. Now, THAT'S creepy.

With the help and blessing of the "psychologist", he was building a case against me. According to him, according to the "psychologist" and her best e-galpal, I had threatened the lives of both women.

"Whoa", wrote the galpal, "No threats have been made against me and I never claimed such. I think he's an ashsole (sic). But he's never threatened me."

Well then, he threatened the "psychologist". Nope. She replied to him: "You're very sweet but he hasn't threatened me, just been annoying like a little gnat".

The irrational guy went on to state: "from what you have told me, by definition of law, he has threatened you."

Women always say that men don't listen when they talk. Clearly. She went on to say that (now) the photo in question was a "generic photo". Well, there goes the irrational guy's fantasy of me the judge and the jury. (I can't resist this so, forgive me. I would have hoped that it wasn't a hung jury as I wouldn't want a bunch of porn stars judging me. WOULD YOU?!)

Shortly after that exchange I found something better to do. This morning, I checked on the thread and the very same irrational guy was fussing with someone else and calling the guy a...(cork-soaker). I guess that you can do that when you've got the law in your back pocket...

So, no one is going to sue anyone about this foolishness. What damage has been done, I think that I have un-done. It was "he said/she said" in the beginning and that's the way this will end. Her friends got her back, my friends got mine and that's not going to change. My e-friend (who is a very real, wonderfull person to me) was right when she told me that you "can't win with stupid..." True. Stupid is irrational and has far more experience than me.