boston legal . . . ish.

if berdovsky and stevens are actually prosecuted for possession of a hoax device and disorderly conduct--the witch-hunty and specious charges they were held on bond for yesterday--i'm going to flip out like a ninja. michael rich, the attorney representing the two men, has a paypal account in place for clients; if you felt like it, you could donate some sympathy bucks and a note to compensate him for the time he's had to waste thus far refuting those charges. i'm not giving up hope that reason will prevail; since the boards were magnetic, their posting had zero physical impact on any of the structures they were mounted on, making the act of hanging them a lesser example of disorderly conduct than walking up and down the block taping "have you seen my cat?" fliers to telephone poles. and possession of a hoax device requires that a person knowingly place another person in fear of serious physical injury by suggesting that a harmless device is an "infernal machine"; how could they even attempt to prosecute these guys for such a charge in this case? all they knowingly engaged in was a sponsored ad campaign, which happened to involve batteries; if anyone's responsible for placing others in fear of bodily harm, it's the local media. crazy. crazy.

and while we're discussing state laws, seeing as how we've (for now, at least) legalized same-sex marriage and all, don't you thing it's about time we emended this section a smidge?