Animal Rights Group Paid Witness To Lie At Trial - Loses Big TIme

$15.75 million will buy a lot of peanuts

Hey y'all: don't pay your witnesses to make things up. That's bad. How bad?

For starters, once it comes to light you'll lose the case. But it doesn't end there. The person you wrongfully sued will like be upset. How upset? Well, the'll probably sue you.

A settlement reached between animal rights groups and the producers of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of making an allegation in federal court that you have trouble backing up.

The Humane Society of the United States and other animal-rights groups have paid Feld Entertainment a combined $15.75 million to settle allegations by the company that the groups and their lawyers bribed a former circus employee to make up allegations that Feld abused Asian elephants in its circus.

So to recap: The Humane Society lost the original case and had to pay Ringling Bros. attorneys' fees for just that case. Then, Ringling Bros. sued The Humane Society for the whole "paying the witness to lie" thing, which just cost The Humane Society and some other related animal rights groups a total of $15.75 million.

Next time someone from PETA or The Humane Society asks you for money, you can just tell them No thanks bro, I've already given some money to Ringling Bros.

Ninth Circuit: Sea Shepard's Actions are "Piracy"

Have you heard of the TV show Whale Wars? If not, it's a reality show on the Animal Planet channel that follows a group of hard-line environmentalists who are engaged in stopping whaling. These environmentalists have a ship called the "Sea Shepherd" and they go around making life difficult for Japanese whaling vessels.

When I say "making life difficult", I mean: they ram the whaler's ships with their own ship, they throw nets in front of the whalers to ensnare/damage their propellers, and they throw glass jars of acid at the whalers. You gotta admit, that's some pretty serious stuff.

So, obviously, the Japanese whalers aren't exactly thrilled with what's going on. Accordingly, the Japanese folks have sued the Sea Shepherd folks in federal district court, claiming that the acts of the Sea Shepherd and its crew amount to piracy, and are seeking an injunction.

The district court dismissed the piracy claim, and the Japanese appealed to the Ninth Circuit, who reversed the trial court. Here's how Judge Kozinski begins his opinion:

You don’t need a peg leg or an eye patch. When you ram ships; hurl glass containers of acid; drag metal-reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders; launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks; and point high-powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate, no matter how high-minded you believe your purpose to be.

You can read the full opinion here. I love it, and he's exactly right. Just because you believe that you're acting in a principled manner and that you're on the side of the angels doesn't mean you get to throw acid at other ships and ram them. There's no exception for subjectively believing you have good intentions. If you do these thinigs, you're a pirate. Maybe you're not a very hard-core pirate, but you're still attacking another ship on the high seas.

Also, you know what didn't help the Sea Shepherd's lawyer? It's kind of hard to argue that your client isn't a pirate when this is their flag:

Seriously, counselor? That's your client's flag? And you're gonna sit there and tell me that your client isn't a pirate? Right.

Here's the thing: if you're going to go to the point where you throw acid at other ships, ram them, and intentionally try to damage their propulsion and steering capabilities with nets, why not go all in? If you're going to be a pirate - own it. Get some cannons, some torpedoes, and be serious about it. Or don't do it at all.

The only thing worse than a pirate is a half-assed pirate.

Meat, Murder, and Morrissey

I kind of vaguely remember Morrissey from back in the day, but I'm not really sure I can think of any of his songs. In any event, this guy Morrissey is upset that he has to share the world with people who have different views from his.

Life is tough when you're an aging rock star that no one really remembers, and you don't eat meat. So, after bering invited on the Jimmy Kimmel, Morrissey decides that he can't agree to go on the show until his demands are met. These demands? Oh nothing, just disinvite some of the other scheduled guests.

The former Smiths frontman and outspoken vegetarian/animal-rights activist has announced that he won't be appearing on Jimmy Kimmel LIve on Tuesday because he doesn't want to share the stage with the animal-stalking crew of the reality TV series "Duck Dynasty."

In explaining his decision, Morrissey, never one to withhold an opinion, referred to the show's stars as "animal serial killers."

"As far as my reputation is concerned, I can't take the risk of being on a show alongside people who, in effect, amount to animal serial killers," the singer said in a statement posted online. "If Jimmy cannot dump 'Duck Dynasty,' then we must step away."

Wait, what? The guys from Duck Dynasty are so evil that a rock star can't be on stage in the same show with them? These guys make duck calls and go duck hunting. That's it. They're not part of Hitler's lost SS Battalion, they aren't in a Satanic cult, and they aren't lawyers.

They're just country folks who hunt. Really. That's it. And they're "animal serial killers". Well, I guess I'm in the "serial killer" club as well. I guess everyone who's in Ducks Unlimited, hunts deer, or even fishes, is now part of the ol' serial killer club. Do we get any perks? Are there any badges or anything?

These militant vegans are seriously crazy. The funny part is that they are the most intolerant people you'll meet. I used to know one. In college, a militant vegan was housemates with a friend of mine. This militant vegan was extreme, which is her choice. The odd part was that her cats (yes she had animal companions) were forced to partake in her vegan lifestyle. Whenever I would visit, I would ultimately end up getting in debates about eating meat and such. I'm sure you'll be shocked to know that we never really ended up convincing the other person. Basically, I was the antithesis of everything good to her - a white, southern male who killed animals and ate meat. Yep, an animal serial killer.

I noticed that whenever I would come over that her cats would always come into the kitchen when I would cook, as I was cooking meat, and they were forced to eat seaweed or something equally icky and vegan. I knew that because she disliked all my meat eating, if I could get her cats to love me, it would really annoy her.

It's amazing how rubbing a little chicken grease on your shoelaces keeps cats sitting at your feet and licking your shoes your all night long.

Wingnut Animal Rights Group Fights for Pigeons

Here's a legal question for you: If a private citizen flies a remote-controlled drone over your property (against your wishes) for the purpose of videotaping you and your guests doing something perfectly legal, do you have the right to shoot at it? Or can someone film you?

That is exactly what has been happening in an what has become an ongoing battle between the wingnut animal rights group SHARK (SHowing Animals Respect and Kindness) and folks who participate in live pigeon shoots. If you've never heard of SHARK, that's ok. These are the people who think that Greenpeace and PETA aren't extreme enough.

In early 2012, SHARK flew a drone over privately owned Broxton Bridge Plantation to film the pigeon shoot with their drone. As you might have guessed, flying a small helicopter over the heads of a bunch of folks with shotguns might not be such a great idea.

Undeterred, these wingnuts are still following the pigeon shooters all over the country. Just this past Sunday, SHARK flew their drone helicopter over privately owned land near Philadelphia, and guess what? It was shot down.

Here's the thing, y'all: People hunt birds all over the country. It's perfectly legal. I did it this past weekend. Some folks don't like it and want to stop it. The folks who are shooting live pigeons aren't exactly shooting an endangered species. Pigeons are about as abundant as any bird can be. I just don't think this is the hill that animal rights folks need to be fighting on. It's not we're talking about people killing endangered whales, endangered tigers, or African elephants.

We're talking about freakin' pigeons here. Pigeons. They're everywhere. Let's get some perspective.

PETA Files Serious Lawsuit in Ninth Circuit

PETA has filed a lawsuit to stop a company from violating the 13th Amendment. That's right. Did you know that there is an evil corporation out there earning money through slavery? No more. PETA is going to stop this slavery.

The Plaintiffs were forcibly taken from their families and natural habitats, are held captive at SeaWorld San Diego and SeaWorld Orlando, denied everything that is natural to them, subjected to artificial insemination or sperm collection to breed performers for defendants' shows, and forced to perform, all for defendants' profit," the lawsuit says, arguing that those conditions amount to enslavement and/or forced servitude.

That's horrible! How dare SeaWorld take people from their families and force them to breed and perform in shows. How has this gone unnoticed for so long! Where is the justice? Oh wait...you mean these guys are your Plaintiffs?

You know, sometimes I think PETA is a group that has the sole purpose of discrediting the animal rights movement by taking such outrageous positions that people otherwise inclined to be sympathetic to them are driven away. I mean really. The lawyer who represents these Orcas is a knuckle-head. Also, how does he know that the orcas wanted to bring this suit? Did he discuss this with them? Maybe they're happier hanging out in San Diego than in the North Sea. I mean, have you seen San Diego? It's really nice. How does he convey offers of settlement? If the case isn't dismissed, can we take some depositions? That would be fun.

If I were SeaWorld, I would offer to settle this case with an offer of free food for life and protection from other animals for all the Plaintiffs. Oh wait, they already have that now? Doh!

If the Court doesn't impose Rule 11 sanctions against the lawyer bringing this suit, the entire rule should be eliminated. The 13th Amendment only applies to people. Always has, always will. When it was adopted in 1865 these slaves were the main way that people got from place to place. Not slavery. There is no way you can even contort yourself into some kind of legal "knot" and say that it is even possible that this is a serious or legitimate lawsuit. If I were a judge hearing this, I would be annoyed that my time is being wasted when there are actual important things to do. Court is not a kid's game or a way to get your agenda some publicity.