Artwork

Contenu fourni par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Application Podcast
Mettez-vous hors ligne avec l'application Player FM !

Lawyer Talk Q&A - Fighting Words: Can Insults Justify Assault?

3:12
 
Partager
 

Manage episode 437651816 series 2812877
Contenu fourni par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.

Steve Palmer answers a fascinating listener question from Kathy about the concept of "fighting words."

In this episode, Steve explores the legal landscape of fighting words, tracing its origins to the 1942 Supreme Court case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. He explains how the Court determined that certain words could be so offensive that they might be criminalized, despite First Amendment protections. Steve also discusses how this doctrine has evolved, particularly through cases arising during the Vietnam era and protests involving inflammatory language against the government.

Steve touches on how these principles apply to juveniles, referencing the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District case, which asserted that students don't lose their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.

Stay tuned for part one of Kathy's question in a future segment.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

  continue reading

352 episodes

Artwork
iconPartager
 
Manage episode 437651816 series 2812877
Contenu fourni par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.

Steve Palmer answers a fascinating listener question from Kathy about the concept of "fighting words."

In this episode, Steve explores the legal landscape of fighting words, tracing its origins to the 1942 Supreme Court case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. He explains how the Court determined that certain words could be so offensive that they might be criminalized, despite First Amendment protections. Steve also discusses how this doctrine has evolved, particularly through cases arising during the Vietnam era and protests involving inflammatory language against the government.

Steve touches on how these principles apply to juveniles, referencing the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District case, which asserted that students don't lose their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.

Stay tuned for part one of Kathy's question in a future segment.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

  continue reading

352 episodes

Wszystkie odcinki

×
 
Loading …

Bienvenue sur Lecteur FM!

Lecteur FM recherche sur Internet des podcasts de haute qualité que vous pourrez apprécier dès maintenant. C'est la meilleure application de podcast et fonctionne sur Android, iPhone et le Web. Inscrivez-vous pour synchroniser les abonnements sur tous les appareils.

 

Guide de référence rapide