AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
18 usc 134312/6/2023 ![]() ![]() We’ve got your fingerprints (somewhere on file), so you might as well tell us why you did it. ![]() Deception is to be found in the tool-bag of every investigative reporter and police detective. The art of deception is a very common strategy, as in sports and war. Lacis then proceeded into a bizarre taxonomy of deceit: Nevertheless, as Lacis observed, the fact that Gleick has preached the importance of scientific integrity for many years and was the Chair of the AGU Committee on Scientific Integrity adds a salaciousness to his hypocrisy. Gleick’s conduct might have been condoned in other societies at other times, but this would not be relevant to a judge’s determination of whether or not he committed an offence under. While there is undoubtedly some cultural relativism in attitudes towards deception, Gleick’s conduct took place in the United States in 2012 and is subject to U.S. Blatant hypocrisy is the inevitable result. Take for example all those not-so-infrequent cases where politicians and televangelists have stridently preached ‘family values’, and then got caught doing the wrong thing at the wrong address. This creates that undesirable circumstance and appearance of hypocrisy. It is only when one is preaching for some emphatic course of action, and then gets caught doing something that is to the contrary. After all, deception, ethics, and morality are all relative, depending on one’s culture, circumstances, and purpose at hand. Lacis then argued that Gleick’s conduct fell within the scope of “dirty-pool politics” and was subject to cultural relativism, with the only real drawback being an “appearance of hypocrisy”:Īll of this falls in the category of dirty-pool politics that has a long established tradition dating back to the early days of recorded time. I think that reasonable people can agree that Gleick was “inept in his deception” (see my post on America’s Dumbest Criminals), though I do not agree with Lacis that the problem was only that he “got caught”. And, there was some poor secretary at the Heartland Institute who was being gullible and naïve (I hope she still has her job). Lacis started as follows:įrom all the foregoing, as I see it, Peter Gleick was simply being inept in his deception (i.e., he got caught doing it). codes and cases, let me start with Lacis’ comment at Judy Curry’s as it is representative of one line of talking points that are being tried out by the “community”. All the elements of appear to met under admitted facts.īefore considering actual U.S. This decision is binding on lower courts. Supreme Court that is exactly on point to this question: it held that confidentiality and exclusive use of business information were a form of property rights, the deprivation of which using false pretences was an offence under. Given Gleick’s admissions, the only legal point that even requires analysis is whether his actions deprived Heartland of “property” under binding interpretations of. Unfortunately for Gleick, the issue is not what Lacis thinks, but whether his admitted acts (leaving the fake memo aside for now) meet all the elements of (wire fraud), a serious federal offence. Lacis classified Gleick’s conduct as merely a “political prank”. Andrew Lacis of GISS has an extraordinary comment at Judy Curry’s that prompted today’s post.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |