Move over financial crisis, there’s something bigger in the media hot seat today. Prop 8 has created quite a controversy and as we speak, the California Supreme Court is deciding the validity of the proposition eliminating same-sex marriage. It began in May when the court finally allowed all of us to have equal rights regarding marriage. However, putting it up for question on the November ballot was a slap in the face.

Kate Kendell, executive director of San Francisco’s National Center for Lesbian Rights, which represents several same-sex couples in cases now before the court — many who have married already — said the court realizes that the cases raise landmark issues.

“Prop 8 strikes at the very core of why those justices wear black robes and sit on the bench,” she said. “If Prop 8 is allowed to stand, they may as well be potted plants in terms of how severely the court’s role as an interpreter and guardian of the constitution will be hampered.”

Popularity: 5% [?]

Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers has a point to make when it comes to the law. Recently, Chambers filed suit against God, seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the “death, destruction, and terrorisation” caused by God. The lawsuit was filed last year. According to Chambers, God had “threatened him and the people of Nebraska and millions upon millions of the Earth’s inhabitants.”

However, US Judge Marlon Polk shot down the God suit because the defendant lacks an address, legal papers and most likely wouldn’t be showing up to court anytime soon.

“Given that this court finds that there can never be service effectuated on the named defendant this action will be dismissed with prejudice,” Judge Polk wrote in his ruling.

Chambers motives are to prove that “anyone can sue anyone else, even God.” That being said, he is currently deciding on whether or not to appeal.

Popularity: 8% [?]

What happens when you mix a stressful legal situation, video cameras and a machine gun smattering of razor sharp (or not so sharp) questions? We’ve put together our favorite all-time cranky court room outbursts, depositions gone awry and sobering Law School realities to create a hilarious collection of the funniest legal videos ever.

#1 When Judges Attack

This Judge flies off the handle in a menopausal tirade directed at a deserving defendant.

TV Judge Marilyn is probably best known for the explosive tongue lashings she gives to the people in her TV courtroom but this one was over the top for even the courtroom queen of mean. When an arrogant defendant demands “a certain level of respect” he is thrown out court but not before a hilarious exchange of words.

#2 How Not To Handle a Tough Deposition

A cranky old guy deflects questions with a pile of B.S. and an entertaining outburst!

When questioned about an unauthorized use of funds the irritable old dude man in question launches into an Oscar winning performance before completely melting down.

#3 Law School the Musical

A musical tribute to Law School Hell

An insider’s melodic interpretation of the harsh realities of law school.

#4 How NOT to Fake a Heart Attack

Hello Mr. Heart-attack Faker, meet a Pissed Off Judge

Note to Lawyers: if you are your client are going to fake a sickness to get out of court, make sure it’s not a heart attack… once they take your vital signs, the ruse is up!!

#5 NO BITING!!!

A defendant in court lashes out.

First he kicks HIS lawyer (???) then tries to go after a bailiff. Tasers ensue, and the funny begins.

Popularity: 8% [?]

In Italy, a part-time judge and lawyer pulled the old switcheroo with her twin in court and got busted for it. Reported in Italy’s leading newspaper, Corriere della Sera, the two 54-year-old twins have been charged with fraud and will go on trial in January. It began when one sister who had two simultaneous engagements did not want to lose out on legal fees and sent her sister in her place.

The problem was that her sister is not a lawyer and therefore, it wasn’t legal for her to charge the clients, which she did anyway. Oops! After the clients caught on to the “sister-swap,” they both sued for damages.

Popularity: 5% [?]

There’s gotta be something in the water in Central Ohio. And sometimes the law is like a game in a Vegas casino. While murderers and definitely pedophiles don’t always get the book thrown at them, a 15-year-old girl did. Accused of taking nude cell phone photos of herself and sending them to high school classmates, police arrested her on Friday and held her over the weekend.

Now, what that will do to a young girl going through puberty who is exploring her sexuality, uncertain about what is deemed “appropriate” versus “inappropriate behavior,” is unimaginable. I’m guessing she is feeling pretty badly about herself right now and sometimes those type of things can last indefinitely. On Monday, the girl entered denials to juvenile charges of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material and possession of criminal tools.

A spokeswoman for the Ohio attorney general’s office said that although an adult convicted of “child pornography” charges would have to register as a sexual offender, a judge would have flexibility on the matter with a convicted juvenile — Oh, gee, thanks! How compassionate.

The people wasting everyone’s time pursuing this are 1.) causing severe damage to a teen girl and 2.) using taxpayer’s money for a case that does no one any good. Rather than bring down a teenager who snapped a few photos of herself, they should go after the REAL child pornographers who abuse kids and get away with it.

In short, everyone involved in this case should be ashamed of themselves! A prosecutor says Licking County authorities are also considering charges for students who received the photos. However, I think the teen being charged should file a suit, defending herself against lunatics trying to bring her down, emotionally and mentally.

Popularity: 5% [?]

Famous best-selling author John Grisham had a face-off in the courtroom and won. A federal judge has dismissed a libel lawsuit filed against him and two other writers over books they wrote about the wrongful conviction of two men in a 1982 murder. Filed last year by former Ontotoc County District Attorney Bill Peterson, former Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation investigator Gary Rogers and Melvin Hett, a state criminalist, the three helped win the original convictions in the slaying of cocktail waitress Debbie Sue Carter.

Alleging that the defendants set out a personal attack, conspiring to commit libel, generate publicity for themselves by placing the plaintiffs in a false light and intentionally inflicting emotional distress, Judge Ronald White rejected the claims in his ruling Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma.

After two men were convicted of murdering the waitress, 12 years later, they were released from prison due to DNA evidence that cleared them. Later linked to the murder was a key witness, Glen Gore, whose DNA matched the killers and was found guilty of the murder and sentenced to life in prison.

According to the judge, it’s highly important to analyze and criticize the judicial system “so that past mistakes do not become future ones,” which is what Grisham did in his book titled, The Innocent Man.

Popularity: 2% [?]

All eyes are on O.J. Simpson who is getting ready to stand trial. And jury picks have officially begun. However, where, oh, where will you find a juror who is actually unbiased regarding O.J. I mean, this is O.J. (killer) Simpson we are talking about. This is a man who probably wishes he were convicted of murder back in the day because life on the outside has been unbearable. Most people hate him, some love him but it isn’t going to be easy to find a juror who has absolutely no opinion of the football star/actor who fell from grace.

Five-hundred prospective jurors were questioned and many confessed that they couldn’t put aside how they felt about the 1995 acquittal on Simpson’s double-murder charges of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. And anyone who says they have no feelings on the subject matter are probably lying. So, what’s a Judge to do?

Judge Jackie Glass personally lectured the jurors on the subject. “If you are here thinking you are going to punish Mr. Simpson for what happened in Los Angeles in 1995, this is not the case for you,” said Glass. “If you’re looking to become famous because of your service in this case, write a book, then this is not the case for you.”

Good luck with that one!

Simpson faces a dozen charges including felony kidnapping, armed robbery, conspiracy, burglary, coercion and assault with a deadly weapon in connection with the alleged robbery of two sports collectibles dealers last September in Las Vegas.

If convicted, he could be a jailbird lifer. And the likelihood of this happening due to his last trial is a high possibility. It’s very rare to get lucky in the hot seat twice.

Popularity: 4% [?]

Talk about a good day in court. Mary Winkler, who was convicted of voluntary manslaughter in the 2006 shooting death of her Church of Christ minister hubby in 2006, is not only out of jail after 12 days and two months in a mental health facility but she has now been granted custody over her two children.

“She is absolutely overjoyed,” said Rachael Putman, a custody attorney.

Now, call me crazy but most likely not even close to overjoyed, has got to be the slain man’s parents, Dan and Diane Winkler. Caring for the children, ages 11, 9, and 3, the grandparents did allow visitation with their mother (probably because they were forced to by the courts), however, Mary is now going to take over full parental responsibility in her home near McMinnville, about 60 miles southeast of Nashville.

“It should be seen as a sign that the family is healing,” Putnam said of the custody arrangement. “It’s a good thing for everyone.”

When an attorney representing Dan and Diane Winkler were contacted, they did not immediately return the call for comment.

Tried for murder after her husband was found dead by a shotgun blast to the back, she was instead found guilty of voluntary manslaughter after describing the years of abuse she endured.

Popularity: 8% [?]

Judge Jesse Harris landed in some trouble after allegedly exposing himself to two women (an ex-girlfriend and friend) in March in the parking lot of a Tulsa motel. Naturally, he says it isn’t so. In response to the allegations, Harris filed a civil lawsuit against the two women last month, stating that they slandered and libeled him. Trying to get rid of the old and bring in some unbiased new folks, lawyers for Harris asked the Oklahoma of Criminal Appeals to order Osage County District Judge M. John Kane IV to disqualify Washington County District Attorney Rick Esser and his team.While Kane denied the disqualification request last month, defense attorneys Joel Wohlgemuth and Allen Smallwood claim Esser’s office engaged in an abuse of power in an attempt to force Harris from the bench.

Until the disqualification request is resolved, Harris will not be arraigned on a two-count indecent exposure charge and no preliminary hearing is scheduled.

Popularity: 5% [?]

On trial in Los Angeles for distributing videos of sexual fetishes, including acts of bestiality and defecation is porn filmmaker Ira Isaacs. However, that’s not where the story lies. Are you ready for this one? Alex Kozinski, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals chief judge overseeing the case is the real one under the courtroom’s microscope.

And why is that?

Well, it turns out that Judge Kozinski isn’t unfamiliar with the porn industry. In fact, he’s got it all over his personal site. Ooh, la, la! Kozinski is in the X-rated house! Due to this recent discovery, Kozinski has granted a 48-hour stay in the obscenity trial after prosecutors requested time to explore “a potential conflict of interest concerning the court having a…sexually explicit [web site] with similar material.”

While Kozinski admitted to posting some of the graphic content on his site, he threw his son Yale under the bus, stating that he must have downloaded the majority of it. Sure, we believe you! Wink, wink.

“Yale called and said he’s pretty sure he uploaded a bunch of it,” Kozinski wrote in an e-mail to Abovethelaw.com, a legal news website. “I had no idea, but that sounds right because I sure don’t remember putting some of that stuff there.”

The moral of today’s Pop Legal story is based on that old, cliché saying: Never throw stones if you live in a glass house full of porn.

Popularity: 7% [?]