Law in Culture…..Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile

Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile is a crime non-fiction documentary regarding chronicle/records of the crimes of Theodore Robert Bundy (Ted Bundy) that he did and hid from his longtime girlfriend, who refused to believe after knowing the truth about him for years. A little background information of this documentary-like the main character, who performed Ted Budny’s character etc. Zac Efron was the main character who performed Ted Bundy’s biography that has been launched on Netflix and its worldwide premiere at the Sundance Film Festival on January 26, 2019, and was released in the United States on May 3, 2019. The film received many good reviews and critics at the same time but most people really enjoyed Zack Efron’s performance.    


(Zac Efron as Ted Bundy)

This documentary talks about this introverted, shy, and really public awkward person who was really insecure growing up because of poor family conditions. He used to live in Seattle, Washington, and was a law student and then fell in love with a girl (who was widowed and had a daughter) in a bar where he used to work. His girlfriend (Elizabeth) didn’t even know that he had been murdering other girls. His so-called shyness and pettiness I would say would never make others think that he could do something like this, especially his girlfriend that he loved so much. He killed random young women and even raped most of them and then either burnt their bodies or cut them into pieces. He basically was a psychopath but always pretended that he was innocent and always acted confident after being convicted of murders he did. I want to mention one of his documented victims, Karen Sparks who survived a beating in her own bed with a metal rod that Bundy used to attack her. He had committed crimes in many states including Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Florida, and Colorado. After insulting all the lawyers he got or just dismissing them from his case, he then fought his own case by himself because as I’ve mentioned earlier that he was studying law. He no doubts fought his case really well but all witnesses were against him, everything was proven but he still didn’t confess after proven guilty. He then confessed the murders of 36 women and some studies showed that it was more than 60 women that he brutally killed and got executed after 10 years of being in jail.  His first-ever murder was in Seattle after meeting with his girlfriend. She was the one who suspected his appearance to the police when watched the news about the killer (Bundy). She wasn’t aware that he was the murderer but later on she got to know him being handcuffed in jail via TV and when he came back home, he totally disapproved of the news and said that he was in jail because of a “high-speed felony”. Later on,  things got more serious murdered many girls, and then he shifted to Colorado’s jail and became the most wanted person by the FBI. 


(Wanted sign for Ted Bundy)

“He tried escaping in June 1977” like usual and he did from Colorado’s jail too but he was caught after a week. This documentary definitely portrayed the concept of the court system like first, he went to the trial court for his “allegation”, then intermediate appellate. After being a dangerous murderer then the highest court comes which is the appellate division where he fought his own case, lost it, and went to jail for execution. According to Screen Rant In 1978, Ted Bundy killed six women in Florida and was ultimately convicted and sentenced to death. And one more according to, “Bundy was charged with raping and murdering two women at the Chi Omega sorority house at Florida State University, attacking two more, and then attacking a young woman nearby after he left”.  Later on, after being sent to jail, he was executed in “Florida State Prison 24, 1989  was buckled with the electric chair and at 7:16 a.m he was pronounced dead”. 

In conclusion, I think yes it really portrayed the legal field because whatever crimes he did at the end he got punished for it and was brutally executed and his body no doubt had felt the same feeling that his victims did. Many innocent women lost their lives because of this psychopath. If I talk about my perspective or interest regarding the law profession, it increased after watching this documentary that yes law works no matter how cool and well you play, if you’ve done something wrong you will get punished at the end no matter what. Court declared his death many times but they could not execute him without him confessing thus waited longer for his confession. And then died at the age of 42. I would like to recommend this documentary to everyone because it’s really interesting and is a biography of Ted Bundy and his crime, there’s actually footage of the courts hearing and like media coverage of his confession and shows what kind of a person he actually was.

Matter of Marian T (Lauren R.)

So this case was heard in October of 2020.v. As per my understanding, this case revolves around the adoption of a lady named Marian and how her consent was required for adoption. According to the video, Marian didn’t have the capacity to consent whether she wants to be adopted or not because of her mental disabilities or she’s not capable of that. She was under the custody of New York State Mental Hygiene Legal Services and got the lawyer through court I think and it’s called ad litem. The court approved the adoption because Appellate division courts are allowed to do such things if a person is not capable of it, doesn’t matter if it’s a child or an adult. The Appellate Division correctly decided according to the statutes that were provided to express the statutory (legal written law) to dispense with Marian’s consent and that the court did not abuse its discretion when it said that she is “incapable” of taking her own decisions as per what I got. 

I actually second the Appellate Division court because in these situations courts are authorized to approve an adoption even without the consent ( grant permission or agreement of a person to do something) of a person of an adult adoptee. And discretion was not abused because as per what I understood, she’ll get every support an adoptee gets like she’ll be an heir of her adoptive family if she gets away from her biological family and that’s the law. I observed many things like the judge said that if a person is 18 or older and they are unable to consent or if they don’t have “capacity” for it, they can never get adopted. One more thing I observed is that the council (female) said that the state had gotten her custody by her own biological parents when she was a kid which was really shocking for me because I’ve never seen something like that. I was thinking that her parents might have died or something else would’ve had happened that’s why she got adopted. One thing that I really liked about the male council was how he mentioned that Marian is considered “not capable” of making decisions and didn’t even ask if she needed the attorney or if she wanted to appeal to the bigger court but she thinks she could’ve. I like how they both were convincing justices that her adopters or petitioners whatever you want to call them really have a deep emotional attachment with Marian and want her to be a member of their family and she wants the same. The court actually considered her best interests (related to financial and inherit I think) after it was proven by the female council as she kept mentioning best interests. She was saved and cared for in their house, and she was flourishing if I put it in simple words. And how it’s really good for her financially too. One thing that was confusing for me that at the beginning of the video, the council (female) said that Marian’s psychologists proved that she has been diagnosed with a profound intellectual disability her whole life. And the Surrogate court had all the expert opinions and documents that said that she has a lack of ability to provide consent but at the end of the video, she was saying how she’s going to lose a lot of services, distribution of assets, and cannot inherit from her biological family. Like what she meant by that?


FYLC Annoying Ways!

Question 1:

After reading the source“Annoying Ways People Use Sources” by Kyle Stedman, he basically saying that how we writers do not really use quotation marks, simply just start writing the quote which makes it seems like copy and paste. And paraphrasing what the author said, don’t define in our own words. Like how Stedman has said on page 253 that “I understand that I couldn’t tell…..I swear I did some research! see? here’s a citation right here!”As this quote is mentioning that  I don’t just suppose to paraphrase it, try to put it in my own words, heave to put it in my own interpretations too, and just putting a quote at the end consider plagiarism.

Question 2:

The article  DECONSTRUCTING RACISM IN AMERICAN SOCIETY–THE ROLE LABOR LAW MIGHT HAVE PLAYED (BUT DID NOT) IN ENDING RACE DISCRIMINATION: A PARTIAL EXPLANATION AND HISTORICAL COMMENTARY by Steven H. Kropp talks about how discrimination was at its peak at the time of the New Deal. Common people were actual victims of that situation. During this new deal program, taxes got so high to be paid. Steven H. Kropp states that “the American labor movement is inescapably linked to intentional racist oppression.231 While this problem is not unique to the United States, the American labor movement notably *398 engaged in an often brutal campaign of racial exclusion from the founding of the American Federation of Labor” and “NIRA codified wage differentials in such a way that even when a Black employee performed more important tasks than a White employee, he would frequently have a lower job classification and hence a lower wage than his White counterpart”.(Deconstructing racism in American society)-These quotes tell us how NIRA was the one act that really differentiates in wages of blacks and white workers for example if blacks did more work than whites. Blacks still certified as lower wages workers and whites would have higher wages than them. That’s how unfair it was at that time. Kropp more said that it’s really sad for us Americans to know that how our history is brutally involved in racism and basically led minorities down. The guideline that I followed from Stedman’s essay is ” Dating Spiderman” because I started with little background information to make it interesting for readers and then used a quote to make my point more valid and gave interpretation about what the quote is talking about. I didn’t just summarize it but stated my opinion too and tried to make it interesting for my readers.


Part 1:

The New Deal was the plan introduced by President Roosevelt during the great depression.  New Deal projects and programs, such as the CCC, the WPA, the TVA, the SEC, and other new deals was introduced by FDR, and how these programs helped America to build up its economic system back to where it was. It put people back to work, saved capitalism, restored faith in the American economic system, and at the same time, it built a sense of hope in the American people. President Roosevelt introduced many programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), the Civil Works Administration (CWA), the Farm Security Administration (FSA), the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 (NIRA), and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Which help America’s economy better



Part 2:

Today my legal research is about racial discrimination in labor law and how mostly African Americans and minorities got affected by this. This racial discrimination is going on for so long. Common people were actual victims of that situation. During this new deal program, taxes got so high to be paid. FDR put taxes on every little thing that didn’t matter was it a cigarette, beers, or even candy. They all taxes were paying mostly by middle-class people and the poor. Taxes were exceeding their limits and were getting high day by day and people were losing their savings because it was all going to the taxes. New Deal taxes were the major reason for unemployment because whatever people earned, it all went to taxes and if someone had a business that meant, they’d got to pay high taxes and remained with less money for growth and jobs. So that was one of the reasons, they didn’t really hire any for more jobs. According to these sources, the reason for unemployment was that  FDR increased the price of money which led to more unemployment and human suffering. At the time, white industrialization was on the top, and how they decided to get rid of people including African Americans, women, and “defective” people. The second reason was unionization that how this should be helpful for every community but it went really bad. Under the Federal law at that time, every employer of the unions regardless of any race would have equal rights through selective bargaining. Because it gives every employee the basic rights but they still prioritized white over black. As per these sources, they give them “separate but equal rights”. Which simply meant that white didn’t accept African Americans working with them.

Part 3:

It’s true that these programs indeed helped its country. However, as I said that something went bad with this deal. And those got discussed in this article by Jim Powell. Yes, poor people were the actual target of this program. Because they had to paid taxes. At first, obviously, it was good but it got affected after seen that a lot of people had lost their jobs, high taxes, and unionization.  President Roosevelt and his cabinet never really had a master plan but a lot of programs and laws that just imposed on the public which later created big problems. During this period of time. mostly white people were working in steel mills, plants, and other Industrial workshops and didn’t allow other races to entered and work with them which caused a big problem for the country in the way of unemployment. They just work with people like them and helped people like them. The middle-class public couldn’t really be saved for themselves because whatever they’d earned, had to go in taxes. That’s why most corporations got scared to hire people because of high wages and less production. National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA)  made people paid more taxes than their actual product made and  Agricultural Adjustment Act( AAA)  forced Americans to pay more for food, In other words, pay tax. I agree with these sources that how congress enacted the fair and equal rights during the new dal program called labor act but legislation tried hard to go against it. It’s really disheartening how minorities got hurt by this and this labor movement intentionally brought racism through it. This act actually brutally led to racism in America till now and shows the real face of unionization back then that how they used and basically disrespected other racial groups for their self-advancement. NIRA was the one act that really differentiates in wages of blacks and white workers for example, if blacks did more work than whites. Blacks still certified as lower wages workers and whites would have higher wages than them. That’s how unfair it was at that time. African Americans who were sharecroppers, didn’t own property and got no compensation from its state government. In these New Deal programs, $1.6 billion to $5.3 billion federal taxes were paid between 1933 and 1940. The government mostly cared about the west and east side of its country but they didn’t really care about the south where they (democrats) won. Social Security Act put taxes on payrolls made it more expensive for employers to hire people, which discouraged hiring.

Part 4:

“This disheartening picture comes into sharper focus when considering members of minority groups. The American labor movement is inescapably linked to intentional racist oppression.”

“democratic governments tend to give the greatest benefits to those who are the best organized and have the most influence categories that include a few Blacks. Such results are consistent with the thesis that labor unions benefit the few and subjugate the many by protecting “superior” races from the competition with “inferior” ones”.

“collective bargaining would substantially reduce and appropriately channel the economic strife inherent in contemporary employment relationships in an industrialized capitalist society. Collective bargaining was required because inequality of bargaining power existed between the individual worker and his corporate employer, making individualized bargaining one-sided”.


President Election 2020!

This article talked about the backers of Trump who terrorized the country. Republicans rallies are really intense this time, they jammed highways, bridges in new jersey, Richmond Virginia, and taxes, and basically created a terror environment. Organizers worry that what if these rallies would turn into violence for both party’s supporters. And according to this article, police actually used pepper spray on Trump’s supporters for being too violent. My thought on this situation is that people are really angry, violent, and scared. Because they’re really passionate about their candidates both and this includes both of these parties. If something happens that doesn’t really go in their favor and again includes for both parties, then their extremists could get really violent and they would looting and destroying others properties which I think is really undisciplined thing.



FNU Amatul Hahi’s timekeeping

Wednesday, October 7, 6:00 am-10 am

0.25  Got up and read my morning prayer

0.50  came to the kitchen, make myself breakfast, and did my homework

0.75  went outside for a morning walk and cleaned the house afterward

60     took my Friday zoom class

0.75.  went outside with cousins

60     ate in the restaurant

0.25  brush my teeth and went to sleep

Law office..I Chose Is Richard M. Kenny

Backed by years of experience and a professional reputation for integrity and excellence, the attorneys at The Law Office Of Richard M. Kenny strive to maintain a leading role in the New York City legal community. Regularly sought after to provide continued education on personal injury litigation matters, There firm has published several legal articles covering a full range of issues. Aim to inform New Yorkers about the legal matters regarding personal injury and how it may affect their life and the lives of loved ones. The reason I want to work here is that they provide lawyers for birth, injury, contraction issues. And provide every kind of representation of accident issues. He also provides legal service for victims of civil rights violations, including police brutality and false arrests. He has worked tirelessly on behalf of accident victims throughout his entire career and has specialized in the representation of firefighters injured in the line of duty.

Top-Rated Service:
 5-star reviews on Google
Address: 875 6th Ave Suite #805, New York, NY 10001

Phone Number: 212-421-0300

Open 24 Hours



Amy Tan response

After this reading, this story “Mother’s Tongue” by Amy Tan, describes many legal issues but I’ll talk about one that really stood out for me and it was (quoted) “because when I was growing up, my mother’s “limited” English limited my perception of her. I was ashamed of her English. I believed that her English reflected the quality of what she had to say That is because she expressed them imperfectly her thoughts were imperfect. And I had plenty of empirical evidence to support me: the fact that people in department stores, at banks, and at restaurants did not take her seriously, did not give her good service, pretended not to understand her, or even acted as if they did not hear her”.This quote describes that how her mother had to face racial and linguistic discrimination. Just because she wasn’t perfect at speaking English, people bullied her. Whenever she went somewhere didn’t really get the treatment as she should just like other normal citizens. People used to ignore whatever her mother said, they never took her seriously always insulted her just because she wasn’t “perfect ” in their language. This is actually a violation of freedom of rights which is the first amendment and basics rights of every civilian who lives in the USA.

Law in Culture review

For the law and culture I chose, the famous novel “OTHELLO” by Shakespeare. This book actually talks about the murder and manipulation of a character called Iago(who wanted to become Othello’s lieutenant but he appointed someone else) who is furious to take revenge against his General Othello, the Moor of Venice. Iago manipulates Othello into believing his wife Desdemona is unfaithful, stimulating Othello’s jealousy. Othello gets to his extreme jealousy and murders Desdemona, and then kills himself.

If anyone of you wants to read it, you can go to this link and that’s  the whole pdf of it



Structure of the Courts

This chapter talks about how the court system and constitution works. It basically made up of three ranches which are legislative, executive, and judicial. checks and balances are basically to maintain equal power so one won’t get too powerful on another.   between these three branches and   Mostly federal government as more always and after having major powers whatever left goes to the state government and state government actually has to obey what federal desires them to do. There are three types of the court system which include trail(local), intermediate appellate, and the highest appellate court, which defines locally, state, and then federal level courts. The New York Court of Appeals is the highest court in the US state of New York. The Court of Appeals consists of seven judges. I have some questions that, in New York City can one county retaking someone’s case from a different county? and what is appellate division? As I was reading I came across that the country has 13 circuits in which one of them covers federal, how about the other 12?