In this episode of The Lawmas Podcast, hosts Lauren and Lacey discuss legal misconceptions portrayed in TV shows and movies. They begin with answering a legal questions about addressing the legality of bringing prescription medications across borders. Lacey explains that just because something can be purchased legally in one country (like medications in Mexico) doesn't make it legal to possess in the United States without a proper prescription. They also note that medical marijuana cards from states where it's legal are not valid in states where it remains illegal, like South Carolina.

The hosts then critique legal inaccuracies in popular media. They analyze the movie "Legally Blonde," pointing out that courtroom proceedings are rarely as dramatic as depicted, with no "smoking gun" revelations during trials due to prior discovery processes. They explain that in real criminal cases, both sides have access to evidence beforehand, preventing surprise revelations.

Lauren and Lacey also debunk the antagonistic relationship often portrayed between prosecutors and defense attorneys in shows like "Law and Order: SVU." In reality, legal professionals typically maintain cordial relationships while zealously representing their clients. They criticize how media often portrays defense attorneys negatively, when in fact all parts of the legal system serve important functions.

The podcast concludes with Lacey expressing frustration about South Carolina's grand jury system, which unlike some procedural dramas, doesn't allow defense participation. They tease an upcoming book discussion series about wrongful convictions, suggesting that pro-prosecution TV shows may influence jurors to convict despite contradictory evidence.

The Lawmas Bookclub starts March28th! Grab a copy of Framed by John Grisham and join them as they discuss the book!

#thelawmaspodcast #legalpodcast #legallyblonde #lawmoms #legalmyths #lawandorderSVU

In this episode of The Lawmas Podcast, hosts Lauren and Lacey discuss the First Amendment and common misconceptions about freedom of speech. They begin by answering a question about what it takes to become a lawyer in South Carolina, explaining the education requirements, bar exam, and continuing legal education obligations.

The hosts then discuss what the First Amendment actually protects. They clarify that the First Amendment primarily prevents the government from arresting people for their speech, with some exceptions. They emphasize that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences in private settings. Employers can still fire employees for their speech, and people can face social repercussions for what they say.

Lacey and Lauren discuss several examples, including reality TV contestants who faced employment consequences for using racial slurs, and explain that while you can't be arrested for most speech, it doesn't protect your reputation or job. They cover exceptions to protected speech, such as inciting violence, child pornography, and yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

The hosts also share personal experiences with advocating against the use of derogatory terms, particularly the R-word, and how they address this in both professional and personal contexts. They discuss the difference between protected speech and offensive speech, and the importance of educating others about harmful language.

Announcement: Read "Framed" by John Gresham and Jim Grisham for upcoming book club episodes starting in a few weeks!

The Lawmas can be reached: thelawmaspodcast@gmail.com

#Thelawmaspodcast #lawpodcast #firstamendment #freespeech #lawmoms #framed #johngrisham #bookclubpodcast

In this episode of The Lawmas Podcast features Lauren and Lacey discussing two topics.

First, they address a legal question about family obligations to notify siblings about a parent's passing, explaining that while there's no legal requirement to inform relatives about an illness, probate laws require notification of all potential heirs after death.

The main topic of this episode dives into the O.J. Simpson case, focusing on how prosecutor Marcia Clark faced gender-based scrutiny during the trial. They discuss media criticism of Clark's appearance and unfair blame for trial outcomes despite her limited decision-making power. Lauren and Lacey also explore how the case transformed media coverage of trials and mention Simpson's civil case judgment and current estate disputes. They also reflecting on progress for women in male-dominated fields while acknowledging persistent challenges.

To contact The Lawmas, email thelawmaspodcast@gmail.com

#lawpodcast #OJSimpson #MarciaClark #lawmoms #thelawmas #genderbias #maledominatedfields #probatelaw #OJSimpsontrial

In this episode of The Lawmas Podcast, hosts Lauren and Lacey dive into the JonBenét Ramsey case, specially on the media's treatment of Patsy Ramsey. Lauren and Lacey discuss children's beauty pageants in the South versus other regions in the United States and analyze how the media unfairly sexualized JonBenét's pageant participation.

Lauren & Lacey discuss the examination of the evidence supporting the intruder theory, including:

• Unmatched DNA evidence
• Similar break-in attempt at another dance student's home
• The broken basement window and suitcase placement
• Critical look at the media's treatment of women in the 1990s
• Comparison to other high-profile cases and media bias against women
• Personal reflections on motherhood, shared interests with children, and judgment of parenting choices

Two notable quotes from this episode from Lacey: "If anybody looks at a child in pageantry or on the beach in a bikini and has those thoughts, they're the problem. They're the pedophile." and...

"You don't know how you're going to react. And let's hope we never do, right? Let's hope we never have to know."

The Lawmas can be reached at thelawmaspodcast@gmail.com

#podcast #lawmoms #laurenandlacey #jonbenétramsey #patsyramsey #thelawmas #highprofilecrime #truecrime

This episode of The Lawmas explores Michael Oher's conservatorship case and a broader discussion about protecting young athletes' finances in the NIL era.

But first: a question answered about Miranda rights and deaf individuals. Officers use written cards for DUI cases. They also discuss challenges with field sobriety tests for deaf individuals and how there are now translation apps for Spanish-speaking individuals.

With Michael Oher's conservatorship case, Lauren & Lacey explain how it extended until age 25, which is very unusual for non-disabled adults. Oher believed he was signing adoption papers. They talk about the lack of proper oversight and accounting in Tennessee and the Tuohy's handling of movie proceeds.

Lauren & Lacey also discuss NIL Implications. There is concern about young athlets managing sudden wealth, how some athletes start college at 17-18 years old and how there is a need for financial protection and education.

Watch/listen to get recommendations from Lauren & Lacey!

Follow the podcast on YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify. Share your thoughts on NIL regulations via DM.

#podcast #NIL #michaeloher #thelawmaspodcast #lawmoms #mompreneur #conservatorships

In this episode of The Lawmas, attorneys Lacey and Lauren discuss two notable criminal cases - Gypsy Rose Blanchard and the Menendez brothers - examining the role of abuse in both cases and their dramatically different sentencing outcomes.

Key Points:

• Gypsy Rose case: Victim of Munchausen by proxy abuse from birth, orchestrated her mother's murder, received 10-year sentence
• Menendez brothers case: Claimed sexual abuse by father, killed both parents, received life sentences
• Analysis of factors affecting sentencing:
  • Gypsy's complete dependence and inability to escape vs. Menendez brothers' resources and opportunities to leave
  • Gypsy's accountability and remorse vs. questions about Menendez brothers' credibility
  • Debate over appropriate sentences for each case based on circumstances and culpability

This episode starts with advice for criminal defendants' courtroom attire, emphasizing the importance of appearing relatable to juries without being overdressed or flashy.

Lauren and Lacey agree Gypsy Rose's 10-year sentence was appropriate given the extreme abuse and her accountability, while suggesting the Menendez brothers deserved lengthy but not life sentences, with potentially different terms for each brother based on their roles.

In this episode of The Lawmas, Lauren and Lacey tackle the Civil Case of Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard!

Key Topics Discussed!

• Differences between civil and criminal cases
• Analysis of jury bias in high-profile civil cases
• Defamation law and burden of proof
• Impact of celebrity status on legal proceedings
• Effect of social media on jury deliberations

Civil cases can significantly affect careers and future opportunities. This case damaged Heard's acting career, the effects can be long-lasting for reputations and employment. There are similar impacts on non-celebrities (think about evictions and medical malpractice).

Role of Social Media: The extensive coverage affected public opinion. There are the issues of potential influence on non-sequestered jury, challenges of keeping jurors unbiased in digital age and the discussion of need for courts to address social media influence.

Watch this episode on YouTube or listen on all major podcast platforms. The Lawmas are on Facebook, Instagram and X. Follow, like, subscribe, comment and share! Email The Lawmas: thelawmaspodcast@gmail.com

#johnnydepp #amberheard #thelawmaspodcast #podcast #mompreneurs #momlawyers

In this episode of The Lawmas Podcast, Lauren and Lacey discuss the Scott Peterson murder case. And a heads up, they have different views!

First, a legal question about could you choose the execution method for a client? Watch/listen and find out their responses!

Now onto the Scott Peterson case.

Lauren and Lacey focus on legal perspectives and recent developments of the case. Topics include:

• Convicted of killing his pregnant wife Laci Peterson
• Originally sentenced to death penalty
• Timeline of events from December disappearance to April body discovery
• Discussion of circumstantial evidence vs direct evidence

Differing Legal Perspectives

• Lauren believes Peterson is guilty
• Lacey believes there isn't enough evidence to convict
• Watch to learn their reasons!

There have been several new developments in the case:

• Death penalty conviction review due to juror issues
• New DNA evidence pending testing
• California nonprofit involvement in case review
• Discussion of potential new trial possibilities

Lastly, theu look at the legal system analysis:

• Jury selection process (voir dire)
• Discussion of circumstantial evidence
• Evolution of DNA evidence in court
• Changes in trial procedures due to technology

"The state has not proven it beyond reasonable doubt in my eyes." - Lacey

"I think he's guilty. I have no doubts in my mind." - Lauren

Looking Ahead:

• Once DNA test results are released there will be a follow up episode!
• Future episode on voir dire process planned

Where to Follow:

• Apple Podcasts
• YouTube
• Instagram
• Facebook

Follow "The Lawmas Podcast" on all platforms for updates and future episodes!

#podcast #mompreneurs #lawmoms #scottpetersoncase #lacipeterson #truecrime