When learning the law, reading about cases is generally a good way to learn how the law works. You read the facts of a case, the judge makes a decision — usually imparting some wisdom along the way — and you acclimate a general understanding of how things are supposed to go. But sometimes, it is just as valuable to learn what not to do, and the YSL RICO case is rich with opportunities to study. For example, you could mine it for lessons about leading questions:

You could use it to point to examples of unreliable testimony:

Hell, you could even use it to suss out bad judging and Brady rule violations:

Why use a textbook to teach about judicial ethics violations when Judge Glanville’s actions just leap from the rules on what he isn’t supposed to do?

Keeping up with all that’s been wrong with this case as more things pile up in real time would be exhausting but for how double-takingly absurd the ride has been. Remember back when Judge Glanville wrongly held Brian Steel in criminal contempt for not disclosing a source of information that was probably protected by attorney-client priviledge? Yeah, that got fast tracked to Georgia’s Supreme Court which, by the way, is already very familiar with Steel:

Professors, prepare your syllabi. Students, go listen to Slime Season. Do you really have to do that to understand what’s going on? No, but since when do you need a reason to go listen to Best Friend?

Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s.  He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who cannot swim, a published author on critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at [email protected] and by tweet at @WritesForRent.