Monday, March 24, 2014
Rant #1,370: The Best of Ranting and Raving #3: Breast Legal Practices
I have to take today off from work due to a previously unforeseen matter that I have to clear up. I did not know until late last week that this was something that I had to do--it has to do with my son and the programs that he has available for him once he graduates--and, unfortunately, it is something I can't do while at work.
So, I figured it was time to present to you another breast ... err ... best of Ranting and Raving, this one going back to Rant #515 from a couple of years ago.
Here it is. Enjoy.
"Leave it to the New York Daily News to find this story hiding under a rock somewhere ...
A Chicago lawyer is saying his opponent in a small claims case is using his paralegal's large breasts to distract the jury.
Attorney Thomas Gooch, who is representing a car dealership, filed a motion last week asking Judge Anita Rivkin-Carothers to force the opposing lawyer's buxom assistant to sit in the audience, rather than at the plaintiff's table.
Gooch (yes, that is his real last name) said his opposing lawyer, Dmitry N. Feofanov, is using Daniella Attencia to draw the attention (get it Attencia-attention) of the jury away from the proceedings.
Feofanov insists that Attencia is his paralegal, and he needs her for his case.
Gooch, on the other hand, thinks that she is just there to show off her ample bosom, and isn't a paralegal at all.
"Personally, I like large breasts," Gooch was reported to have said. "However, I object to somebody I don't think is a qualified paralegal sitting at the counsel table -- when there's already two lawyers there -- dressed in such a fashion as to call attention to herself."
Feofanov said he's got paperwork to prove she's legit.
Evidently she has been paid as a paralegal before, but Gooch said that even though she has been paid as one, it doesn't make her one.
(The photo I used today is totally unrelated to the story. It is the cleanest photo I could find related to the search "busty lawyer.")
I don't know about this one. Just because a woman has an ample figure, does that preclude her from working on a law team?
On the other hand, if you see how some women dress today--even to work--with their you know whats bouncing and hanging out all over the place--don't you think the woman, or even the lawyer she is working with, know what she is doing?
There are scant few pictures of Attencia on the Web (rats!), so I can't judge for myself.
But again, should a woman's ample figure bar her from court proceedings?
All who believe that probably believe that a woman like this was born to do porno films, and that is it.
On the other hand, if her ample endowments are on display in the court, wouldn't you say that is wrong too?
Personally, I don't want to be Solomon here, making the breast, err, best decision about this woman and why she is in the courtroom.
But I think that Gooch should get her eyes of this woman's breasts and back to his legal briefs. (And keep on his other briefs, while he is at it.)
I'm sure his client would want that from him.
As for Attencia, well, let's see more of her on the Web. Then we can judge for ourselves what's going on.
C'mon, more Attencia on the Web.
The latest wrinkle in this case is that Atencia is actually Feofanov's wife! Stay tuned, this might get more interesting!"
Followup: I could not find anything alluding to this case and its aftermath, and I could not find any photos of Ms. Atencia online that would point to her breasts as being the focal point of this case. I posted a picture of her, but it does not show much of anything, other than she is a nice looking woman facially.
I do know that her hubby the lawyer defended her left and right for her appearance, and didn't deny that she has a huge chest, but also said that he was not using it as a distraction.
But as far as evidence one way or the other, I don't have any.
So I will rest my case.
Posted by Larry at 4:00 AM