he suggests that she spend the association's money, indirectly her money, to get council on a suit that a loudmouth hasn't even filed. What was he thinking Nanette is going to get for a judgement? for loud pipes? What did he think Nanette was going claim Sayuko did to wrong her? Conspire with upstairs neighbors to put loud water into the drain pipe?

I thought my humor was obvious when I start by blaming Sayuko's boyfriend particularly when it is apparently Intrepid, who coyly avoided stating the fact. I keep trying to soak my humor before sharing...

But I stand by my above points: A suit against Sayuko personally sounds ridiculous. A suit against the association is pointless: the association is trying to do just what a judge would order them to try to do. Nanette is most likely a blowhard and not apt to file anything--what is she going to gain?

Intrepid draws a charming profile of Sayuko; that is what I'll remember of this thread 15 years hence.

I agree with what TrekNoid said in this thread.

You state you are no longer a lawyer but you don't feel you have shirked the moral responsibilities you had. How is Sayuko quitting any different? I am not ashamed to suggest that Sayuko seek happiness and peace in her life, I am not worried that she will stop doing good in the world.

I find your view of the moral issues of defending criminals interesting.

the problems will not disappear if she leaves her post.

No, they will drastically diminish.

We live in a society of individuals who cannot even consider the meaning of a community.

I do not live in such a society.

Be well,
rir