Million Dollar Reward Case Refiled

You may also like...

7 Responses

  1. Scote says:

    “Mason says not only was his bluster about the million a joke, the full text of what he said makes clear he was daring the prosecutors to prove the point, not the general public.”

    To which he added, “And I’ll pay a million dollars to anybody who can prove otherwise!”

    (Not an actual quote. Not an actual offer. Not actual offer Offer not valid anywhere. IANAL. Cash value of not actual offer 0.0000 cents.)

  2. Lawrence Cunningham says:


    Dave Hoffman’s linked post gives the following quote from the NBC program transcript, p. 3.

    “And from there to be on the videotape in 28 minutes? Not possible. Not possible. I challenge anybody to show me, and guess what? Did they bring in any evidence to say that somebody made that route, did so? State’s burden of proof. If they can do it, I’ll challenge ‘em. I’ll pay them a million dollars if they can do it.”

    Sentence 4 challenges “anybody” to show him; the next ones refer to the prosecutors (“they,” “State’s,” and “’em”); the final sentence, containing the offer, is directed at “them” and “they” which could be a reference only to the prosecutors or to anybody.

    Though as my post says I think little of the argument given the context, a literal parsing can support Mason.

  3. Scote says:

    I was making a joke, as if Mason punctuated his claim to have not made an actual offer with another million dollar dare.

    I don’t think a literal parsing supports Mason, BTW, since it is not credible that he would offer the prosecution a million dollars to successfully dismantle his case and, thus, successfully prosecute his client for a capital offense. I think one could make the argument that such an offer might be malpractice, which suggests to me that Mason’s defense is that he committed malpractice rather than made a general offer to the public–and I’d say that hardly seems like a good stance to take.

  4. Lawrence Cunningham says:


    Thanks for the very funny joke, and sorry for being so serious about this stuff as to miss it earlier! Interesting point on malpractice.

  5. Scote says:

    I think one of Mason’s biggest problems is that he clearly wasn’t joking. He may not have made the offer in earnest, it was likely puffery, but that is not the same as “joking,” so for him to now claim he was “joking” about a key aspect of his case serves only to reduce the credibility of what seems like a revisionist claim, nor can it both be a joke and an offer exclusively to the prosecution. Either it was a joke or it was an offer–he can’t argue both simultaneously–well, maybe in pleadings, but not to the outside world.

    As a non-lawyer, I don’t know the intricacies of what would or wouldn’t constitute a good defense, but the closest analog seems to be advertising puffery–which is, I think, essentially what the jet plane case revolved around. Puffery being lies that are so big that the courts presume that nobody will take them seriously. I think the rather grand offer of round one million dollars (pinky held to corner of mouth) could easily be argued to be blatant puffery (aka, a giant lie). But it can’t, I think, be reasonably argued to be a joke. The two just aren’t synonymous.

  6. ParatrooperJJ says:

    Sounds like a valid contract to me. As well as suing in court, Kolodziej should file a complaint with the bar and try to get Mason’s license revoked.

  7. JustMe says:

    “Puffery being lies that are so big that the courts presume that nobody will take them seriously”.

    Well, we all know “Not Perry” Mason is FULL of “puffery”.. just look at the idiots he surrounds himself with in the Casey Scamthony case. He is nothing more than a big mouthed bully. He should never have bolstered this “joke”, if he had no intention to pay. ASS.