Question

Larry London (LL) has a sad story. LL lives in Missouri, but he recently visited Los Angeles for a business trip. LL rented a car, and was out with clients having drinks one night. After he had consumed several drinks, he went to the parking lot, looking for his rental. He believed he had found his car, but inadvertently got into a very similar car that worked with his key.

LL was in a minor accident, and damaged the car he was driving. The owner of the car contacted the police, and the police arrested LL. The rightful owner was a powerful L.A. movie producer, Stephan Siegel (SS), who threatened to take LL "all the way to the Supreme Court." The police also want to investigate LL’s mishaps.

Pretend you are a lawyer, and that you must advise one of the different parties involved in this scenario. If your last name begins with A-M, you are a lawyer representing LL. If your last name begins with N-Z, are representing SS.

Answer 1

As Larry London's legal representative, the focus would be on demonstrating that the entry and usage of Stephan Siegel's car were accidental due to the mistaken belief that it was his rental, emphasizing the lack of criminal intent. It is also essential to negotiate with Siegel's legal team and to mitigate potential legal consequences through cooperation with the investigation and possibly a plea deal.

Step-by-step explanation:

Legal Representation for Larry London

As a lawyer representing Larry London, you would first assess the facts surrounding the unintentional use of a vehicle that did not belong to him. After consuming several drinks, LL mistakenly believed he was entering his rental car, which led to a minor accident. This situation involves considerations of criminal law, particularly regarding the unintentional taking of property and potential intoxication offenses. The first step is to negotiate with the movie producer Stephan Siegel's legal team, aiming to resolve the issue without escalation.

Additionally, it's crucial to cooperate with the police investigation, providing evidence that supports LL's version of the events, emphasizing that the entry into the car was accidental and not with criminal intent. The defense could involve questioning the security of the vehicle's locking system that allowed LL's key to work on another car.

Finally, it will be important to discuss potential repercussions and provide legal advice on how to mitigate them, which could include compensation for damages and reaching a plea deal if necessary. Avoiding the threat of taking the matter "all the way to the Supreme Court" would be beneficial for LL in terms of legal costs and publicity.