:47:00
Which must be a nice vacation
for his balls.
:47:13
Thank you.
:47:20
According to
Swinney vs. Neubert...
:47:22
Swinney, who was also
a private sperm donor...
:47:25
was allowed visitation rights
as long as he came to terms...
:47:28
with the hours
set forth by the parents.
:47:29
So, if we're sticking
to past precedent...
:47:32
Mr. Latimer wasn't stalking.
:47:35
He was clearly within his rights
to ask for visitation.
:47:38
But Swinney was
a one-time sperm donor...
:47:41
and our defendant
was an habitual sperm donor...
:47:45
who also happens to be
harassing the parents...
:47:48
in his quest for visitation.
:47:49
But without this man's sperm...
:47:52
the child in question
wouldn't exist.
:47:55
Now you're
thinking like a lawyer.
:48:02
Yes, Ms. Woods?
:48:04
Although Mr. Huntington
makes an excellent point...
:48:07
I have to wonder
if the defendant...
:48:09
kept a thorough record
of every sperm emission...
:48:12
made throughout his life.
:48:16
Interesting. Why do you ask?
:48:18
Unless the defendant
attempted to contact...
:48:22
every single one-night stand
to determine...
:48:24
if a child resulted
in those unions...
:48:26
he has no parental claim
over this child whatsoever.
:48:29
Why now? Why this sperm?
:48:32
I see your point.
:48:34
And for that matter,
all masturbatory emissions...
:48:37
where his sperm was clearly
not seeking an egg...
:48:39
could be termed
reckless abandonment.
:48:42
I believe
you've just won your case.
:48:50
Ms. Woods, you did well today.
:48:52
Really?
:48:53
You're applying
for my internship, aren't you?
:48:56
I don't know.
:48:58
You should.
Do you have a resume?