February 26, 2026 – 4:01 pm
Bill Gates apologized this week for his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein.
“It was a huge mistake to spend time with Epstein,” he said. “I apologize to other people who are drawn into this because of the mistake that I made.” Mr. Gates directed his apology to the staff of the Gates Foundation; part of his apology was for bringing Gates Foundation executives into meetings with Epstein.
A lengthy article in the Wall Street Journal details Mr. Gates’s speech, based on a recording of it. He describes his various contacts with Jeffrey Epstein over a period of years, but draws lines regarding some behavior: although he traveled with Epstein, “I never stayed overnight,” or visited Epstein’s island. “I never spent any time with victims, the women around him.”
It seems like a fairly honest apology. He even discloses that he had two extra-marital affairs, that Epstein knew about and tried to use against him. It takes some humility to admit publicly to two extra-marital affairs.
One aspect of a good apology is acknowledging the impact that the offender’s behavior had on the victim. In this case, that would be the Foundation, and Mr. Gates acknowledged that his behavior had a negative impact on the Foundation, which relies on its good reputation to partner with other organizations.
So this seems like a pretty good apology.
This apology was to the Gates Foundation, so he was right to limit his comments to that audience. But it is a little upsetting to read his efforts in the apology to distance himself from the women who were always around Jeffrey Epstein. “To be clear I never spent any time with victims, the women around him,” Gates said. Why not? Does he regret now that he didn’t ask more questions to find out who these women were, what their stories were? He was willing to be photographed with them, but apparently didn’t inquire further, even though it must have seemed strange to have these young beautiful women sitting in quietly on meetings among middle-aged male billionaires. Does Bill Gates also owe an apology to the women who were Epstein’s victims, for his inaction?
February 21, 2026 – 1:30 pm
This shouldn’t be a surprise, right? We’re turning to AI for help with all kinds of things these days, so why not for drafting an apology? Indeed, I found two websites that offer this service for free, one called Wrizzle, another called CelebrateAlly. And the results aren’t bad. If you find yourself stuck trying to come up with the right words, this is a good place to start.
But don’t stop with the AI results. An insincere apology is worse than saying nothing, so be sure to personalize it before delivering it. A judge recently questioned the sincerity of an apology letter submitted by a criminal defendant who used AI to draft the letter. The judge commented, “when one is considering the genuineness of an individual’s remorse, simply producing a computer-generated letter does not really take me anywhere as far as I am concerned.”
Still, if AI makes it easier for us to come up with the right words for good apologies, perhaps we will apologize more often — and it seems like that would be a good thing.
January 7, 2026 – 3:11 pm
Is there a deal, or not?
Ideally, lawsuit settlement negotiations result in a written agreement that all parties sign as final. But occasionally there are problems, as in the lawsuit between Bethany Christian Services and the State of Michigan. Bethany sued the State in 2024, claiming religious discrimination when the State failed to renew its contract with Bethany for refugee services. This past fall, as reported by mLive, the parties negotiated a settlement via email: Bethany’s attorney reportedly sent the assistant attorney general (AAG) a settlement proposal, the AAG “very gently modified” it and sent it back, and Bethany accepted the modified proposal. But the AG’s office claims that the case could be finally settled only after the Attorney General herself approved it, and she has not. So when Bethany went back to court last month to enforce the agreement, the judge determined that there ultimately was no settlement, and ordered the parties back to the negotiating table.
Negotiating with governmental entities usually involves seeking approval from parties who are not at the negotiating table. Although the negotiators may be elated with their deal, it’s not final until all the key parties have approved it.
An interesting side-note in this case is that the terms of the settlement were reported, because they were included in one of Bethany’s filings. Settlement terms are typically confidential.
November 2, 2025 – 9:25 am
A recent article in the Grand Rapids Press on crashes involving Amish vehicles in Michigan highlights how the Amish live out Jesus’ command to forgive. On October 16, 2022, an Amish couple was walking to church along a road in Isabella County when they were struck by a vehicle; the wife died. Some members of their Amish community asked for a meeting with the county prosecutor to let him know that the community forgave the driver, and didn’t want the punishment harder because of them. The driver pled guilty to committing a moving violation causing death, and received probation.
In another fatal crash, where a distracted driver killed an Amish pedestrian in Clare County, members of the Amish community attended the driver’s sentencing and told the judge they forgave the man. He too received no jail time.
The article doesn’t mention whether either driver admitted responsibility or showed any remorse.
Jesus warned us, “If you don’t forgive people their sins, neither will your heavenly father forgive you your sins.” Matthew 6:15. The Amish take this seriously, and are quick to forgive. How about the rest of us?
October 22, 2025 – 11:43 am
Arbitration is a time-honored dispute resolution process, valued for being both faster than litigation, and private. It has long been the dispute resolution process of choice in the construction industry because it typically resolves disputes more quickly than litigation, allowing the construction to continue.
But arbitration may not always be a time- or money-saver. In a case unfolding in New Jersey, a developer of a hotel project was advised by its attorneys, the law firm Connell Foley LLP, to resolve its dispute with a contractor through arbitration. The developer alleges that the arbitration process was both lengthy and costly, and resulted in an unfavorable outcome. So now the developer is suing its lawyers for $40 million, alleging attorney malpractice for guiding the developer into arbitration.
Usually malpractice suits allege bad legal advice. Is the choice of a dispute resolution process legal advice? How does the developer prove that it would’ve been better off in litigation than in arbitration? It’s ironic that the choice to use arbitration has itself spawned more litigation.
