WASHINGTON • The Supreme Court chambers is where the United States' sharpest legal minds gather to discuss the most pressing matters of modern jurisprudence - and, uh, the latest Kim Kardashian West drama.
Justice Steven Breyer on Tuesday showed he has been following the reality television star's robbery in Paris, bringing up the matter as part of an analogy during oral arguments in a case about bank fraud. And do we detect just the slightest suggestion he might be among those who have their suspicions about the alleged crime, where robbers made off with US$10 million (S$13.7 million) in jewellery?
He was questioning an attorney whose argument essentially was that his client did not commit bank fraud because the bank where he took money from another person's account was insured and therefore did not actually lose money.
He made an analogy between the case and the crime. "Even Kardashian's thief, if there is one, believes that all that jewellery is insured," he posited. He drew out the scenario, imagining that a man claiming to be a jewellery cleaner approached Kardashian West, who, in this scene, hands over her borrowed jewels - and who appears to be in on the scheme, but knows she is insured and the incident will get her in the news.
His question: "I'm asking you, if the local person comes to the door and says, 'Dear Miss Kardashian, I am your local jewellery cleaner. Please give me your jewellery.' She does. And that is not fraud. He wanted to get the jewellery. He tried to get - he also believed the friend had just loaned it for the evening, that she's triple insured, that she won't even lose any money because the publicity will be worth it."