Richmond, Calif. — I see people in county jail held there on suspicion of committing serious crimes, the kind of crimes like you imagine. Others are accused of much smaller offenses, like loitering, theft or drug possession.

A common thing I see: a parent in jail after a fight at home, which supposedly became violent. In some cases, the fight really did become violent. Yet sometimes it did not, but the police thought it did, wanted to make sure everyone was safe, judged that there was probable cause, and made arrests. Unless a parent can afford to pay bail — money as security for their temporary release — the mom or dad stays in custody.

Today, in preparation for Mother’s Day, is National Mama’s Bail Out Day, where organizations throughout the country have raised money to help post bail for many African America mothers in custody to see their kids. Amazing.

Inmates in county jail who have the option to post bail are those who are still going through the court process: they haven’t been convicted or acquitted of the criminal charges. Often, they have indeed done the crime. Also often, they have done a much lesser version of the crime. And every now and then, the accusations were wrong and they did not commit any crime.

One easy, common attitude is this: if you broke the law, a basic part of your punishment is that you don’t get to enjoy things that the rest of us enjoy, like holidays with your family. I admit that a piece of me sometimes feels that way too. The problem is that this punishes the children who did nothing wrong. Usually, those kids just want their moms back.

One thing I keep seeing with children who live in environments where family members spend time in jail: as the kids get older, they get into trouble, go to jail and eventually go to prison. These kids grew up in environments seeing a lot of violence or drugs and rarely saw people taking sympathy on, for example, their mothers.

Perhaps a kid today will see people have compassion for his mom, and that itself might change the entire direction he takes in life.

Berkeley, Calif. — As I prepare for Ann Coulter to visit the University of California, Berkeley to give a speech, I do so without liking what she has to say but acknowledging how important it is to exchange ideas. And I recall other controversial speakers whom the school has allowed to speak — from Louis Farrakhan to Nonie Darwish.

Quite a few universities beyond UC Berkeley have canceled their guest speakers because of protests or supposed public safety concerns in the past. According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, over the past 17 years, schools have cancelled or nearly cancelled speakers who brought controversy along with them in more than 300 instances.

Here is a sampling:

William Ayers — The former Weather Underground member was disinvited from numerous schools, including University of Wyoming. However, a federal judge ordered the school to allow him to speak.

John Brennan — The former CIA Director cancelled his speech at University of Pennsylvania in 2016 due to protests.

Eric Cantor — After protests at the University of Pennsylvania in 2011, the House Majority Leader cancelled.

Action Bronson — George Washington University and Trinity College uninvited the rapper in 2016 after student groups opposed him, citing his lyrics as homophobic and misogynistic.

For more, check out Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

His company is great

This guy works hard and he’s talented. It’s always been like that and now he is the chief executive of his company.

My client runs the private equity firm that loves the company the executive has invested his sweat and tears to build. My client and he have gotten to know each other well over the past six months.

She believes in him and what he is doing. She wants the guy to succeed.

But she wants to make sure he is as great as he seems to be.

He seems awesome

My client and this executive have met now a dozen times. Not only in his offices, but they have gone to dinner, a baseball game, her country club. They like each other and they like each other’s management groups.

My client and her team want to get involved by making an investment so this executive can grow and make more money for himself and make more money for my client. It feels like a such a great fit.

Their lawyers met. The subject opened up his books to my client’s accountants.

He’s not a criminal, right?

In this case, my client wants to start by making a $15 million investment. Sometimes she does $5 million. Sometimes $50 million. Before she pulls the trigger, she just wants to feel completely at-ease. This money is a huge long-term commitment for her firm.

She hires me.

She just wants to be certain that this man she has gotten to know only recently, and perhaps the rest of his executive team she is trusting, are people she can have that long-term relationship with. She wants to make sure, at least, she won’t be embarrassed. She wants to make sure he has a record of keeping his promises. My client does not want to be defrauded.

My client has not asked him whether he has sued people in the past, or whether he has been sued. She certainly hasn’t asked him to his face whether he’s been charged with a crime. Did old newspaper stories cast his reputation in a negative light? Has he been accused of anything? She has not asked these questions.

So, she hired me. I am to look into all of this, hopefully without the executive knowing, with the assumption and expectation that he is as great as the person she has grown to know.

If he has been around a while, he probably knows that this is how it works, and to be offended by my investigation — in case he finds out — is simply naïve.

I look for deceit

Has he had an extra-marital affair? I’m probably not going to find out about it and I’m not really looking for it simply because it’s not a deal-breaker for my client, or any client who has ever hired me. An old arrest for driving under the influence? If I find that, I doubt the client will care very much. But maybe. Some do.

I am focused on deceit and fraud in business, as well as something that other people can find in the public record that will embarrass my client. How many times has he been sued, accused of not paying a business partner? Accused of sexual harassment? Racial discrimination? Telling past investors that everything was great, when it wasn’t, just to inflate the price of his company’s stock? Perhaps his former spouse said in divorce records — readable by anyone who bothers to look in the courthouse — he was abusive. That’s not good.

Being a big boy

If he finds out I’m “diligencing” him, good grief, I hope he does not get all upset. People have been checking on reputations forever. Although it usually stays out of the news, it occurs in nearly every deal, and it makes sense. Remember when Yahoo CEO Scott Thompson turned out to have lied about his college degree? Yikes. That is the rare exception. But when somebody unearths such information after installing the executive, it’s embarrassing.

Remember Disney buying Pixar? Or how Microsoft bought LinkedIn? I honestly don’t know who did the investigations for those deals, but indeed someone did.