The person who allegedly wrote the post on Mr. Black causing riots has written back to say:
A) I found your site while surfing for justice in Miami-Dade County.B) I didn't know a High School Degree was required to speak on a subject I care deeply about.(I dropped out in 11th grade)C) I should have known this site was being run by a bunch of lawyer snobs who of course think they know it all.D) No he did not start the riots, but my observations go to the fact that doing a good job as a lawyer does not always mean doing a good thing for society as a whole.
Rumpole Says: A) Thanks for reading and participating. Your comments are always welcome.
B) We (Rumpole, not our readers) are snobs (well, some of the robbed readers are as well) who know it all, but we digress. C) If you want to post a comment you need to be prepared for the rough and tumble responses.
D) You are correct- doing a good job as an attorney does not always benefit society. Since you are not an attorney, let us pose this question to you:
Assume you are a police officer charged with manslaughter because the prosecutor says you improperly fired your weapon and killed a small child. Riots in the community ensued and a politically motivated prosecutor had you arrested although expert testimony will conclude you acted properly. Thus, in this scenario, although you are charged with a tragic crime, you are innocent. You have a family to support who loves you.
What type of attorney do you want to represent you?
1) A lawyer who will fight his or her heart out and do anything and everything within the bounds of ethics to defend you; or
2) A lawyer who secretly thinks it’s the best thing for the community for you to go to prison regardless of the fact you are innocent?
Your comment touched on a subject that is widely debated between lawyers and non-lawyers. Our response was harsh because your views, which you have an absolute right to have and express, would widely criticized and virtually indefensible if you were an attorney. Please do not be offended, and as we said, please keep reading and writing.
WHITE (Karma)
Anonymous writes:Bad karma? Why player hate? Black is one of the best lawyers in town. Furthermore, investigating/prosecuting atty's for getting paid to defend criminal defendants is fascist.
Rumpole wonders….”player hate”?????
Jason Grey writes:
Roy Black didn't cause the riot. The rioters caused the riot. what an idiot,must be a civil lawyer . As to that "investigation", you have my proxy.please keep us informed
And Billy Joel sings….”We didn’t start the fire.”
Anonymous correctly says:
I guess that moron would ALSO criticize Ed Odonnell for winning McDuffy.
Juan Elso, victim or criminal?
Anonymous writes:
Jason you must have been drinking something very strong a few nights ago. seriously to include "Johnny Elso" as you call him among the list of the wrongfully accused lawyers is way off base. According to what has been reported in the press and the published appellate opinion on his case, the feds never targeted "Johnny" for investigation. Instead he wound up picking up hundreds of thousands of dollars at the wrong place and the wrong time. He then led police on a high speed chase through Miami. Now admittedly what I write is based only upon what I have read, but it doesnt seem to me that you should be crying crocodile tears for the departed Mr. Elso.
Rumpole notes: Mr. Elso is not dead, just incarcerated.
PD Personals:
Anonymous writes:
I think I know who the PD described in the personal ad might be... This particular PD fits the description, and has the personality of someone who would post this kind of ad for fun or prank. Or maybe she was the inspiration foe the person who posted it. Who knows...
Rumpole Responds: We have our magnifying glass out, and are carefully studying the possible suspects who may..ahem…fit the bill as it were. So if you see a young woman slap someone with a magnifying glass in the REGJB, then you will have our identity.
On The Judge in Prison, anonymous cries:
Boo-hoo for Judge Amundson and other lawyers who go to prison for stealing from their clients' trust funds.He obviously hasn't learned much if he thinks he can speaker on the callousness of judges and prosecutors. Frankly, if he got anything less than the maximum for stealing from a mentally impaired person with capacity of a 3 year old, it wasn't enough.
RED ALL OVER:
A real wize guy/gal writes:
Hey Rump I mean Phil,
Your conformist former state self is really starting to show with these latest comments. The final word on Det. Fernandez is that he's a lying piece of sh$#cop who finally got caught. If they did stings on all of these UC officers (especially the Northside District), my guess is 40% would be arrested. I've had Fernandez on 2 trials and in both my clients rejected what amounted to CTS pleas insisting that the guy was lying. How many times do we have to hear from our clients that theyactually had 4K on them when arrested and not the 2K that theofficers listed on the property receipts?Or how about the clients who insist (as mine did in one Fernandez case) that they were just chillin when jump out arrested them and then said the drugs they found around the corner were theirs?
Rumpole says:1) We hope "Phil" finds you and squashes you. Its very 2005 to speculate on our identity. Join the new year and move on. Plus, very few posters are bigger than him.
2) Can you read? Have you read any of our posts?
Conformist?
Try reading the post on capital punishment (November 17, 2005). We are not conformists. However, we try to give a fair view on all subjects. We don’t like dirty cops. But if Detective Fernandez showed up in our waiting room, we would take his case.
A criminal defense attorney who screams about the presumption of innocence for all defendants except [insert whatever ox is gored here] is nothing more than a hypocrite. If the officers are found guilty, then their punishment should be especially severe for the effect their conduct had on the entire system. Until that time, they are entitled to the same presumption of innocence.
Conformist?
We voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. How’s that for conformist?
What a dirty shot. The next thing you’re going to write is that we are boring and not funny.
Conformist? We still use the terms “Small” “Medium” or “Large” when ordering a coffee from Starbucks.
How dare you!
14 comments:
Ask ASA Johnson whether Elso is Victim or criminal. He is prosecuting him for stealing from his dead partner's estate.
J.C Elso is my friend, and one hell of a trial lawyer. Johnny made a dumb move picking up that money. The alleged car chase never happened. But the real reason Elso was so viciously prosecuted (he got ten years),was because he kicked butt in dozens of federal trials and and had the temerity to "high-five" his clients and laugh in the prosecutors faces.He could try a case with the best and never backed down.Johnny wasn't thinking clearly after his wife was killed,and made some mistakes, but what the feds did to him was un-called for. When you use the term "crockodile tears "you insult me.
RUMP, when referring to judges, it's "robed" not "robbed." When you refer to them as such, it reads as if they steal things instead of people who wear long black dresses. On second thought, perhaps you did mean robbed.
Jason Grey is correct -- JC was a great trial lawyer. But the other comments are correct as well. He did some commit crimes and should be punished for them. On a separate note, does Grey spend all of his free time on this blog? Has he broken a record for number of posts? What is the over/under on how long it will take him to respond to this post? Have Jason Grey and rumpy ever been seen together? Stay tuned.
There's nothing cool about Johnny's high fiving clients. It's one thing to vigorously defend people's rights; it's another to enjoy their company and revel in their beating the system.
Johnny got himself in trouble because he enjoyed the lifestyle a bit too much.
It seems the record for number of posts goes to that "gutsy" poster Anonymous .
handicapping the switches at MJB. For a change I actually think we are getting some good judges this time.
Pinero- Pinero is an excellent Judge. Smart, efficient, wants to try cases. Makes lots of court offers to move cases. Moves through a division audit like a hot knife through butter. Dont lose a trial after turing down one of his offers. Dope lawyers bewareas he often rejects sao substantial assistance pleas. Would be a first time ballot hall of famer if he let lawyers take a little more time picking a jury.
Lopez-- Best Judicial demeanor of all. A pleasure to try a case in front of. Works hard and does not punish defendant's for going to trial. That will most likely change, as it probably should, when he is in ROC court.
Schwartz-- Too much has been written about his demeanor so I wont add anything to what you have said Rump. It is a shame because he is actually a very god trial Judge who knows the law, keeps the case moving and is not afraid to make hard calls.
Dresnick-- Good Judge. Works harder than most. Wants to try cases instead of eating long lunches as so many of the robed ones do. Fair in trial does not sentence everyone to the max for going to trial.
Schelesinger-- an unkown quantity who has just been released from the Judicial equivalent of Iraq--dependency court. Had a good rep as a Federal prosecutor. Probably will be some culture shock when he sees the Persian bazaar of justice that is the MJB.
overall for once I think we are doing well in the judicial switch game.
I SEE THAT THE POLLS WERE TAKEN DOWN. HOW DID BRUMMER DO?
At the risk of being accused of partisanship, I feel compelled to enter this debate. Mr. Grey's comments about Mr. Elso's situation are based on facts which are far more accurate and complete than any reported in the local media. Those who choose to conceal themselves behind the veil of anonymity should know that relying upon the "facts" as reported in The Herald can be a dangerous thing. Of course the fact that I need to explain this painfully obvious point to Mr./Mrs. anonymous should be sufficient to discredit anything that this person has to say. Did Mr. Elso put himself in a compromising situation? Yes. Did his mistakes merit a sentence far greater than those which were imposed upon the convicted drug traffickers whose testimony was used to convict him? Certainly not. Was the ferocity with which he was prosecuted at all motivated by the ferocity and tenacity with which he represented his clients? I'm not sure. But that possibility should concern us all.
Rumpy, have you taken your magnifying class to Ed Newman's courtroom yet? One of the PD's there certainly fits the description in the personal ad. Go take a look!
No way the Personal ad was definitely done by the PD in
Judge Pereyra-Shuminer's court.
She used to be in Emas but has
now switched to Shuminer.
The other guy had the right floor
- sixth - wrong courtroom.
Not the one in Shuminer. She is over 30 and in a relationship. Also would never post that. Furthermore, I asked her. She is one of my best friends. My guess...a joke.
Did you really think she could be interested in you? How delusional are you?
You were clutching at straws all along.
Post a Comment