On Judge Glick:
For the record, the discussion on Judge Glick, his thoughts on Miami elections, and his record as Judge, have been intelligent and thoughtful. Some people like him, some don’t. But the discussion has been within the bounds of decency. For the record, we printed EVERY comment on Judge Glick, meaning that when cretins know we are moderating the comments, they don’t waste their time writing the type of garbage that makes us ashamed to be associated with the blog.
Our view is that people do Judge Glick a disservice labeling him “state oriented.” Does anyone believe he would assist the prosecution in the conviction of an innocent man? He may not tolerate criminals easily, but what Judge should? We think he calls it like he sees it. There are too many prosecutors who have felt the brunt of his criticism for us to agree that he is “state oriented.”
On Judicial IQ'S:
We think science missed a golden opportunity with the appointment of Reemberto Diaz to the bench. It would have been great to have his IQ tested every six months for the next five years to prove our thoroughly un-scientific proposition that there is a direct inverse relationship between the ‘wearin o the robes” and IQ. (you didn’t think we were going to say all those nice things about judge Glick without taking a shot at the judiciary as a whole, did you?)
On Candidate Parks and the "darker" side of people:
Catherine Parks resigned her job to run for Judge full time.
Dedicated? Or in need of medication?
People support Ms. Parks because of the life experience she brings as a nurse prior to being an attorney.
Our only comment to Ms. Parks is that if elected,
If you thought you saw a lot of …ahem…when giving enemas in a hospital…
Wait to you get to our little world in the REGJB.
We mean, there’s a whole world of attorneys and bondsmen who will make you feel dirtier than the working end of a colonoscopy camera.
How did we do in our little federal free-for-all?
To quote our friend and former Judge, Rudy Sorrondo, when he was in the private practice of criminal defense (before he became a big-shot) : “UFR” (usual federal result).
RUMPOLE WINS- 5 TO 4
On the order we received from the Honorable Chief Judge John Roberts, to return the blog to the wild days gone by:
You are in the minority. Justice Kennedy writing for a majority of the court (Souter, Stevens, Ginsberg, and Breyer concurring) wrote:
“[t]he right of free speech has traditionally been tempered by restrictions such as the laws against libel, and the doctrine of fighting words. In this day and digital age, when rumors on the internet one minute can become ill-conceived “facts” the next, we find that the restrictions used by Rumpole, namely his moderation of the comments so that no scurrilous and un-founded rumors will not be published, are a rational and reasonable restriction and do not violate the first amendment.
Rumpole strikes a blow for decency, and wins!”
Justice Scalia, in a scathing dissent, joined by Roberts, Alito, and Thomas wrote:
“Rumpole is a jerk and his blog is now boring. He blew it with a capital B man.”
See You In Court savouring our victory.
(You know you've really made it when you are mentioned in a Scalia dissent. I bet we can get a good table at Mortons or Joes now.)