WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL RICHARD E GERSTEIN JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG. THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO JUSTICE BUILDING RUMOR, HUMOR, AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT AND BETWEEN THE JUDGES, LAWYERS AND THE DEDICATED SUPPORT STAFF, CLERKS, COURT REPORTERS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO LABOR IN THE WORLD OF MIAMI'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE. POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM

Saturday, September 09, 2006

MOONS OVER MIAMI

ATTORNEY TERRY MOONS FROM NORTH OF THE BORDER WRITES IN TO SUPPORT A MIAMI LAWYER IN A BROWARD JUDICIAL ELECTION BATTLE:

We received this email:

I would like to post a blog on your site about Michele Towbin-Singer.

But I’m not sure on how to introduce a new topic….

Michele has been a Miami-Dade PD for years. She won the primary election but did not get enough votes to win outright. Her opponent is a politician.

Okay - he has the time required as an attorney, but lacks Michele’s trial and courtroom experience.

I am a Broward Criminal Defense attorney who has read and laughed my ass off at the comments regarding the Broward “system” on this blogspot.

Well, now its time to put a Dade County Criminal Defense Lawyer on the bench in Broward. For those of you north of the border, your vote would certainly help. For those south of the border your checks would certainly be appreciated.
You can reach her at this address: michele at micheletowbin dot com.


Please contact me if you have any questions comments or otherwise have something that needs to be covered when you are in a bind. (Rumpole notes that by definition whenever we have a case North of the Border, we are “in a bind”. )

Terry Moons
409 Southeast 7 St. Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Ofc 954-525-8900



Rumpole is certain that Judges North of the Border will welcome a Miami Criminal Defense attorney into their own club as quickly as they would welcome a case scurvy.

121 comments:

Anonymous said...

whats your problem I am posting honestly and you take down the post. C'mon be fair. Let your viewers decide for them selfs whats up.

Rumpole said...

I AM SORRY but COMMENT MODERATION is on, because we are about to be attacked.

Listen- I know your posts. You cannot use this blog for your own personal hatred. Use your own website. It is not my problem if no one reads your web site. Go lititgate your FTC, Florida Bar, JQC, JNQ, California Bar, complaints about this blog. You won't win. You can't win. You can post comments if you want. But your paranoid rants and raves against individuals lawyers will not be allowed. The Blog survives just fine with moderation and there is nothing you can do about it.

Anonymous said...

look I was not starting trouble he can respond it was short and too the point.

I thought your blog was about free discussion. I would appreciate a free discussion about this issue.

I posted one post and it ticked someone off. well let them respond and have a discussion. I followed your rules.

Anonymous said...

Rumpole, the quote in the previous post by Brian saying this:

"I served on a grievance committee for 3 years and received a bar complaint during my tenure. I was asked to respond and provide a copy of my response to the person who filed the complaint. There was no special treatment, and I was vice-chair of my grievance committee"


Rumpole: That quote is exactly what my point is. Here a good attorney like Brain T. has to respond to a complaint filed against him but Miguel De La O, does NOT ?

Rumpole: Why should a ticket lawyer or some lawyer who is working his ass off doing pro-bono and not well connected have to answer a bar complaint but Mr. De La O', is special? That is just wrong.

I am not saying that after he would have responded to what was a sworn verified complaint the bar would have pursued it any further but at the very least he should have had to respond to bar counsel.

I am not starting trouble just having a free discussion of facts. I would appreciate if you would let your readers have a opionion on this matter.

Thank you

Rumpole said...

OK- your points are well taken and deserve a response.
1) This blog is more about humor and fun matters. A judge who locks herself out of her chambers, that kind of stuff.
2) Believe it or not, I do not Know the attorney in question. I know of him, and because of you I am aware of the lawsuit and the bar complaint.
3) It is a troubling matter, but there are two sides to a story and I do not think it's appropriate to litigate it on the pages of this blog.
4) Honestly speaking, it is your tactics that I find troubling if not disturbing. Correct me if I am wrong, but the attorney litigated against you on behalf of Judge Hernandez and in response, you decided to investigate him, found out about the lawsuit, lost your own case, and now,although you have nothing to do with that suit, want to use the pages of this blog to personally attack him on a forum that his colleagues read. That is decidely different than if you had posted a comment about Judge Hernandez when he originally treated you in a discourteous manner. That would be proper for the blog.
5) Finally, even you would admit that you are relentless. You will repeat that comment, and new comments on the same subject, on every new post, just as a way of attacking the attorney.

So, since this is my blog, and I do not wish to have it be used to settle personal grudges, I choose to remove your post. I support your right to post it on your blog. I would defend that right in court. But it does not mean I have to let my blog be used for your personal affairs.

I hope that explains it. I have posted your complaints because they are valid. I would invite others to comment about this, and if I am wrong, I would re-consider my position.

Anonymous said...

I thought we made a truce as to the issue of repeating subjects and I stand by that.

You once made a comment that because I was mentioned in the Herald I was fair game to be attacked on this blog, ok so be it. You said comply with your rules and I shall.

The issue is much deeper than that. I took his clients deposition and got admissions of facts regards very scandalous facts. Previuous to this deposition which he fought me tooth and nail he filed a motion making scadalous accusations to oppose my motion for cost after I won the case. (The depo came in a related separate case before Judge Leban). Judge Leban ordered his client back to a depo after he instructed his client over 81 times not to answer questions that were relevant to the lies De La O stated in the motion before Judge Hernandez.

Well long story short hernandez denied all my cost and allowed the motion to stay in the record (after a request to strike it).

I filed a bar complaint last year on December 6 2005 on December 29, 2006 Randi Lazarus decides she has a conflict and passes it to Barnaby Min who on December 29, 2006 closes the case without asking for Miguel to admit or deny the allegations. That is wrong.. They also tell me he is on Randi Lazarus grevance committee. (you think she would have known that on Dec 6 when she got the complaint?

Its wrong to have lawyers that dont have connections have to respond and Miguel gets the red carpet.

Anonymous said...

ps. you can talk moderation off I will not report the comment

Anonymous said...

While I have nothing bad to say about Towbin-Singer, I will comment about her opponent.

First of all the post about this race has one important distortion or I would say lie.

Your comment about John Rayson not having less legal experience than Ms. Towbin Singer is untrue. I know for a fact that John has at least one acquittal on a First Degree Murder case. When he won that case he snapped an 18 win streak by then prosecuter Ed McGee. As many long time attorneys who know Ed know he is one of the best attorneys to be in a courtoom.

Besides that John worked for years as a Public Defender before going into private practice. John has run a general practice firm handling both cival and criminal cases for over 25 years.

As for John being an elected official making him a questionable judicial candidate. I dont really see how this disqualifies someone to be judge. I can see saying this about about an ex prosecutor (pro defense judge) or ex PD (pro defense oriented). Ms. Towbin-Singer says being a politician puts you in a position of having to make deals to survive. Lets face it, unlike Dade, once your are elected in Broward you are here for life. Who is there deals to be cut with to stay alive? no one. Lets face it, if this is the only thing she can call to questions on her opponent, its not much.

Its my understanding that many of you Dade attorneys knew Ms. Towbin-Singer until recently as Ms. Towbin. Looks to me like someone changed added her husbands name to make backroom deals with the condo commandos in Broward. I will concede it was a good campaign move but lets call it what it is, do you really wants a judge who will manipulate herself this much to be judge?

On another note, I will congratulate Ms. Towbin-Singer on her impressive showing on Tuesday. She has done a great job campaigning.

Finally, attorneys who read this viewing this campaign remember this:
By Ms. Towbin Singer's standards
attorneys who want to be elected officials should be barred from judgeships?
PD's because they have their name on tons of cases are more qualified then private attorneys to be judge.

Anonymous said...

Although I live in Miami-Dade and practice mostly in Miami-Dade, I've given $100 to Michele Towbin-Singer's judicial campaign and attended 2 of her fundraisers and brought friends (who reside in Broward and also contributed) to her fundraisers. I challenge all members of the FACDL-Miami Chapter to open up their checkbooks and make a contribution. It would be nice to have a case in Broward and see a smiling face on the bench.

Anonymous said...

let the guy state his case

She Who Must Be.... said...

I am from Broward and do not know anything about Towbin Singer. What does anyone have to say about her credentials?

Anonymous said...

In response to all who still have nothing better to do with their time, than bring up and lash out at those who gave their time, desire and effort to grab for the brass ring. In the words of Theodore Roosevelt that Rumpole posted the other day:

"It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst if he fails at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

I guess I thought that by the ripe old age of 37, it would be great to have "grown up" conversations, read smart and intelligent debates and keep the years of catty remarks and jealous ramblings where they belong,,,in high school.

I don't know what makes me more sad, the fact that a friend dared to make a difference and made a valiant effort to reach for a dream, and came up short. Or the reality that there are still people, grown people who must not have anything better to do with their time, than sit at home on a Friday night and come up with scenarios in their head about what people will be doing and saying 4 months from now.

Kudos to Rumpole and The Captain for their informative posts and ability to be adults, even if I do not always agree with what they say.

Luckily, one of my favorite quotes in life has helped me to look past high schoolish rants and jealous tirades.

"Opinions are like assholes,,,,everybody has one"

youknowwho said...

Gee Golly Whiz All this talk about a Florida Bar conspiracy Uhmmmm just maybe someone is not adhering to their medication schedule?

Rumpole said...

I guess my main point is that while anyone can comment, I would not like to see this turned into a forum for individuals to complain about their attorneys. I get enough of that at work. My objections to your posts have nothing, repeat, nothing to do with whether your facts are true or false. I have no idea. And the point is I could not care less about any attorney who has a bar complaint against them. In this day and age, it is part of the practice of law. We all get them. (For the record, I have never had one go past the response stage.)I just don't want this to be a forum for that.
This is a more difficult issue than I first thought. I would like to see other people comment on this.

Anonymous said...

A Dade PD was elected in Broward,
Jill Levy.
Unknown to many in Broward, she took no money from lawyers and anted up over 400K of her own cash to win in a 3 way race. Very impressive.

Anonymous said...

To the person who accussed Michelle Towbin of changing her name to Towbin-Singer to attract the condominuium vote...ridiculous...nothing changes...both are Jewish names. It is like going from Suarez to Suarez-Perez. I think that she has been Towbin-Singer since she married, but at the PD's office she started before she was married, and just didn't change it with the office for convenience sake. However, she has been Towbin-Singer since she tied the knot.

Anonymous said...

Michelle Towbin changing her name to Towbin-Singer to attract the condominuium vote...ridiculous...nothing changes...both are Jewish names

may I suggest that Singer is the more "Jewish" looking part of her name. "Towbin" is very close to "Tobin" who is a Broward Ciruit Judge.

Anonymous said...

Broward judges never get opponents because they rock.

Anonymous said...

hey shit for brains who thinks he knows the origins of all jewish names you know not of what you speak. while Tobin is a jewish name, the spelling Towbin is not common. furthermore singer is clearly more identifiably jewish than towbin

Anonymous said...

Rumpole at 1:30 pm , I appreciate that you actually what responses to my claims and allegations. That is truly all I wanted from the Florida bar was a response for Miguel to deny or admit that claims, he did not have to and thats my biggest problem with the issues.

Thank you for hearing me out.

Darrin

Anonymous said...

that should be "want responses"

Anonymous said...

read the lawsuit against Miguel de la O, by that elderly woman

if Miguel did what is claimed he should be investigated by the Florida bar

shame on you

Anonymous said...

Darrin

G E T A L I F E.

No one cares what you think!

Anonymous said...

Publicly discussing a Bar Complaint that was determined by a staff counsel to be not worthy of investigation seems flat out wrong.

I wouldn't have allowed any of your vindictive posts and am surprised that Rump has allowed them.

The Bar doesn't just dismiss complaints because people are connected (I assure you that Brian T is very well connected). Make a valid complaint, and the Bar will make the lawyer respond.

PS---the snide comment about Lazarus not conflicting out immediately is ridiculous. Unlike some others, she actually has a life. You filed your complaint during the December holiday season. She transfered it to Min, who dismissed in the same month. Sounds to me like she transfered it almost immediately (you think she was sitting at her desk waiting for you to send in your complaint?). The Bar doesn't work for you. If you don't file an appropriate complaint, the Bar SHOULDN'T ask for a response. Get over it.

Darrin E. McGillis said...

I am posting under my name so that who ever reads this can be sure its me DARRIN.

It should be noted that Ramon A. Abadin was just sent the complaint on September 7 2006, and that any negative comments about how he may proceed including possibly disqualifying himself should be reserved. I just spoke with him on the telephone and apologized for jumping the gun as to his ethics, he accepted my apology. Having said this please note:

A sworn complaint saying a lawyer:

1. Lied in a motion to get a ruling in his favor is a violation of the rules of professional conduct.

2. Fabricated facts in a motion and did other inappropriate things that cause the 3rd DCA to issue a emergency show cause order on a writ of mandamus is a violation of the rules of profession conduct.

How I ask you Miguel de la O, does the bar at the point of receiving a verified complaint know if Miguel will admit the above if they don’t ask for a response. Give me a break he got special treatment. When I did a bar complaint many years ago against a lawyer for DCF stating she lied to the Judge at a hearing they demanded a response (happened to be Randi who demanded a response), in the end they close the file stating the DCF social worker lied to her so she was just relaying the information.

Why do sole practitioner’s have such a hard time with the bar but well connected lawyer’s get the red carpet.

The DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW, June 13, 2006, article “Florida Bar Tweaking Discipline” several prominent attorneys stated frustrations with reporting attorneys to the Florida Bar:

“. . . .Robert Montgomery, a prominent West Palm Beach plaintiff lawyer, questioned the responsiveness and impartiality of the Bar’s current system. He cited his unsatisfactory experience in seeking disciplinary sanctions against a former law partner. “The damn Bar doesn’t do anything about it for three years,” Montgomery said. “I have a pretty high profile as far as The Florida Bar is concerned, and if I can’t get anything done, what is the guy on the street going to do? If you have a buddy on the [Bar board of governors], you don’t stand a chance.. . . .”


“. . . .Miami attorney Warren Trazenfeld, who represents consumers in malpractice cases against attorneys, called the commission’s recommendations “purely politics.” He said he had no confidence that the recommendations would help. “I’ve been suing lawyers for over 15 years,” he said, “and The Florida Bar grievance process has never been of any value to a single one of my clients.. . . .”

Rumpole said...

OK. I think one of the things that seems better is that the post is not anonymous. I think the second thing is that, now that the post is out, it is fair game for discussion. The marketplace will now decide if the topic merits further discussion. If it does, I will stand aside and let it go. If it does not, I would hope that you will feel you have had your say, and its time to move on.

Darrin E. McGillis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Darrin E. McGillis said...

here comes the flood of Miguel de la O, postings.

Thank you rumpole for allowing the free discussion.

Will you be allowing me to post a link to the bar documents for independent review?

Anonymous said...

I know nothing about any of these people, but de la o is a ridculous name. Did the O ever have anything else attached to it?

Anonymous said...

laughing

brian tannebaum said...

Darrin, I've known Miguel for 12 years. I know nothing about the dispute you have with him, other than what I read here.

There are 2 problems, first, people see what you are doing as airing dirty laundry, and second, it is about a lawyer that rarely practices in the justice building anymore, so many reading don't know him, and therefore, don't care.

Rumpole has tried to make this a respectable forum with a good deal of humor. Judges read it and respond, and some of the most respected lawyers on both sides of the arena (and I include those anonymous ticket lawyers who we all crucify until we walk into a courtroom and need advice on the ticket we are handling for our mother-in-law) read it and write comments.

It sometimes gets personal, and in your case it is real personal.

When you use terms like "corrupt," although not a term that is uncommon in Miami, it causes concern, especially when you mention names of people that no one knows.

As an example, Randi Klayman Lazarus is a long time Bar lawyer and about as straight a shooter as they come. No one who has worked against her would ever accuse her of favoritism or corruption, trust me.

Being "well connected" gets you one thing - credibility. No one at the Bar is doing favors for anyone, they don't need to, and other than making judgement calls, they favor no one.

Pursuant to the Florida Bar's procedural rules governing attorney discipline, Bar Counsel is permitted to outright dismiss complaints without seeking response from the lawyer, just like a prosecutor is permitted to announce a "no action" after reviewing sworn testimony of an alleged victim.

Enjoy your Saturday night.

Anonymous said...

the only thing any of us old timers no about miguel de la o is that he defended an alligator and got into a pissing match with catalano over some traffic hack issue.

Rumpole please no more mcgillis, de la o etc. this shit is more boring than sitting through a 80 page calendar with judge mcginnes.

please use your censorship power and get rid of this shite

Darrin E. McGillis said...

Brain, Thank you for the e-mail.

I think Randi Lazarus is a straight shooter also. She sought a response to a top lawyer from DCF in a complaint I did many years ago. She also wrote me a very kind letter expressing her condolences regards my sisters passing.

When I learned the complaint was assigned to her I had no doubt that it would be treated fairly because of past encounter with her.

However, I truly beleive that this time around the Bar played the special treatment card. Maybe Mr. Abadin will order a response from De La O, and allow him to admit or deny if he lied before the court. I will reply to his response and perhaps he will be treated like any other lawyer.

To the guy (Miguel De La O) who wants the post removed. I think Rumpole said earlier he would let the discussion continue freely.

Rumpole, created a blog that get visitors from the legal community as Brian states above. A blog in todays society allows free speech and discussion about the issues. Why the Florida bar may want this converstion censored, you should ask yourselfs is that what a good blog is for censorship.

I have posted my name and I am not hiding from anyone. I will respect and comply with Rumpole's rules, it is his Blog and I appreciate him allowing a free uncensored discussion.

Darrin E. McGillis said...

ps. If Mr. Abadin does ask Miguel De La O, to respond to the complaint and Mr. De La O, denies the allegations that he lied. I will counter that by replying to the Bar with a copy of his own clients deposition I took in which his own client admits to certain facts being untrue and with De La O, stated in a motion as being true.

So either his client initially lied to him and which he relied on to lie to the trial judge or his client lied in the depo. Either way someone lied, cant have it both ways.

Miguel M. de la O said...

Yes, the "O" did have more attached to it. It was originally de la Operationrestorejustice.com. I had it surgically shortened for obvious reasons. You can imagine my children's relief.

Darrin E. McGillis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

orj linked the September 7, 2006, on the home page:

http://www.operationrestorejustice.com/fla%20bar%20let%20sept%207%202006.pdf

Anonymous said...

the letter of the Florida bar assigning the case to Mr. Ramon A. Abadin.

http://www.operationrestorejustice.com/fla%20bar%20let%20sept%207%202006.pdf

DanLurvey said...

I take offense to the scury comment.

Anonymous said...

Darrin, Miguel didn't post the 3:39 comment, I did.

Your response to my post is silly. You can always find SOMEBODY to complain about every agency.

You want to bash Miguel? Fine. A lawyer's reputation, however, is very important. Publicly discussing a dismissed complaint is wrong.

Further, complaining that the Bar is showing favortism though is a bit much (you're starting to sound like conspiracy theorist).

Frankly, the reason so many of us have a hard time buying your complaints is that you seem to have a problem with more people than anyone else we know. And, you go after everyone.

Not everyone has it in for you (I don't know you from a hole in the wall and bear you no ill will). I do, however, find it hard to believe that you can be so unfortunate as to have had so many bad experiences with so many people without bearing any responsibility for them.

Finally, yes, I know Miguel. No, I'm not friends with him. In fact, I haven't seen him in about 10 years. However, a couple of my colleagues had cases AGAINST him. He played them straight each time.

Darrin E. McGillis said...

did you read the 6:26 pm comment about de la O?

hey 10:01 pm, I guess all those letters about Judge Hernandez and comments from the administrative Judge etc were just my imagination. Visit my web site, I provide documents supporting my claims against Hernandez and I will do the same with De La O.

Why you only hear about my complaints, I can show you numerous transcripts from many Judges complimenting me in open court. I have been before many decent and honest judges, unfortunatly for me I ended up in a dispute before Judge Hernandez and his JA, with Miguel as opposition.

Both of the cases in the trial court that I had with Miguel De La O, as counsel for my opposition I prevailed. I am pissed because after spending in one case over $500.00 court cost, Judge Hernandez denies me the cost based on a motion in which De La O, fabricated facts in his Court, hence the bar complaint.

I can assure you that if I file a cmplaint I have documents to support my arguments and will post them on the ORJ web site.

Darrin

CAPTAIN said...

I would like to thank 11:48 AM for the compliment.

I will do my best to continue posting with important and relevant topics that concern the players in the the criminal justice system, including topics on judges, lawyers, legislation, campaigns, etc.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

CAPTAIN OUT ..............

Anonymous said...

what is Kenneth Marvin, Randi Klayman Lazarus and Ramon Abadin doing contributing to the campaign of Judge Leifman and at the same time investigating Juan Gonzalez by asking the DCBA for documents pertaining Juan Gonzalez and the Complaint David Marko made against Juan Gonzalez?

David Marko and Miguel De La O, are law partners. ummm...

Anonymous said...

looks like Darrin McGillis lost his case in the supreme court against De La O.

Order of Friday, Sept 8, 2006.

09/08/2006 DISP-DENY ON MERITS Petitioner has filed a "Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Petition to Invoke All Writs Jurisdiction." To the extent that the petition requests mandamus relief on the basis that the Third District Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to enter its January 24, 2006 order, it is hereby denied. To the extent that the petition requests that the Court exercise its all writs jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(7), Florida Constitution, or its discretionary review jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution, it is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All motions are hereby denied.


Case No. SC06-505

Anonymous said...

great... now the blog has given OCD-boy a new place to vent. i dont give a rat's ass what this guy has to say. all these frickin long posts quoting this opinion and that and BRAIN tannebaum and the O and the mcgillis. i wanna puke.

lets talk about which judges are hot. thats something way more important.

Anonymous said...

del pino is hot

Anonymous said...

conspiracy doubters did you fail to note that all the Judges,Justices and lawyers involved in everything McGillis cares about were all members of the FLORIDA BAR?

Darrin I would double check these connections Pronto!

Anonymous said...

12:34 wtf

Anonymous said...

McGillis

Stop complaining about Miguel de la O- he is protected by Leifman. Leifman is untouchable.

Anonymous said...

Look I think he made a good point and Brain T. was sent to defend. Who made a better point? Let see if he post supporting documents on his web site.

Anonymous said...

Leave Barnaby Minn alone- I saw him exchanging some papers the other day at a cocktail.

But I'm sure it was not your complaint.

Anonymous said...

I was there it should looked like one document said mcgillis on it.

Better look into this

Anonymous said...

its not the complaint that the bar should be worried about, its the cover up.

Dont we learn that it never is the original complaint, it is always the cover up that gets you arrested on corruption charges.

watergate etc

Anonymous said...

here is why you lost your supreme court case:

Miguel M. de la O elected Vice-Chair of Florida Board of Bar Examiners
Wednesday, November 9, 2005
Miguel M. de la O has been elected to serve as Vice-Chair of the Florida Board of Bar Examiners for 2005- 2006 and will be the Chair for the 2006-2007 term. The Florida Board of Bar Examiners is an administrative arm of the Supreme Court of Florida created by the Court to handle all matters related to bar admission, including screening all applicants for character and fitness before admission to the Florida Bar in order to protect the public and safeguard the judicial system. The 15 members of the Board are selected by the Justices of the Florida Supreme Court to serve five year terms.

CAPTAIN said...

THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

From the Venice Sun newspaper (wherever that is) comes this story:

Appeal still pending in DUI cases

It probably won't set a world record for lengthy court battles, but the breathalyzer case is pushing four years and counting.

"The Second District Court of Appeal is waiting to decide whether to hear the case or not," attorney Robert Harrison said.

The state recently appealed a lower court order that the manufacturer of the Intoxilyzer 5000, the breathalyzer used in Sarasota and Manatee counties, turn over the software for inspection by the plaintiffs. The manufacturer has repeatedly refused to reveal the software. It said showing the software, or source code, would reveal "trade secrets."

At the heart of the Intoxilyzer 5000 issue is whether repairs or modifications to the instruments may have affected the results of DUI tests.

The protracted legal battle has put more than 250 pending DUI cases in three counties in a holding pattern.

Ironically, while the court battle still rages over the 5000, the machine itself has been mothballed. On March 27, the 5000 was replaced by the upgraded Intoxilyzer 8000.

"We have some problems with that one, too," Harrison said.

Harrison said there have been many times when the 8000 has been reported out of calibration.

"It may be a better mousetrap," Harrison said, "but still not a good one."

Maybe Catalano or Hersch can give us an update on our local situation...

CAPTAIN OUT .........

CAPTAIN said...

THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

Or maybe, we should be discussing this important issue:

Florida Family Policy Council v. Freeman, No. 4:06CR395 (N.D. Fla.).

This case was filed in federal court last month. The suit claims that "sections of the state Code of Judicial Conduct are unconstitutional insofar as they are being used to prohibit judicial candidates from expressing their views on important issues."

To read the story about it go here:

http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/s8canon.html

We may be one step closer now in seeing the day where judges will be openly giving their opinions at these meet and greets instead of just smiling.

CAPTAIN OUT .................

Anonymous said...

dont they do it anyway behind closed doors

Anonymous said...

THIS MESSAGE IS FOR MCGILLIS:

http://www.careerbuilder.com/monk-e-mail/?mid=13518336

DONT MESS WITH THE BAR EXAMINER

Anonymous said...

those wondering what Pattywhatshernamethisweek's name is, as I understand for the next 6 years it will be JUDGE PATRICIA MARINO-PEDRAZA.

Anonymous said...

1:32 am not as funny as the one Rumpole posted

Anonymous said...

Rumpole, I wrote a rather well written defense to Robin/Juvenile court detractors which was up briefly and then deleted, what's up? And then you give copious air time to McGillis, who has stepped well off of our collective plane of illusion into total self-delusion. Can we not return to our shared reality where Sense of Humor and Vicious, Anonymous, criticism reign supreme.

Anonymous said...

A few very nice and qualified candidates lost their elections: Rima Bardawil, Marie Davidson and most especially Gina Mendez...wake up Larry, I supported you but you will continue to get challenged if you continue to treat people rudely.

Rumpole said...

Rumpole, I wrote a rather well written defense to Robin/Juvenile court detractors which was up briefly and then deleted, what's up? And then you give copious air time to McGillis, who has stepped well off of our collective plane of illusion into total self-delusion. Can we not return to our shared reality where Sense of Humor and Vicious, Anonymous, criticism reign supreme.

I don't recall doing that- please repost it. I cannot imagine why it would come down.

Anonymous said...

Rumpole,

If you are going to allow posts re De La O, et al, will you please post, in a concise manner, the procedural history so we can understand the issues?

Darrin E. McGillis said...

to 12:43 am

De La O, is not protected by Judge Leifman as you say. He is protected by his buddies at the Florida bar.

The only connection between Leifman and de la o, was the fact that De La O, was co-chair to his campaign and Randi Lazrus the Bar counsel, Kenneth Marvin, Bar staff Counsel Tallahassee and Ramon A. Abadin, Board of governors of Florida bar, all just happened to donate to Leifman’s campaign. Each with the exception of Mr. Abadin, did not contribute to any other campaigns.

All 3 also reviewed and played a part in the disposition of the bar complaint pending before the Florida bar against Miguel de la O.

Another fact the Florida bar requested in writing of the DCBA all the documents pertaining the complaint filed by Miguel's law partner David Marko, against Juan Gonzalez (I have the letter). Well, David Marko is Miguel's law partner and was also co-chair of the Leifman’s campaign.

The letter the Florida bar wrote to the DCBA was sent to me by accident in the pile of documents they gave me under my public records request. The DCBA requested in writing to me that I do not disclose this on my web site and to return the letter of the Florida bar back to them as it is a confidential document.

The Florida bar has time to investigate Juan Gonzalez (Leifman’s opponent) when no sworn complaint was ever filed against him with the Bar. But in my sworn VERIFIED complaint against Miguel De La O, he gets the red carpet and does not have to respond and admit or deny if he lied to the trial Court (which happened to be Judge Hernandez’s court). Miguel De La O, just also happens to be close personal friends of Radi Klayman Lazarus and on her grievance committee and took her 3 weeks to realize this.

You can decide for yourself’s if this is right or wrong. I will be posting on my web site my Motion for Rehearing in the Florida Supreme Court on www.operationrestorejustice.com which will contain the appendix. You will find this Motion detailing the issues involved between De La O, and myself in the Court proceedings and you can make a independent review of the facts.

“something was rotten in the State of Denmark” and you can smell it. (Hamlet, Act I, Scene 4, Line 90)

Rumpole said...

OK. EVEN WITH THE SHAKESPEARE REFERENCE. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. MOVE ON OR I'LL MODERATE. I SAID YESTERDAY I DID NOT WANT THIS BLOG TURNED INTO A PERSONAL SOUNDING BOARD FOR ANY INDIVIDUAL'S PROBLEMS WITH ANY INDIVIDUAL LAWYER.

Darrin E. McGillis said...

just responded to a comment.

Anonymous said...

MCGillis seems clear to me that all of this is Leifman's work and manipulations. Even Leifman pushing for Miguel de la O's law partner to complain about his opponent and Leifman using his connections w/ the bar to cover up for Miguel de la O's actions in Judge Hernandez's courtroom.

By the way, it seems Judge Hernandez and D'arce were right all along by denying you had an emergency and denying you were entitled to your court costs.

Seems to me like your claim to obstruction of justice was overruled! Nah ha ha.

Anonymous said...

Can he be more paranoid about the Fla. Bar and Miguel de la O - let it go...what an obsessed person...there are 20 blogs about this man written by you that are quite boring and getting very very OLD.......... YOUR SO WORRIED ABOUT HIS "SO-CALED" RED CARPET....START WORRYING ABOUT A WHITE STRAIGHT JACKET FOR YOU...ENOUGH IS ENOUGH...GET A LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

we are not dumb we can decide for ourselfs whats what.

Anonymous said...

I think he has a point. Look it is Miami the capital of corruption. But I agree you made your point let it go.

CAPTAIN said...

LET ME TRY AGAIN - TO STEER THE CONVERSATION TO SOMETHING MORE RELEVANT:

THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

Florida Family Policy Council v. Freeman, No. 4:06CR395 (N.D. Fla.).

This case was filed in federal court last month. The suit claims that "sections of the state Code of Judicial Conduct are unconstitutional insofar as they are being used to prohibit judicial candidates from expressing their views on important issues."

To read the story about it go here:

http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/s8canon.html

We may be one step closer now in seeing the day where judges will be openly giving their opinions at these meet and greets instead of just smiling.

CAPTAIN OUT .................

Anonymous said...

Judge Echarte's opinion: "Get away from me."

Anonymous said...

i know ramon

he would never allow his position as jnc chief of the third district court or other positions be compromised

Anonymous said...

Judge Postman's opinion: "Lets eat!"

Anonymous said...

Check out Circuit Court Case No:
06-11747-CA-01
Big troubles for a seasoned Attorney......

Anonymous said...

Captain :

The link is very informative. Rumpole I think that Captains subject why more detailed in the link warrants starting a new post on this subject.

I personally think that carving out a group of people because they are diffent is wrong.

That cristian group should change its name to the group of hate. I do not care how you sugar coat it, HATE IS HATE!

We can go back in time and recall when public officials discriminated against Blacks/Afican Americans, because that was the popular thing to support if you wanted to be elected to public office.

Now this HATE group seeks to change elections based on discrimination and what may be in some circles a popular thing to do to get elected and support.

Mark my words that come 10 years or so down the road all these public officials riding the train of hate will appear on TV apologizing for there actions today just as many public officials from the red neck south ended up doing in the 80's regards hate filled comments from the 50 and 60's.

HATE IS HATE!!!!!!

Rumpole said...

CasaDeAmor@aol.com to me
More options 1:14 pm (3 hours ago)

Rump please post this for me, I'm to tech illit to do it myself, sorry.



Dear Rumpole
I've worked with Michelle Towbin-Singer for 17 years. She is a good attorney, who knows the law, with alot of trial experience. She wants to serve her community, so she stands for election, and as every candidate, she takes the chance. Any fair evaluation has to conclude she is very qualified for the bench.
The discussion of which name is more 'jewish' Towbin or Singer, is both dump and insulting. Any Condo Comando whould know both are yidisha, Oy VEy what do you expext from goyim .
La Shana ToVa
David Sisselman

Anonymous said...

captain do you think the lawsuit will prevail?

also Judge Rothenberg when running against KFR have a scandal on the same subject when she answered far right on the form?

Anonymous said...

so who is sarino costanzo and why should we care?

Anonymous said...

i asked myself the same question

who ever he is someone got a break in order on his property so i imagine at this point he is someone without furniture.

Anonymous said...

i love you sisselman but you are wrong. i have practiced in dade for 12 years and funny when i have opposed ms towbin she never had the name tobin. then all of a sudden she runs for judge.

she is a decent person who has mellowed and grown up quite a bit since she waw part of the PD's death squad that attacked rothenberg in the mid 1990's.

trivia name the other members of the anitrothnberg squad?

Anonymous said...

Costanzo has practiced for 50 years, was a Law Partner of former Ambassador David Walters for many years.....very funy about the no furniture, not only that but how about no Law Firm anymore, assets frozen etc... and an indictment comming....hey, its a better story than listening about "O" for 135 blog for countless days !

Anonymous said...

has the media done anything on the lawyer?

Anonymous said...

who cares about elections in broward

by my count appears to be one or two people posting about that crap this is Miami. Broward politics BORING

Anonymous said...

4:17 PM, BE CAREFUL DAVID MILLER, LESLIE ROTHEBERG WE BE LOOKING FOR YOU.

Anonymous said...

before you all jump on me i meant that she never had the name of singer.

Anonymous said...

The members of the PD death squad were a murders row of difficult nasty and none too talented trial lawyers.

1. The always cheerful joyce brenner.
2. Ms. personality plus marlene montaner--whatever you say about the voters at least they had the sense not to make her a judge.
3. cynthia guerra-- cant believe she was in this crowd tried a case against her once very pleasant and ethical--she must have been coerced into being part of the mafia.
4 ms towbin-singer

Anonymous said...

Rumpole this Darrin Mcillis vendetta ,whether justified or not, is boring as shit.I can't beleive you let a nut job that was assaulting your website a couple of days ago trying to shut it down free reign thereby annoying and boring the hell out of the rest of us

Block his access!

Anonymous said...

can we please move the blog back to south of the border before i puke

Anonymous said...

joyce brenner - man was she hot!

Anonymous said...

6:17 pm tad bit upset this afternoon.

Mr. T, responded to the discussion. Feel free to add comments.

Anonymous said...

No media yet, but there should be !......I think everyone is trying to keep it hush hush...I just happened to be in court the day it all came down on him.....its a very interesting case though......alot of hidden assets etc....alot of bank accounts frozen,just got caught with his hand in a BIG cookie jar !

Darrin E. McGillis said...

You dare call me a NUT JOB and attack me, without even the courage to be a man and show your name. I have no reason to hide my name. When Brian responded to my claims he posted his name and also emailed me privately it was a civil discussion about a serious matter.

Get some balls and post you name before you attack someone. I did.

The Fonz said...

Which judges are hot: Sam Slom. Hands down winner.

Anonymous said...

Ada Pozo

Anonymous said...

ENOUGH! Rumpole, I never thought I'd say this, but turn comment moderation on and delete all of these stupid darrin mcgillis posts. No one wants to read this man's rants. This blog is not for him to dominate by airing all his complaints. Rump, if you don't start deleting his posts, I'll have to start a mcgillis-free competitor blog.

Wilma!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! said...

if you count the newly elected judges, Don Cohn is the hottest judge

Anonymous said...

rumpole are you scared, 6:49 is making threats against your blog. You better delete those post or competition will crush you.

Anonymous said...

someone having a hissy fit this afternoon

Anonymous said...

this is rumpoles number of visitors. You can bet that he is not scared of you making another blog:

PAGE VIEWS

Total 242,029
Average Per Day 1,713
Average Per Visit 2.6
Last Hour 58
Today 562
This Week 11,994

Anonymous said...

chris someone is making threats against this blog

Anonymous said...

alan don't worry I have rumpoles back

Hello, Newman said...

Sarino "Cantstandya" Costanzo was the model for T.V.'s famous George Costanza.

Sarino, as a young man at Rueben Dario Middle School, forgot to return his copy of Vamos a Cuba to the Dade School Board offices. Of course, he was then hounded by Mr. Bookman-Sanchez, the School Board Library detective.

The rest, as we say, is TV Land History.

Anonymous said...

Men arrested for telling lawyer jokes

Charged with disorderly conduct

http://www.unknownnews.org/05011811lawyerjokes.html

Anonymous said...

you might want to complain to the "FLORIDA COMMISSION ON ETHICS"

Rumpole said...

YOU VOTE : MODERATION OR NOT.

TOMORROW IS 9/11

WE HAVE A POST DEDIDATED TO THAT.

NO PETTY CRAP TOMORROW.
OR ELSE.

Rumpole said...

Miguel M. de la O to me
More options 8:34 pm (6 minutes ago)

I regret even having to write this email and it will be my only response in this forum to the accusations leveled against me by Mr. McGillis. As is his right to do, Mr. McGillis filed a meritless bar complaint against me in connection with our firm litigating against him on behalf of a client in a civil lawsuit. After Bar counsel dismissed his complaint because -- on its face -- it lacked merit, he claimed (wrongly) that I was given special treatment by the Bar. Consequently, the Chief Branch Discipline Counsel reviewed the complaint and concurred with its dismissal. At Mr. McGillis' request, the complaint was forwarded to the Chair of another Grievance Committee. This third review of the complaint again resulted in the complaint being dismissed. Mr. McGillis is unable to accept the findings of the Bar and continues to claim bias. I have no intentions of filing a response to Mr. McGillis' complaint, as one was never required by the Bar.

Mr. McGillis' also makes hay of a malpractice suit regrettably filed against me by a former client. The suit never claimed that I stole funds. It was the sort of lawsuit that is filed after a client disregards the advice of counsel and is later unhappy with the results. It was not dismissed for technical reasons. No pressure was brought on the plaintiff to drop the case, and the case was never dropped. Rather, the case was tried on the merits and I and my firm prevailed on the merits.

Please accept my apologies for wasting time on this otherwise entertaining Blog. I cannot allow a bitter litigant continue to sully my reputation without, at least once, standing up for myself. I trust this topic has now exhausted itself.

Anonymous said...

"DEDIDATED TO THAT"

you mean dedicated

Anonymous said...

Miguel is right is was ordered to moderation:

MOSES, RUTH vs DE LA O, MIGUEL
* Click on BOOK/PAGE of a particular docket to see the image if it is available *
Case Number (LOCAL): 2004-10168-CA-01 Filing Date: 5/5/2004
Case Number (STATE): 13-2004-CA-010168-0000-01 Dockets Retrieved: 97
Judicial Section: 25

Date Book/Page Docket Entry Comments
07/21/06 SUBPOENA RETURNED
07/05/06 ORDER: DIRECTING BINDING ARBITRATION


here is the link:

http://www.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil/docketinfo.asp?pCase_Year=2004&pCase_Seq=10168&pCase_Code=CA&pCase_Loc=01&id=AAAA8tAAHAAAfMqAAL

Anonymous said...

as long as that guy does not post any more trash on O keep it free

Darrin E. McGillis said...

Rumpole you do not have to have moderation on I will not be posting any response to Miguel de la O, and I hope that if anyone post any further comments that you delete them and we put this subject to bed.

Thank you for allowing the discussion.

Darrin

Anonymous said...

These are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts, and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now published by court reporters who had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were actually taking place.
-------------------------------
ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there.
________________________________
ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
WITNESS: July 18th.
ATTORNEY: What year?
WITNESS: Every year.
_____________________________________
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
_____________________________________
ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you?
WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.
ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you?
WITNESS: Forty-five years.
_____________________________________
ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
WITNESS: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?"
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
WITNESS: My name is Susan.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo?
WITNESS: We both do.
ATTORNEY: Voodoo?
WITNESS: We do.
ATTORNEY: You do?
WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
____________________________________
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty year old, how old is he?
WITNESS: Uh, he's twenty.
________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Would you repeat the question?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: Uh....
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All my autopsies are performed on dead people.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
WITNESS: Oral.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy on him!
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Huh?
____________________________________________
And the best for last:
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: But could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

Anonymous said...

John S., Timothy O., Paul T., Terrence H., James S., James G., John C. PEOPLE I GREW UP WITH, WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH, PLAYED LITTLE LEAGUE WITH - ALL MURDERED AND INCINERATED AT THE WTC ON 9/11/2001. LET'S ALL TRY TO COUNT OUR BLESSINGS AND TRY TO HAVE LESS PETTINESS AND MORE EMPATHY AND FRIENDSHIP IN OUR SHORT LIVES HERE.

Anonymous said...

Michelle Towbin is insane and I am not saying that to be mean it's actually true. Do not vote for her under any circustances!

Anonymous said...

New news: check out Florida Supreme Court Docket: Case No's
SC06-880 & SC06-1541

Anonymous said...

is that the reason that she dresses like a homeless lady?

Anonymous said...

Do you realize that literally almost 50% of the votes from this election were absentee??? 66,741 were turned in. Even with the rain how could there have been just as many voters in absentee as in 2 weeks of early voting and election day?

Anonymous said...

because someone did something illegal you may want to chat with that JA

Anonymous said...

You guys all need to spend more time doing pro bono work than whinning on a blog. Many children in south florida need GALs. stop waisting your time on guffy blog, help those who are in need.

Anonymous said...

ok 10:24 pm and what are you doing