Michigan/Ohio State. Thanksgiving day games. What a wonderful time of the year if you love the ol' pigskin.
Going with the defending champs for the first time this year. Take the Steelers and give the 3.5 over the Brownies. These games are usually close and hard fought. The ½ point worries me as I can see this as an OT game decided by a field goal. But the Steelers always play the Browns hard and their offense is beginning to click.
Colts over the Cowboys pickem on the road, Not this week 72 Fins, sorry.
Speaking of the Fins. Why not lay the 3 over the fading Vikes and make a few bucks?
OVER/UNDER. Still red hot this year.
UNDER 40 Jets and Bears.
OVER 41 SAN DIEGO AT DENVER
UNDER 42 SEATTLE AT SAN FRAN
Have fun and make sure to check back on Wednesday for our Turkey day picks.
Bonus: Michigan vs. Ohio State. Michigan averages 29 points a game while Ohio gives up 8 points a game. Ohio State averages 35 ppg, while Michigan gives up 12 ppg. Two big offensives go up against two tough defenses. Something has to give.
The Over/Under is 41. Take the over.
Ohio State is favoured by 7. My mind says Ohio, but the birdie on my shoulder says take the 7 and relax.
When you see something that is not right, not fair, find a way to get in the way and cause trouble. Congressman John Lewis
JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG
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. Winner of the prestigious Cushing Left Anterior Descending Artery Award.
22 comments:
did ya all catch that the minute we all start talking about Freedman and Lurvey as Rumpole up comes a new post????
Change of subject hey there Rumpole...
Horace have you read the Herald today? If not, go online now and read the headlines. Then read on. Much fodder for this blog. BTW my first time commenting, and am addicted to the blog, Scott.
It JUST sounds like the Finger, doesn't it? It's not Phil. I can tell it isn't. BTW Phil, is Gladys still with you? She and I got along famously.
I am duh blogga, the captain, the riddler and rumpole.
I've known Scott and Phil for nearly 20 years...Scott better than Phil...the voice behind the blog is, to my limited ear, Scott's..
I am rumpole.
Dan, how's the wife and kid? She was a great paralegal at the SAO..
HEY!!!! I know and like Dan, he's a great guy. And know his wife and child. That was nasty. That was just wrong.
I am a friend of Dan's and was just kidding. He makes that same joke all the time.
Has anyone read the Herald report on altered docket histories? How the SAO alters dockets to protect snitches? go to the Herald online...
1:42 provide link please
Nothing new - its been around for a while
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16041983.htm
This whole thing in the herald is a non-story. Funny they beat up on SAO for not doing enough re corruption and then when SAO does some creative things to further investigations, they squawk.
Funny, I didnt hear them squawking too loud when these same tactics were used to catch Judge Shenberg who was willing to give up the name of an informant for 20 grand.
I agree with 6:42 as when operation court broom was in force they created phony defendants and complete phony dockets
creative things to help investigations? this is the SAO falsifying ct. records so that their informants can't be impeached with their priors. thats clearly unconstitutional and shows a complete disdain and disregard for the right of a defendant to fully and fairly cross examine all witnesses against him. and the fact that sitting judges are willing to go along with it should be disturbing to anyone with the slightest idea how the criminal justice system is supposed to work in our country. its a story. if you think it isn't you've been too jaded by working in the system.
842 you are a fucking retard. When you actually get out of county court or traffic ticket land you might understand what really goes on.
If you read the story you would know that no ones priors are hidden forever so that when they take the stand a defense attorney cant cross examine them. It is temporary so that someone can work as an informant. in both cases cited by the herald, once the snitch did his work, the records were restored to thier true state.
you post is one of the dumbest i have read on this blog which is no small accomplishment
8:42...that's BS. Secret files/false dockets weren't created to allow witnesses to avoid impeachment. They were created to keep witnesses alive and investigations going.
When people enter sealed pleas or a judge seals a file, the Clerk's Office notes that in the public docked. This, of course, vitiates the purpose of the sealed plea and, in fact, creates added risk since anyone with half a brain knows files generally are sealed for only one reason (yeah, I know some first timers who are not convicted get their cases sealed/expunged, but we all know that's rare as hell).
We all know that some of the more organized/sophisticated criminals check each other out and see what happens with each others' cases.
10:59.....please don't insult the mentally disadvantaged by comparing them to 8:42.
A crime is not a crime if the SAO is doing it and has its flunkies defend it in a blog. Just like conflicts of interest in journalism are not ethical violations if they happen at The Miami Herald, which denies the violation in a publisher's open letter. Stop trying to apply the law and ethics to the SAO and Herald. By the way - If the Herald really wanted to do some serious investigation about hidden stuff, uncover Rumpole.
7:35 hits it right on the head - there is nothing wrong with what happened here, because any crime was committed by the SAO.
And the records were not restored when the snitch was through, THEY WERE RESTORED WHEN A REPORTER ASKED ABOUT IT
The problem isn't the altered dockets (which occured with the judges' permission). The problem was the failure to disclose the conviction when the subject was listed as a witness (assuming, of course, that the allegation that the prosecutor failed to do so is accurate).
thanks again for the winners, you the man
Post a Comment