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

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

A DISTURBING CASE

UPDATE: Before we begin, this is a disturbing case. Judge Stacy Glick has sentenced a pregnant woman to 3 years in state prison after a guilty verdict for felony battery on a law enforcement officer. We have no idea of the facts of the case, and the sentence may well be appropriate. The Defendant has a web site here which gives her side of the story. While we understand Judge Glick cannot respond to this, perhaps the SAO can?


As criminal defense attorneys we are often confronted with the dark side of human nature.

We are called upon to defend those that may appear indefensible.

We see acts so brutal, so ultimately devoid of humanity that we often have trouble sleeping at night.

Perhaps no other type of crime is more disturbing than a domestic related crime. The passions of family can often drive people to commit unspeakable acts.

Having been forewarned, we present to you an excerpt from a particularly troubling domestic violence crime from Jacksonville. We remind our readers that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and the facts, as horrific as they are, remain unproven allegations at this time.

On September 29, 2010, the Defendant Marie Brenda Riley was arrested and accused of...

Actually and intentionally touch or s trike (KEANE LANGEL), (HER) (BOYFRIEND) and c o-habitant, against the will of (KEANE LANGEL), to-wit: THE DEF W AS IN AN ALTERCATION WITH HER LIVE IN BOYFRIEND . THE VIC BEGAN SPITTING BANANA ON THE DEF AND THROWING DONUTS AT HER. THE DEF GOT UPSET AND WENT AND A R MED HERSELF WITH A BANANA. SHE RIPPED THE BANANA IN 2 AND SMASHED THEM INTO THE VIC'S EARS. THE VIC AND DEF THEN CONTINUED

TO THROW FOOD AT EACH OTHER AND THE DEF FINA LLY CALLED THE POLICE. THE DEF STATED SHE SMASHED THE BANANA INTO THE DEF'S EARS BECAUSE SHE WAS MAD. THIS IS DOMESTIC RELATED BECAUSE BOTH PARTIES RESIDE TOGETHER AS A FAMILY.






Hat tip to a devoted reader for the a-form.





Domestic

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ah yes , a very ancient technique, very deadly, the "BANNANA SPLIT"
DS

Anonymous said...

Why arent you all talking about crazy Stacy Glick. Her outrageous behavior need to be exposed. She is a disgrace to the judiciary. This spoiled, entitled woman has decided to sentence an african american woman to three years state prison. This woman only has a mm disorderly prior. In fact, she graduated pre-med, has a little child and is currently 6 months pregnant. She is considered to be in the high risk category for her pregnancy. Glick allowed her JA's husband to testify in the trial . She refused to recuse herself, even though in the past she has done so for the same reason. The PSI recommended less than 364. The state even recommended less than 364. However, evil decided to do something different. She has no compassion, digity, grace or intellect. I can not recount the whole story as it will take to long to tell it. Please google Stacy Glick.. you will see a result that includes a webpage dedicated to this woman that is sentenced.http://nicoledunsonbowen.bbnow.org/ Please read it so that you can see all the facts. Stacy Glick needs to be removed. It is a shame that any fool can become a judge. They should require a mental examination. If required, Stacy along with some others would have never qualified. Stacy Glick should be ashamed of herself. This lady will be before Glick on friday for a mitigation hearing. Once you have read the website, article and conducted your own research... I ask that you show up to support what is right. What is right is that this young lady should get a fair sentence.. not one that was just pulled from Stacy Glick's behind with no rhyme or reason for it. Please show up to the court room. I truly hope the media gets ahold of this, so that Glick may be exposed and maybe justice will prevail.

Anonymous said...

It's the Keys!! Anymore questions....

Anonymous said...

Rumpole
another innocent man
DS

Deaf Texan Exonerated of Child Sex Assault FreedUpdated: 16 hours 43 minutes ago
.Print Text Size Print this page|EmailShare on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on DiggShare on LifestreamAP DALLAS (Sept. 29) -- A deaf man exonerated of the rape of a 5-year-old suburban Dallas girl was released Tuesday after serving about 10 years in prison. His release came a day after a judge determined he was innocent.

Stephen Brodie's dad was there to greet the 39-year-old north Texas man when he walked out of the Dallas County jail. Brodie said through an interpreter that he was looking forward to being able to have lunch with his dad, J. Steve Brodie, now that he was out of jail.

Brodie also received an apology from Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins, whose office had reopened the case and whose investigation ultimately led to Brodie's exoneration.



LM Otero, AP
Stephen Brodie was sent to prison for raping a 5-year-old girl despite an absence of physical evidence linking him to the attack. He was released Tuesday after a judge determined he was innocent.A bureaucratic matter had kept Brodie from being released Monday, when a judge ruled Brodie had been wrongly prosecuted despite an absence of physical evidence linking him to the attack. Brodie also was serving prison time for failing to register in Lamar County as a sex offender. With the elimination of his 1993 conviction in the 1990 rape of the Richardson girl, he no longer needed to register and state prison officials signed off on his release Tuesday.

Brodie originally was arrested in 1991 for stealing quarters from a vending machine at a community swimming pool. While he was being questioned about that crime, police began asking about the unsolved rape of the 5-year-old girl a year earlier.

The case was reopened after his father wrote a letter to Watkins' office, which had started a unit dedicated to re-examining possible innocence cases.

Brodie has been deaf since childhood, but police questioned him for hours without an interpreter. He eventually confessed, but later told The Associated Press he felt scared and pressured.

Richardson police said Monday that Brodie initially declined their offer of an interpreter.

When a judge ruled the confession was admissible at trial, Brodie and his attorney figured a guilty verdict, which was punishable by up to 99 years, was all but certain. So they cut a deal - pleading guilty to assaulting the girl in exchange for a five-year sentence. After serving that sentence, Brodie served two more prison stints totaling five more years for twice failing to register as a sex offender.

Brodie was convicted even though a hair and a fingerprint that police believed came from the perpetrator were not a match. Moore said prosecutors failed to notify Brodie's trial attorney that testing showed the hair excluded Brodie as the source.

When Brodie was arrested and convicted, police knew the fingerprint, found on the window through which the perpetrator entered the victim's home, did not match their suspect or anyone living there.

Anonymous said...

Fruit is good, but no tossed salad?

Fake Jonathan Blecher said...

Why would anyone waste a good doughnut?

Anonymous said...

We have found great extras for the food fight scene if there is ever a remake of Animal House.

Anonymous said...

Illegal trial tax, Example 1

Anonymous said...

Hold on before destroying Glick. My understanding is that Def demanded a trial, refused any plea, 3 years is guidelines. Not crazy judge, crazy def. Gave not reasons to mitigate, stuck with guidelines to make a legal sentence.

Anonymous said...

Stacey Glick is a cruel mental midget.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, Stacy?

I have about 10 clients that deserve 3 years in state prison and 2 years CC to follow. None of them will get it. You give it to a preganant woman for a battery on a LEO case where she scores NSPS? Gimme a break. And to place a late term pregnant woman with a history of high risk preganancies in the custody of Miami-Dade Corrections for the last trimester? As a woman, you should be concerned. Could you see Ward, Barzee, Soto or Venzer doing that? Of course not.

When the state, probation and defense agree on certain parameters of a sentence, why must you go well above it? You know who did that alot? Judge Adrien.

The word around the defense bar is that Glick is awful. I worked with her at the SAO and will come to her defense. But that is becoming more and more difficult as stuff like this happens.

Anonymous said...

If what the defendant says in her website is true, it is the NFL and ICE agents the ones that should have gone to jail for strong arm robbery, theft, and burglary of a conveyance with assault and battery. It seems like the cops and NFL people assumed she was with the man selling t-shirts. In any event, what legal authority do they have to seize property and go searching a car just like that?

Is there something else here that we don't know? If the facts are as described in the defendant's website, how did the SAO even filed charges. Anyone from the SAO to comment on how this case was prosecuted. Did the defendant hire counsel early on so that her witness could be produced to the SAO at the pre-file to try to get the charges no-actioned?

Anonymous said...

Gee, you think 11:10 pm might be the defendant or her family?

Anonymous said...

It's NOT the Keys. Largo is different than Key Largo. Largo is on the west coast, near St. Pete.

Anonymous said...

I don't know the facts of the case but 11:10PM I don't think you are right.

I've heard that the defendant had a bunch of arrests & conviction for the same offense of hitting cops BEFORE and got probation on that one and messed that up by commiting another crime (disorderly?)

And what does Judge Glick's JA's husband have to do with anything? This was a jury trial I assume. The jury doesn't know Glick's "relationship" (if any) to the witness and besides, it's the JURY, not Glick, who decides whether or not to believe the witnesses and find her guilty or innocent. And they (JURY) found her guilty and believed JA's husband not Glick.

Guess the real facts will come out tomorrow. Just my $.02.

CAPTAIN said...

THE CAPTAIN REPORTS:

My understanding is that she had one misdemeanor prior; not multiple arrests and convictions.

She will serve her time in State prison, not the DCJ system. She will give birth in prison and the baby will be taken from her to live without her while she completes her prison term.


The officer was not injured; I believe the testimony was that he was pushed by the defendant.

Even the State recommended a sentence of County time.

Judge Glick stated that the defendant showed an escalating pattern of violence, citing the previous disorderly charge from years ago, and slammed her with the 3 years FSP.

Defense attorney of record shows as Gabrielle Green (2005). There is a hearing tomorrow before Judge Glick on a Motion To Mitigate.

Cap Out ....

Anonymous said...

Ok I just went to the defendant's website and shame on any of you who are simply believing these are the "facts" in this case.

If you believe what you read on that website based on 1 anonymous "witness" who is probably the defendant's husband or attorney who is writing it, come on. Get real! You seriously think those are the real facts of the case? You seriously think the defendant's criminal history is accurate? A jury found the defendant guilty. They did not believe the defendant and her "witnesses". And if she has a criminal history I doubt the state only asked for 364.

Someone needs to go to Glick's courtroom tomorrow and get the real scoop!

Anonymous said...

Stacy's dad would have done the same thing.

Anonymous said...

I don't know the specific facts of the case either. But I've been around long enough to know what when defendant says A, cops/victims say B, the truth is usually at point C.

Also, the fact that the defendant posted an entire website vigorously maintaining her innocence bothers me some. The first thing I tell every client that I MEET with is that regardless of whether the retain me, retain other counsel, use the public defender or represent themselves is this: ONLY DISCUSS THE FACTS OF YOUR CASE WITH AN ATTORNEY. IF YOU DISCUSS THE FACTS OF YOUR CASE WITH SOMEONE ELSE, IT MAY COME BACK TO HAUNT YOU.

I am also reminded of the case of Roger Keith Coleman, who was executed in Virginia in 1992. He went to his death claiming he was innocent, and had a large numer of people and organizations believing the same. He even appeared on the cover of TIME magazine. In 2006, sophisticated DNA tests confirmed that he was guilty. Not all claims of innocence are founded.

As to the facts of the case, I'd love to see the trial testimony or hear someone from the SAO comment.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Stacy Glick - like father, like daughter.

Anonymous said...

i tell u what! Karma is a bioootcchhh! Look what happened to the USASA! Glick will reap the fruits of the seeds she plants. If infact she acted justly she has nothing to worry about but if she did not then life has a way of evening the score. To be truthfull I like her as a person as a judge she is terrible. I knew this would happen I never doubted it for a second. Even Judge Scola would not have been so cruel in this case and Glick learned a lot from that woman since she was the dc in there forever. The ones going to jail are our minority children and loved ones, if you are white you have less to worry about than if you are latino or black. The community needs to get together and come against these judges that have the lock em up n throw away the key attitude. That is why our jails are packed.

Anonymous said...

WOW - the Glicks have really done it this time. A pregnant woman with no prior convictions going to prison on a Batt LEO case. This shows how the "trial tax" works in state court. Unbelievable. Trial or no trial - this is a Non-State Prison case. Ofcourse if the D was a career criminal its different.
This just shows how mean spirited this Judge is. All she had to do was give the lady 2 years CC followed by probation and include a ton of special conditions and that would have punished this woman more than enough.

Anonymous said...

Should have maxed her.

Anonymous said...

3 years for a first time felony offender is not the worst. If David Miller were still around, he would have given her five on the felony and 364 on the battery consecutive. Butchko would have done the same.

But since Miller is out, Butchko and Glick remain. There are many excellent judges who have been prosecutors (Soto), but who have also had real world, private practice experience.

Glick was a career prosecutor from start to finish. With the exception of some time in a maritime practice, Butchko was a career prosecutor as well.

Career public defenders don't make much better judges either (although Colodny is really proving me wrong on this one). Not every multiple offending asshole deserves a hug and drug treatment. Some people have to be punished.

But on the other hand, this batt/leo case should have never gone to trial. And how she was found guilty is beyond me.

Good judges, however, see the bullshit, even when the verdict is guilty. They may allow a case to go to trial but will not impose an overly punitive sentence on a terrible set of facts.

Sentence should have been a withhold and 2 years probation with early term after one year.

Anonymous said...

From this poor defendant's blog:

" She has owned profitable businesses: by herself with Puppy Love Rescue to her current of Multi Enterprises (All purpose plant supply-- interior design, exterior landscape, and commencement staging and floral sales)which she runs with her husband." 

Really sounds like someone who qualified for the PDs. I say charge her for lying on the application of indigency and wasting the PD and Gabby Greene's time. Sounds like Glick gave her guidelines so stop complaining PD supervisor who posted this. If you have an issue with Glick than run against her.

Fake Jonathan Blecher said...

what does this have to do with my weed and the dozen doughnuts i eat every night to get me through another day of DUI cases?

Anonymous said...

It's not the judges... It's the courtroom! Courtroom 3-4 makes judges do stupid things. It did it to Adrien and now it's doing it to Glick too. Looks like 3-4 also has the ability to cause election losses to the judges that work there, too.

Anonymous said...

I gotta tell you, Stacy, I donated to you campaign, I told people about you, that you were one of us, I got the bail bondsman to back you and donate t yoyr campaing. You know who I am and I hope you understand the point I am making. Simply because the defendant demanded a trial is not a reason to hammer her. We celebrate the fact that people enjoy the right to trial and are innocent until proven guilty. I am a wealthy lawyer, I would hate, hate to see a judge wreck the life of someone because they are cutting their teeth on the bench.

Do what is right, do what a good judge does, you are no longer an ASA.

Anonymous said...

As you note, Stacey’s father would have done the same thing, but times were different. A word to the wise, in Miami-Dade County, a judge today, could be a mere practitioner tomorrow! Ask Flora Seff. One simple, almost innocuous act by Seff turned the campaign against her, and gave Michaelle Gonzalez-Paulson an essential impetus she lacked. Newman, with incredible name recognition, heavy hitting support, and lots, lots of his own money - he spent over $160,000.00 on the campaign (about a $1,000.00 per vote) - and Newman almost lost. Moral, all you have to do is p - - - off (upset) the wrong member of the bar, and you will not only get opposition, you will get the support for your opponent that makes the difference. As a judge in Miami-Dade County you are perpetually running for office. If you are a judge, you have better know the players, there are a few in our humble building who have the political know, and necessary net work to destroy delusional flights of fancy. So, my advice, understand a judge is not a Prosecutor, as a judge you are to level the field, and administer justice, not please the State or the PBA! (The PBA cannot get you elected. They could not garner the votes to do squat in certain areas of this county; ironically the areas that produce higher voter turn out.) The best judges maintain a delicate balance, a provide a fair playing field, so we respect their rulings. To understand the community, a judge has to know the community, as a whole, not only the lily white, upper crust. So every once in a while go out, listen, have empathy, and show compassion for the little people, not just the rich, the powerful, the prosecutors, and the cops.

To our robed readers, reflect, the defense bar, not prosecutors, make the political difference. All we ask is be fair, not a Stamp for the State or a prosecutor in the Robe!

Anonymous said...

As far as i understand, no one was injured, not even a scratch. I heard some of the testimony and was left with the impression in favor of a conviction. as we all know, most jurors believe cops and certain things are kept out by the state, discussed at side bar, etc.. Now, a conviction doesn't always have to mean incarceration. house arrest for a pregnant woman seems appropriate in that situation. she's not going to be a danger to herself or to others in the last trimester. Weekend jail is also an option. Judge glick could have chosen either one, but she's the judge and her word is golden at the end of the day. Does it make it right? No, I don't think so. And to echo what somebody else said, if she had violent felony priors the State would have asked for more than 364. they have to get their pound of flesh after conviction. Don't blame them. they're following orders from the DC. that alone should have halted Judge Glick's decision, but c'et la vie.

Anonymous said...

Glick sucks as a Judge. She's lazy and stupid, her dad should be ashamed of raising such a disconnected entitled brat.