Wednesday, December 17, 2014


Hate is protected speech.
We are publishing, with permission of the recipient, the anonymous hate mail sent to her by a coward.
And make no mistake about it, a coward sent this.
We are publicizing it to shame the coward.
Oh, they might enjoy it at first. But as it lingers, and people view it, and think to themselves about the coward who sent it who didn't have the guts to sign their name to their hate mail, it will begin to make them uncomfortable. Maybe they will get upset. At some point they will want us to take it down. But we won't. Others have tried and failed. This post will be an everlasting monument to their abject cowardice.

Enjoy it coward.



Coward is being nice to the writer. The author sounds like something a pre-teen would be texting out to another sixth grader.

What an absolute embarrassment this person is to the legal profession. Whether you agree with Ms. Wear and what she has to say, or not, nobody has the right to write those words.

This would not be protected by the first amendment Rump as far as the Florida Bar is concerned. If this person was ever IDd they would be suspended for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct.

And the only reason the words are not criminal in nature are because the writer was "clever" enough to add the word legal to that last sentence.

This person is vile and despicable, and it's a damn shame that this person will continue to be a member of FACDL and have access to the List Serv because of their anonymous status.

Nancy, keep your head held high and don't let the comments of one idiot get you down. Remember, every dog has his day.

Cap Out .....

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't be surprised if Nancy Wear wrote that letter herself to make herself out to be the victim. But if another member of the defense bar did in fact write that letter, I agree, he or she is a coward.

Anonymous said...

She must have kicked his butt in open court at some point....

Anonymous said...

The author was totally out of line, to say the least. However......

I don't think the anonymous writer cares or will ever care that you posted this.

Further, his opinions, expressed as unprofessionally as they are, are shared by a fairly significant number of people.

Also, there's nothing criminal about it and I can't believe what an issue you (and Nancy) are making of this. It was a personal letter (arguably, the private rant is no worse than some of the things Nancy has written or that people have posted on this blog. I bet most people would rather be cursed out in private that publicly slammed via the list serve or this site). Nancy should have just torn it up and thrown it away.

That said, the letter is another shining example of our profession and society is crumbling. Why can't we all get along?


Anonymous said...

Rump is this promotion to get people to join FACDL just to get on the listserv for the juicy stuff?! JK! On a serious note however, the writer could have simply used only the 11, 12, and 13th words in their letter to make their point.

Anonymous said...

What is really bad is that Nancy didn't even insult ph Jr. She voiced an opinion that more defense lawyers should be on the jnc. Then, every suck up in the world jumped on Nancy to declare their undying support for the judgeling. I suspect that both the judge and Jr. Are embarrassed for those kiss ass idiots

Anonymous said...

Just a second here. Did it ever occur to anyone that Nancy sent that to Nancy? She's pissed off just about everyone in FACDL. This is the first time anyone has stuck up for her. Don't rush to judgment.

Anonymous said...

Although I disagree with sending such a letter I must point out that Nancy has insulted 99% of FACDL. She posted that APD's were over paid. She sued her former boss, Essen and lost. She attacked CLE chairpersons for not allowing to her speak on subjects she knows nothing about and generally says about the stupidest things you could say.
I'm on the list serve and I delete everything she says before reading it.

Anonymous said...

Who knows, or cares, if the letter was really sent to Nancy Wear? Honestly, Rumpole, who really gives a damn? Get your panties out of a bunch, will you?

Anonymous said...

The letter writer was not a coward. He was a really pissed off lawyer. Coward is the wrong word.
Coward: (American Heritage Dictionary)
cow·ard (kouərd)

One who shows ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain.

[Middle English, from Old French couard, from coue, tail, from Latin cauda.]

coward adj.

Word History: A coward is one who "turns tail." The word comes from Old French couart, coart, "coward," and is related to Italian codardo, "coward." Couart is formed from coe, a northern French dialectal variant of cue, "tail" (from Latin cōda), to which the derogatory suffix -ard was added. This suffix appears in bastard, laggard, and sluggard, to name a few. In heraldry a lion couard, "cowardly lion," was depicted with his tail between his legs. So a coward may be one with his tail hidden between his legs or one who turns tail and runs like a rabbit, with his tail showing.

Anonymous said...

Some wise guy tells Nancy off and this is the "worst of the worst?" Really?

I've wanted to say that to her face for years.

Anonymous said...

Oh please stop the drama. Rumpole you are just fanning the flames.

real fake former Judge said...

Kenny in the NY Times today:

The Queens kimchi belt has got to be the least explored, discussed and celebrated of the city’s great ethnic-food districts. For variety of dishes and excellence of cooking, the only areas that compete are the Japanese clusters in the East Village and the East 40s or the city’s three Chinatowns. Koreatown in the West 30s, which was once strong, doesn’t even get on the scoreboard.

Anonymous said...

Before you longtime Blog readers get all misty eyed about Nancy Wear, you need to know that this is not the first time she has published an attack on her to make people feel sorry for her. Last time it really backfired on her.

Nancy really pissed off Mike C about a year ago and he wrote her a long email explaining all the crap she had pulled and Nancy was dumb enough to publish it. It sure made her look like an idiot.

Nothing Mike said was false. Mike even warned her that if she published it she did so at her own peril.

Now, Nancy sent us all an email last week that said this about the Huck clan:

Indeed. I am entertained to see that Paul Huck Jr's "information to be provided." It is absurd for him to serve on a JNC, with his father a federal judge and his wife a 3d DCA judge.

I can see why a friend of the Huck's would think less of Nancy Wear.

Looks to me like Nancy wrote this letter to herself.

Anonymous said...

On this Blog, we say fuck off, asshole etc.

Now, if you swear, in private at an idiot that insults everyone, you are the worst of the worst.


Anonymous said...

Rumpole. whether you print this or not, it is a story that needs to be told.
In December of last year I told you we were a group of five public servants, lawyers and judges, who cashed out of the drop program. We asked you where to invest? You sent us (me) a complicated email referencing demand curves, fracking, Russia, and said to sell oil short and hang on until the end of the year. We each said "what the hell?" and put in 10,000 each and sold oil short and bought oil short funds. Nothing until June, and then we began to see a slight tick downward. In July we reached out and you responded that if we weren't in by now, we had left tons of money on the table. We doubled down another 10,000 each and then again in August.
All I can say is g-d bless you Rumpole. I put 50% down on a new home for my daughter and her new husband this month. At your advice we sold half our positions for a profit of almost 1.3 million dollars. Yes, you read that right. And we still have 1.3 million of the house's money riding on more weakness in oil. You have given us a straggly of straddles and hedging to get out completely in 2015 and be out of oil by 2016, when you say it is going back up.
Thank you thank you thank you.
You are de man!

Grateful beyond words.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Wear deserves that letter. SHE EARNED every single word in it by HER OWN words and actions.

Anonymous said...

I just received a letter from someone on the the list serve accusing me of being the most handsome, smartest lawyer in Miami. So what if the handwriting looks awfully close to mine?

I am thinking of asking a Rolling Stone writer to cover this story.

Anonymous said...


RUMPOLE….This is an article in the ABA Journal re: Nancy Wear

Anonymous said...

Read the ABA article. Nancy would throw her junk mail on the floor near her mailbox and demanded a trash can. Codo assn. refused. She sued and won. Boy does that make lawyers look like assholes.

Anonymous said...

A blog written by someone who uses a pseudonym is criticizing someone for being a coward for not putting his/her name to something?

Rumpole said...

Yeah. Quite the contradiction. Ayn Rand wrote that contradictions don't exist. When you think you have one, check your premise. I suggest you do the same.

Anonymous said...

Rumpy, you are a coward according to your definition of coward.

Why not reveal who you are? You dish up people who have it coming and you compliment people who do good deeds. So, stop being a coward and come out of your closet. (Why not.... gays can get married in Miami January 5th.)

Anonymous said...

There's no contradiction. Rump moderates comments to avoid the kind of attacks the author made in the letter.

As for Nancy's lawsuit; she won a nice sum, but, the 1050 poster is right........she is unbelievable nasty and vindictive. As I said before, I don't like the tone of the letter (which is disgusting), but many people rightfully share the sentiments. You can't spend a lifetime hammering others without making a ton of enemies. It's unfortunate that Nancy is misusing her talents as she is. If she refocused her energy in a more positive way, she could make a tremendous difference in our community (and, most likely, in her own life). Too bad that won't happen.


Anonymous said...

I don't think it's a contradiction. I think you're both cowards. But I'm okay with it. I think, among other things, it achieves the purpose of being able to express ideas without fear of retribution.

Anonymity in writing and comments is a wonderful thing because it allows us to look at the merit of the ideas being presented without worrying about the identity of the writer. While writers will always have motives in what they write, without knowing these motives, we can analyze the comment itself.

Anonymous said...

Unlike FACDL where you have to say who you are, not one nice post for fancy Nancy.

I've never met her but, who has? I just read a bunch of her stupid emails and must say I too wish she would just go away.

Anonymous said...

Who the fuck is nancy wear?

Anonymous said...

Rumpole has writer's block and picked up on this non-issue, added drama and came up with a post.

Anonymous said...

I've been out of town and just read this post today. Dear Capt... do you have any idea how the Bar works? You say they would suspend the lawyer but, for what rule violation? If you're so smart, cite a rule and show me one case where the Bar ever did anything about one lawyer bitching out another. The Bar never goes after lawyers unless the matter is a media hot potato.
I wish people would shut up unless they know what they're talking about. Opps. Am I a coward for asking the dear Capt to shut up?
One other thing, Capt. have you read Nancy's posts? If you did, how could you ever tell such a person to keep her head up high? Her head has been somewhere else way down low for about 20 years.
I'm just sayin........

You reap What You Sow said...

From the Justice Building Blog (June 7, 2010)- Horace Rumpole, Proprietor


Last week on the FACDL listserve, Broward Attorney Talitha Leacock posted a question seeking advice on a warrantless search of a vehicle. Ms. Leacock wrote, inter alia,

Specifically, I am looking for the following:
(1) Recent caselaw on point that states searching a vehicle subsequent to a traffic stop, absent consent or any other exception to the search warrant requirement, is unlawful and any evidence seized should be suppressed.
(2) Recent caselaw on point that states stopping a vehicle for a traffic stop, observing a clear plastic cup full of liquid, and a Defendant admitting to having a drink of alcohol after work is not sufficient to search a vehicle without consent or other exception to the search warrant requirement and any evidence seized should be suppressed.

Enter famed Miami Appellate attorney Nancy Wear who, drawing upon her years of legal experience wrote this email, reprinted in its entirety here:

Nancy Wear
to Talitha, FACDL-Miami
Here is my guidance: Open a Law Book!!! "

Anonymous said...


I did a full investigation and the letter is written in New Times Roman 14, exactly what appellate lawyers use for everything. It was also mailed in the same area where Nancy practices law.

She sent it to herself and you fell for this hoax.

Anonymous said...


After reading Nancy's wise ass comment, "open a law book," I would like to join the person who sent the nasty note. Would that make me THE worst of the worst of the worst?

How much of a jerk do you have to be before this Blog leaves you alone when you call out a really horrible jerk?