Saturday, January 17, 2015


Let's see… in no particular order of importance….

Today is NFL Championship Sunday. Four teams will vie for the right to go to the Super Bowl which has become a holiday of almost religious reverence in the United States. It's just a football game. 

The oceans are collapsing at an alarming rate and ocean life is approaching a point of collapse from which there is no return. The NY Times has the article here. 

And David Young is running for Judge. 

The announcement of Mr. Young's candidacy drew a multitude of comments in the last post. But it's our blog so we get the last word. (Although actually Mr. Young would have the last word should he care to write in.). 

First as to the Airline Pilots trial several years back. The pilots were charged with attempting to take command of a commercial airline filled with passengers while they were intoxicated from a night of drinking. It is an absolute rule of flying taught on the first day of flight school: "Twenty-four hours from bottle to throttle" and the pilots charged with a violating that rule were about twenty hours short of compliance. 

It has been alleged that Mr. Young in his capacity as a Judge rejected plea offers in the case because he wanted to try the case and use the publicity and notoriety of the televised trial for his own personal aggrandizement. It is not disputed that after the conclusion of the trial that Mr. Young was offered- and accepted- a job as a "television judge" ala "The People's Court" (also headed by a former Dade County Judge- the Honorable Marilyn Milian.). 

To accuse Mr. Young of turning down the pleas because of his desire to land a job on television, is akin to accusing Barak Obama's mother of faking the place of her son's birth because she knew that someday he was destined to be President of the United States. A far-fetched accusation, but one in which small-minded people are apt to believe. The same goes with Judge Young, and the logic is just as tenuous.  

Judges accept pleas all day long to a familiar litany of crimes- possession, robbery, assault, battery, DUI. But as we enter our third decade labouring in the hallowed halls of the REGJB, this is the first case we can recall with these type of charges. At times DUI practitioners would see a private pilot charged with flying while impaired, but we have never seen commercial pilots charged with such a crime. The magnitude of a disaster that could have come about if the pilot's impairment caused error which resulted in a crash is almost unimaginable. Besides the unfortunate souls on the aircraft,  Miami is a crowded urban center. The plane could have crashed into a school, or hospital, or the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant or even the Dade State Attorneys Office!!!  

If in the course of a career a judge rejects a plea or two, this is one of those cases ripe for such action. We see no nefarious plans behind Judge Young's actions. He had the authority, indeed the duty, to accept only a plea that he deemed acceptable in light of the nature of the crime. 

In all other aspects we welcome Mr. Young's return to the bench.  The qualities we seek in a judge are foremost the courage to do the right thing. Time and time again Judge Young spoke out for defendants he saw being mistreated. Defense attorneys applauded him for this, rightfully so. Shame on us for turning on Judge Young for his courage to reject a plea in a case where he thought the crime merited a more serious punishment. We should not criticize philosophical consistency; we should applaud the courage it takes to make a decision consistent with one's belief in the face of the  criticism of the vox populi. 

Seattle over Green Bay by ten, although we are rooting for the Packers. The Colts stun the Cheaters 34-31 when Luck leads his team on a last minute drive and game winning field goal. 

Enjoy the long weekend. No court Monday. 


Anonymous said...

RUMP -- I agree with you on almost everything, but not as to Mr. David Young.

He played favorites more than any judge that I can remember. If there was a political twist in the case, he would do everything that he could to be able to rule in a way that he could one day ask for the political favor back in the way of a donation to his campaign -- or his previously stated desire to one day be the Governor of Florida!

He is NOT the fair and impartial arbiter of the truth one expects on the bench.

If he did such a good job before, why would he not submit his qualifications to the JNC and see if he could be nominated -- instead of the political maneuver of the election process?

What say you?

Rumpole said...

Fair question. I didn't consider that. Perhaps as spots open up he will. Or perhaps as an avowed democrat from a well known Florida Democratic family, he didn't think he could get through the JNC to Rick Scott, who I am sure he actively campaigned against, and knowing Mr. Young, probably said some critical things about on his various social media enterprises.

Claude Erskine - Browne said...

Why should David Young bother with the JNC ? The only way Gov. Scott would appoint Young to Anything would require a nighttime visit by the Spirit of Ronald Reagan telling The Gov. to appoint David

Anonymous said...

David has hammered Scott publicly, including via Facebook. There is not a chance in hell that Scott would appoint him. SOME (not all) of the criticism I've read on this blog is reasonable (even if I don't necessarily agree with it), but criticizing him for running for office is just plain ridiculous.

Putting aside the drunk pilots case, I'd say David was an average judge at worst (I'll reserve commenting on whether that says more about the bench than about him). If nothing else, he was always pleasant (if not outright fun) to appear in front of and fair (the vast majority of the time). I wish him nothing but the best.


Anonymous said...

Weisman and Colby have a new Gordon Lightfoot tribute page up on Facebook replacing their old Sister Sledge tribute page.

Anonymous said...

David Young would often reject pleas agreed upon by state and defense in run of the mill cases.

Me said...

Hope you're well, Chief.

Anonymous said...

Those two knuckleheads are just wild and crazy guys. What's next? A Better Call Sail cafe on south beach ?

Anonymous said...

If that is the case - that David Young had incendiary political statements on his various social media sites - than he should not run for judge.

Who wants a judge that is preset in his ways and is so biased against a particular political party and their ideals?

David Young does NOT meet the criteria to be a "Retired Judge" as per the Florida Supreme Court as he did not apply within their specified time period once he left the bench to be a TV judge.

He cannot get appointed now (as he has announced that he wants to) to serve as a "Retired Judge". It is too remote in time for him to get that appointment. Since he was turned down for that position, he is forced to run in an election or submit his qualifications to the JNC.

I would submit that we don't want ideologues on the bench that espouse either left or right wing politics and pledge their allegiance to certain groups and demographics within our community. Mr. Young clearly did so with his social media writings and with his past actions on the bench.

Anonymous said...

The Green Bay packers will be ill for at least six months. Thy won't be able to watch the film. That was disgusting if you were rooting for the packers.

And even worse if you were me as I listened to Rumpole ans bet a dime on the Seahawks minus the eight and took a bath.

Anonymous said...

Great. Just dropped another dime on Rumpole recommnedation that I bet the Colts. Oh well that 2200 down for the week. I'll need to hit big in the super bowl.

Anonymous said...

Fonts could not beat Zilber , how does he think he is going to beat Young?

Anonymous said...

But what is the problem with Young being a lawyer and actually practicing law? Can he only be a judge? He had his time. Move over.

Rumpole said...

5:26 PM. Your comment is ridiculous bordering on the inane. In your view- which I strongly suspect you have invented just to criticize Young, any person who has any political belief is disqualified to be a judge. Believe in re-cyciing? You can't be a judge. Vote for a political candidate? You can't be a judge.

The essence of being a judge is following the law despite your personal beliefs. There isn't a judge alive who is happy granting a motion to suppress with a client charged with drug trafficking or murder. But they do it because they put aside their personal beliefs and follow the law.

Anonymous said...

Packers went down like the choking dogs they really are; I wish the would have saved it for the Super Bowl though. Tom Brady is going to obliterate the injured Seahawks ' secondary, and even the pathetic Pack would give the Pats a better game before choking it all away.

Anonymous said...

I will do everything in my vast power to defeat this clown, Young.

Active Cultures said...

At David's first investiture, which I attended, he spoke about intending to be an "activist judge", his words. Everyone in the room looked on, at at each other, as he railed on about how he would do what he thought was the right thing...in spite of the law.

Here's a few examples of judicial activism, some good, some not so good:

Roe v. Wade (abortion)
Bush v. Gore (stealing elections)
Brown v. Board of Education (de-segregation)
Citizens United (campaign finance)
Hollingsworth v. Perry (same sex marriage)




Over the course of several weeks last summer, Guy Lewis and Michael Tein were mostly vilified in the comments section of this BLOG for their representation of the Miccosukee Tribe.

Anyone who has read this BLOG for an extended period of time, knows the general reputation of many of the readers. Lawyer makes it big; lawyer makes lots of money; lawyer gets in the press; lawyer gets a bit $$$ result in a case - in all those scenarios, they are trashed on this BLOG. (Can you say JEALOUSY).

So, it goes without saying that, last Friday, when Judge Marcia Cooke issued her final Sanctions ruling in the Bernardo Roman matter, no one even thought to comment on the outcome of the case.

Bernardo Roman, you recall, was the new tribe attorney who filed a federal lawsuit against the Lewis Tein firm and accused them of racketeering. The lawsuit claimed the lawyers helped former Miccosukee chairman Billy Cypress embezzle $26 million.

Paul Calli was hired to represent Lewis Tein. And anyone that knows Paul or that has ever had the pleasure of being on the same side as him in a legal battle, knows that he is a great attorney and has a take no prisoners attitude.

On Friday, Judge Marcia Cooke filed her Sanctions Order resulting from a Sanctions Hearing that lasted nine days. In it, she ordered more than $1 million in sanctions against attorney Bernardo Roman III.

She also referred Roman to the Florida Bar in her 27-page order, where Roman already faces an ethics investigation, and the Southern District of Florida professional committee for possible disciplinary action.

Cooke ordered Roman to pay Lewis Tein $975,750 and Lehtinen $95,640.

You can read more of the "facts" here as covered by the DBR:


So, now let's see what the tone of the comments are as they relate to the conduct of Guy Lewis and Michael Tein.

Cap Out



Oh, Rumpole is going to have a field day over this latest story

NFL Investigating Patriots' Footballs

The NFL is investigating whether the New England Patriots intentionally deflated footballs during their victory over the Indianapolis Colts in Sunday's rain-soaked AFC Championship Game.


Cap Out ....

Active Cultures said...


Where's the comment about activist judges?

Active Cultures

Anonymous said...

Nicely said, Cap. And sadly, so true re all the haters. Roman isn't long for the profession. But the irony is in half the time he likely took 10 fold from the tribe what guy and mike billed so he probably will move to Vietnam and never be heard from again.

Anonymous said...

Young never tried a jury trial as a lawyer. He would be a zero but for his father. He will never donn the black robes again. A very qualified Hisspanic attorney will run against him and slaughter him in the election. there are several waiting to throw their sombraroes into the ring. Young is unqualifed and should make a nice housewife.

Anonymous said...


How about that for 2 years Jay Weaver recycled article after article containing damning false allegation after false allegation against tein and louis and now....nothing. What kind of dishonest newspaper allows suppression of the news for one writer's personal bias, other than the Miami Herald? It feels like Weaver knew this was all a lie and published it anyway. Just feels...scuzzy. I attended several days of the Cooke evidentiary sanctions hearing against Roman. Weaver was in court every day, smirking, taking notes and whispering to roman's co-conspirator, our own Pepe Herrera. And Weaver wrote not one article regarding his friend Roman getting exposed as a liar. And Weaver did not write an article about Cooke's ruling. How disgusting is that?

Knowing the parties involved, Weaver better lawyer up.

Anonymous said...

Hey Rump, followed both your football picks yesterday, and lost both games. It's my fault, not yours, but how can one guy be so consistently wrong on making predictions?

Anonymous said...

Explain to me how deflated balls would help LaGarrette Blount get 148 yards rushing. Explain to me how the Pats scored 28 unanswered points after the allegedly underweight ball was taken out of the game. Explain to me how Brady would get a throwing advantage when Luck was using the very same balls to throw.

Nothing to see here, although I look forward to hearing Rumpole compare Belichick to Napoleon, Genghis Khan, and Saddam Hussein.

Anonymous said...

I like David Young, he was always human on the bench, cared about people. God forbid a judge should be human. Most of you blow hard clowns suck anyway, I've seen you practice and you suck.

Anonymous said...

526..............every human being with a brain and even a smidgen of interest in the public's well-being has opinions on a multitude of issues. Would you really want someone who somehow has no opinion on anything? Each and every day we ask judges to set aside their preconceived beliefs (and biases) and rule according to the law (and, in appropriate cases, to recuse themselves). Young is no different than the rest of us.

Further, I'd rather have a judge like Young and know where I stand....it lends predictability to the process. Would you rather have a judge who hides all of his or her feelings/thoughts/beliefs?


Anonymous said...

Sorry Rump but, I was there back then and David Young forced those pilots to a jury trial just so he could get publicity by giving the main pilot the max. Think about it, 5 years in prison for a DUI and don't give me that shit about a plane full of people. It's no different than a bus driver showing up for work after a long night out and still being over .08.

He made it 100% clear that he wanted to be on TV and that is not how any judge should act.

I like David but, he lost all of my respect when he did that.

Gary Ostrow, esq said...


On Tuesday, January 13, 2015, Gary Ostrow wrote:

Re: Dade is right up there with some of Broweird's notorious/Right?

Dear Howard,

In light of your kindness in posting some of my previous blog contributions, I am compelled to offer evidence of the very same type of judicial misconduct that your blog is so very deeply critical of here in Broward. While appearing before Judge Monica Gordo on a Vehicular Homicide and Reckless Driving with Serious Bodily Injury, the attached exchange took place as recently as December 17, 2014.

Undersigned counsel had filed an amended C-4 sworn motion to Dismiss approximately 7 months prior, that is dispositive. There were no less than 6 hearings set by the Court for the sole purpose of issuing it's ruling on counsel's motion. The court NEVER ruled and many , if not all of those scheduled dates were cancelled at the last minute or simply never heard. As reflected by the attached, counsel AGAIN, appeared before Judge Gordo on December 17, 2014 when the court had specifically scheduled a hearing for the sole purpose of a colloquy, designed to advise my client as to the sentence he was facing and what further suggests, a very lame attempt to "force a plea down my client's throat."

The only problem, among others, was that the Court still had refused to issue a ruling on counsel's sworn motion. Present with my client on December 17, 2014, when called before the court, the attached transcript reflects a judge who simply refuses to rule and at the same time, is determined to colloquy my client on a non-existent plea offer, over defense objection. The transcript is more than sufficient to reflect the incompetency of the court, something your blog is very quick (and often rightfully so) to publish, as it relates to the Broward criminal bench.

What the transcript does not reflect is the "off the record side bar " discussion, that appears at the commencement of the transcript. Judge Gordo, repeated to undersigned counsel, several times, that "the motion is neither here no there." My response: That's NOT true Your Honor, the Motion is BOTH here AND there and this Court refuses to rule, while at the same time, forcing this undue and untimely colloquy upon Mr. Carvajal .........as the court continued to insist, there was an offer.....which mattered NOT in light of the ugly and inappropriate FAILURE of the court to issue a "ruling." You may note how the court specifically states in the transcript "I am not ruling today" (page 6, line 24 )and moreover, (on page 4 , line 15 and 16.......I have to review the case law in the meantime" and how her ruling has "no bearing on our plea negotiations( page 5, line 11) Really?

After these representations by the court, and void of any break in the action with which the court could have reviewed the facts and the applicable case law and the motion, the court summarily denies the motion (page 9, line 8) without ANY explanation, after the exchange reflected in the transcript. I guess it's not all about Broward. Is it?



to Gary


You want this on the blog or is this just for me? I won't print it unless you give me permission.

Jan 13 (8 days ago)

to: howardroark21@gmail.com

You have Gary's permission, Howard. Gary says THANK YOU!

Melanie T. Batdorf


Jan 13 (8 days ago)

to Melanie

To print it with or without attribution?

Melanie Batdorf

Jan 13 (8 days ago)

to howardroark21

With Attribution, of course!

Anonymous said...

Is this the same Gary Ostrow who was once quoted by a Broward Judge as saying "I don't give a F**k what some judge in Dade County wants or thinks", and then blew off a trial leaving his client waiting in court all day. Is this the same Gary Ostrow who told that same Dade judge when called to appear, "I'm Gary Ostrow and I have no idea why I am here." Is this the same Gary Ostrow whose contempt for all Dade judges is well known. Is this the same Gary Ostrow who had 3 Broward Judges call the Dade judge to get him off of a contempt finding.

You have a lot of nerve writing anything about any judge, you arrogant asshole.

I was that judge, and I should have found you in contempt, adjudicated you and put you in jail.

Anonymous said...

You stay classy, anonymous judge at 9:35 pm. Even assuming you are now off the bench, your post speaks volumes about your demeanor and temperament.

Take matters personally, much?

Anonymous said...

I wonder if Anonymous Judge at 9:35 realizes that his or her comment risks violating Canons One and Two of the Code of Judicial Conduct. If he or she is no longer a judge, then that's not the case. But if the judge is still active, the comment seems to undermine the integrity of the judiciary and leaves an appearance of impropriety.

While Attorney Ostrow's posting (if actually of his doing) has issues of its own, judges should be above this sort of thing.

Anonymous said...

3:27 and 4:57

You are both right, if I was still on the bench, it would be wrong, but I am retired. This happened in 1996. I am now free to say what I want, and I did.

I consider letting Ostrow off the hood was one of my biggest mistakes. It was the wrong thing to do. He did the same thing to me 6 weeks later in the same case. It was not about me, it was about the system and respect for the court.

Please tell me you don't approve of such actions. If, you do and you appeared in front of me, I am disappointed in you.

I promise you all liked me, my bar polls said so. So, get over it.