WHEEL IN THE SKY KEEPS ON TURNING

We have been asked to post this information:

Save the Wheel committee said...

Rumpole, please let your readers know that there is a meeting on wed, may 9th at the Mahi Lodge (just sw of the Gerstein courthouse) at 5:30 pm. Pat Malloy, a top Tallahassee lobbyist ... will be there to answer all the questions re the wheel and to let us know how we can stop it [Rumpole's edit: "it" being the new system which abolishes the wheel] from being implemented. We need everyone who wants to save the wheel to attend. Thank you.

FUN NORTH OF THE BORDER

We received an email from an intrepid DBR reporter about to do a blockbuster article on the Broward Blog. You can check out the Broward Blog here: BROWARD BLOG

There is a nice link on the Broward Blog to Chief Judge Dale Ross's (motto: saying "dade sucks" with a southern twang is cool ) press conference with the Sun Sentinel in which the Chief blames much of the Broward Judiciary's recent woes on the Broward Blog. Well, he didn't blame all their woes on the blog, but in the best traditions of our humble Blog, Judge Ross took a couple of cheap shots. See, we knew all along he read our blog.

Here is what the brave Broward Blogger had to say about his Chief Judge's kind words:

I just wanted to add to my previous statements about Judge Ross saying we are "undermining" the judiciary. I've been fielding calls and questions all day on this issue, and I've gone from bemusement to anger. The bottom line, in my mind, is that this type of judicial behavior is nothing new in Broward, and that these judges don't need my help, or this blog's help, in undermining the 17th Judiciary. They are doing a great job all by themselves.

You got to love that last line. Long time and careful readers of the blog know that we are baseball fans. When Judge Ross said the Broward Blog was undermining the Judiciary, that is what is known as a hanging curve ball. Our Broward Blogger hit a home run. Nice job.

Here are some more gems from our favourite Blogger North of the Border:

For Judge Ross to deflect the obvious flaws in his leadership, and the obvious flaws in the dysfunctional thinking of the judges that are causing this mess, by attempting to scapegoat this blog, is, frankly, despicable. A leader accepts responsibility for his performance, and the actions of those he is responsible for, and for Judge Ross to somehow assert that this blog is undermining the judiciary by shining light on the judicial hijinks and politics that have nearly wrecked this Circuit, is, in my opinion, more evidence that this judicial administration is self-serving and out of touch with the pulse of our multi-cultural community. Lastly, I resent his comment that we want the judges to fail. Not true. To be perfectly clear, what I want is for judicial administration to climb down from its self-constructed Mount Olympus, and open a dialogue with the community.

My oh my this Bill Gelin is good. You sir will never pay for a drink when we are in the bar (and when we admit our identity, so unfortunately you will still be paying for drinks for awhile. But its the thought that counts, right?)

Say what you want about Dade, and lord knows we have said a lot in the last two years. But Judges Blake and Slom in the criminal courts have been responsive to the attorneys and the community and work hard to make life easier for all of us. You can hardly say either one of them inhabits a Mount Olympus. And although he has not been brave enough to sign his name to a comment on our humble blog, Judge Farina has always been open, honest and responsive in dealing with the attorneys in Dade. Perhaps a good motto for our chief judges might be: "We're not perfect, but at least we're not like Broward."

Well, knowing our deep respect and abiding love for the Judges North Of the Border, we turn again to our modern Bard, Mr.Bruce Springsteen, and quote from Tenth Avenue Freeze Out:

"I'm just gonna sit back here and laugh, while the Scooter (Judge Greene) and the Big Man (Chief Judge Ross) bust the city in half. "

See You In Court.

Diary of a Mad Jurist.

Rumpole, I leave my diary for the moment to comment on the issues of the day.

Court Appointments. The system seems destined to fail. I was impressed by statistics by JAC that indicated that fraud or over billing was a concern in less than one percent of the bills. It also seems that the second PD office for Dade and Monroe, in which the lawyers will also have to cover juvenile cases, is woefully underfunded.

Forget for the moment the issue of capital cases. You have written in the past about the cases just below the level of death penalty cases: those serious cases which upon conviction merit a long prison sentence, but because they are not death penalty cases, they do not get the money or publicity. You are 100% correct about that. That is the area where a tragedy is most likely to occur. Is it really less of a tragedy if we lock an innocent man in prison for the rest of life? For every death penalty case, there are hundreds of cases where people face long or life prison sentences. If we're going to spend money to give people a fair trial, this is where the majority of money should go.

I read Judge Carney's (a judge from Broward) letter to the Herald the other day and it was right on point. I know you do not care for my colleagues "North Of the Border" but they do not have a problem up there. Florida has a great system for educating and training judges, and Broward is just like the client who never speeds and then gets three speeding tickets in three months. It is not indicative of a problem.

Final point. We are thankfully past the swearing in season. All the new Judges have been sworn in. Here is an open secret- many of my colleagues do not attend the ceremony for a new judge who won an election against a sitting judge. It is popular these days to call our seats "the peoples' seat" and yet when some lawyer tests that theory and wins an election, many judges do not attend their swearing in ceremony. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about this. I do know that when a new judge looks out and sees 10-15 open seats where the Judges sit, it hurts them, and this is not good.

Anyway, thanks as always for the space. By the way, I like the moderation. I don't know how you have the time to get the comments up so quick (if you are just one person, and I have my suspicions) but I think moderation adds value to the blog and makes the reading of it more enjoyable. Those stupid and nasty comments have no place in something that you obviously work hard on. And I can tell you that many of my colleagues enjoy your blog as well, although I will not spill any secrets as to whether they read it during voire dire . Keep up the good work.


Rumpole says: Thanks for the kind words and the post. You are our favourite anonymous Judge (if in fact you are a judge) and many lawyers have emailed me to tell me how much they like your posts.

See You In Court Monday.

HAVE THE PEOPLE AT THE HERALD LOST THEIR MIND?

We are not referring to the multiple deliveries of the daily paper that we receive.

We are referring to this headline today:

What would end the drought? A hurricane.

Let us randomly throw out a few names: Andrew; Katrina; Rita; Wilma.

We understand Florida is in the midst of a drought. We understand we need rain. What we don't need is some 220 mile per hour storm smashing through Miami, knocking out power for July and August, destroying homes, devastating communities. Not even the prospect of not having to sit and watch certain robed readers labour through 98 page calendars is sufficient for us to wish such a prospect on our community.

In other headlines today, the Herald hoped that all the new draft picks for the dolphins would not injure their knees during the mini-camp; that the surgeon for Dwayne Wade would not make a grievous mistake; and that George Bush would not choke on another pretzel.

Judge Charles Greene:

The comments were running three or four to one against our call for his resignation. Our readers are more forgiving then we are. Let us posit this query: if you represented a client before him, and he ruled against your client, how would you answer your client's belief that Greene did it because he didn't like the way your client looked? There is a reason a Judge is supposed to avoid the appearance of impropriety, not just impropriety itself. It is the reputation of our courts for fairness and justice that we are trying to protect. That reputation is valuable, and Greene has destroyed his ability to ever be viewed as being fair. He needs to go.
Check out our new Judge Greene poll.

See You In Court.

PS. If the Herald does get its wish, lets hope the hurricane doesn't hit during the big federal wing ding in the Keys next weekend. How would we ever get by without our friendly federal friends?

HE WHO LAUGHS LAST

The Florida Supreme Court says the prosecution should have the last word. If prosecutors need the help because their cases are so weak or their trial skills are lacking, we say give the poor schlumps a fighting chance.

In Federal Court the prosecution has always had the last word at closing argument. The theory behind this is that the prosecution has the burden of proof and therefore should have the last word.

We have often felt that good and solid defense evidence is more than worth losing the rebuttal at closing argument. An experienced defense attorney can handle the prosecution's rebuttal argument in their closing argument by asking questions and challenging the prosecution to answer them. There are other tricks of the trade, so if you are concerned, just ask around.

The real issue here is the Judge (you know- those individuals who leave the courthouse at 2pm lugging a set of golf clubs.)
If the Judge can stop reading the blog during closing argument and pay close attention to the closing argument by the defense attorney, then the Judge can issue (heaven forbid) an intelligent ruling when the defense objects that the prosecution's rebuttal is outside the scope of the Defendant's closing argument.

We have been involved in cases where we have never mentioned one particular piece of evidence, yet over our objections, the Judge has allowed the prosecution to argue the issue during rebuttal. To make this fair, Judges need to be vigilant and keep the prosecution's argument at rebuttal to only issues that the defense argued.

Perhaps this will help our robed readers:

Rebuttal: n 1: the act of refuting by offering a contrary contention or argument.

From: legal-explanations.com : (n) Rebuttal is the negation of a proof, argument, evidence or documents provided in a proceedings by introducing counter evidence.

So as long as our robed readers hold the prosecution to actual rebuttal arguments, we think the prejudice will be negligible.

Do not despair fellow defense attorneys. We win cases all the time in Federal Court and in State Court where we did not have the last word.

Remember: Your goal is to make sure that the very last words uttered by the clerk in reading the jury verdict begins with "NOT".

See You in Court. Sandwiches are fattening anyway. Try salad.

JUDGE GREENE NEEDS TO RESIGN NOW.

BREAKING BLOG NEWS: The Florida Surpeme Court abolished the rebuttal argument in closing for the defense. The defense will NEVER get to rebut the prosecution's closing argument, except in their one and only argument to the jury. Effective TODAY the proscution always gets the last word.

Rumpole says: Actually, the jury always gets the last word, and in our cases it usually begins with a "NOT". The bottom line is that there is now no reason to shy away from using defense witnesses and defense evidence. Give the jury the evidence necessary for an acquittal, and they will do their job. That's our opinion.

Up Next: The Florida Legistaure abolishes the presumption of innocence.


Leave it to our robed friends North of the Border to make us do something we loathe to do.

We hereby call upon Judge Charles Greene of the 17th Judicial Circuit to resign.

Judge Greene commented on a not guilty verdict by telling the attorneys not to worry about it. He called the case NHI- no humans involved.

Not only should Judge Greene resign, but he should be deeply ashamed of himself.

Let us tell you why Judge Greene is not ashamed.

His words bespeak a deep seated chasm between self deigned Kings, and the rest of humanity. He views himself at the top of the chain of a system of “us versus them”; the US being members of the legal system and White Americans; the THEM is everyone else. People who think that way are not really ashamed of their words or actions. Trust us when we tell you that the only things bothering Judge Greene today is that he got caught and that a public defender reported his loathsome words.

The case Judge Greene presided over involved an African American defendant, African American victims, and an African American witness. If Judge Greene comments do not reflect a deep seated bigotry, then answer us this question- were any of the attorneys African American?

You don’t just dismiss a serious case in which an individual was shot with a comment disparaging the verdict and the parties by calling them less than human, unless you view people of color less than human.
How many NHI cases has Judge Greene been the sentencing Judge on? Has he sentenced defendants because he viewed them as a member of the class of NHI’s?

Judge Greene’s comments are indefensible. The comments are beyond tolerance for a Judge. A judge is supposed to represent the best and brightest among us. Was Judge Greene, like the statute of justice, blind to the color of the parties? Obviously not.

Can we ever trust Judge Greene to hold a defendant’s life in his hands again? Absolutely not.

Can any litigant of color ever trust Judge Greene again? Sending him to civil court doesn’t lessen the effects of his words. Is it OK to be a bigot in civil court but not criminal court? Can any litigant of color who loses a motion before Judge Greene in the future ever believe his decision was color blind? Or will there always be a suspicion that he viewed one of the litigants as a member of those class of people he views as less than human?

Can anybody defend Judge Greene’s remarks and show where there is a place among the judiciary for a person who thinks like he does?

This is not the PC police speaking. Judge Greene is not an entertainer and this is not an issue of freedom of speech. This episode is purely and simply an unintended peek into the dark soul of a man who thinks certain people are less than human. There is no place for a man like that on a bench of justice and law.

Judge Greene needs to resign now and slink away into the slimy bigot world where his thoughts and feelings live.

See you in court.

NEWTON AND THE BOSS

Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica

Sir Issac Newton is one of our very favourites. His Principa Mathematica changed the way we saw the universe . When he sat down to begin the Principia, he started with three laws, commonly referred to the laws of motion.

Maybe Newton can assist us today.

First Law of Motion: Inertia: Inertia describes the Florida Legislature. They tend to do nothing until something makes them do it.

Newton wrote:
Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

Our inert politicians were just sitting on their front porches in Tallahassee, sipping ice tea, and laughing at Miami (“Wait..wait…wait…it gets better. They actually think we’re gonna build them a baseball stadium so those buncha drug addicted illegal aliens [That’s Tallahassee speak for the general population south of Broward] can sit and drink …whatta they call it? Cerveza…watchin a ball game” [General laughter amid the spitting of tobacco juice in spittoons]. ).

The Court appointment system was merrily rolling along until a group of politicians decided to change it. The politicians were the external force, and they have changed the system, probably for the worse.

Second Law of Motion: Acceleration.

Force equals mass multiplied by acceleration.
The rate of change of momentum of a body is proportional to the resultant force acting on the body and is in the same direction

There’s no doubt the Legislature has mass. Lots of it where they sit…less of it between their ears. Force in Tallahassee is stated in this complicated mathematical term, where F=Force.
F=$$$$$

So what happened to us is $$$$x(m)ass=quick loss of court appointments.

The Legislature would do well to heed the third law of motion: The law of reciprocal reactions.

III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Example- Some guy named “Hep” slapped his knee and spit tobacco juice in Tallahassee , and some lawyer in Miami was soon asked to represent some kid charged with murder for $10/hour, 20 hour cap.

The politicians have changed the system. There will be an opposite reaction. There will be a price to pay and we will all pay it.


Money is the heart of the matter. Oh Susannah Nesmith’s fine article yesterday detailed the familiar story of young prosecutors and public defenders in debt, unable to pay their bills, and scrapping pennies for food at the end of the month. The same story can be written about school teachers, EMT techs, just about any profession that is valuable to society. Of course the real important people, the athletes and performers don’t have such worries.

Right now there’s lots of talk and plans and possible heroics. Long time and careful readers of the blog know that we often recommend turning to the Bard in times of stress or trouble. However, there is a more modern day Bard who often fulfills the same role.

And he wrote this poetry in Thunder Road:

You can hide 'neath your covers
And study your pain
Make crosses from your lovers
Throw roses in the rain
Waste your summer praying in vain
For a savior to rise from these streets
Well now I'm no hero
That's understood
All the redemption I can offer, girl Is beneath this dirty hood
With a chance to make it good somehow
Hey what else can we do now
Except roll down the window
And let the wind blow back your hair


And perhaps as we spend this summer waiting in vain for a savior to rise from these streets, we can contemplate life after appointments:

And in the lonely cool before dawn
You hear their engines roaring on
But when you get to the porch they're gone
On the wind, so Mary climb in
It's a town full of losers
And I'm pulling out of here to win.

Yes, we might just understand it if some of our colleagues packed it up and pulled out of here to win.

See you in court. We’re the one’s humming “No Retreat No Surrender” right before we pick a jury.

WHAT IF

they needed to appoint an experienced criminal defense lawyer, and no one agreed to take the case?

Judge Will Thomas is right in the middle of trying five individuals who are alleged to have committed the most heinous of crimes. One has already been convicted and the jury voted for death. On the pages of this very blog, the lead prosecutor commended the defense attorneys. He recognized what we all do- that a vigorous defense leads to a fair and just verdict.

It is very clear that the Florida Legislature will not continue to pay for the type of defense necessary for these types of cases. With the trend towards higher minimum mandatory sentences, and the fervent belief that any and all criminal cases should result in life altering lengthy prison sentences, why should we as criminal defense attorneys be surprised that the Legislature does not want to pay for the defense of the individuals they want to incarcerate forever and a day?

The first thing the prosecutor’s office does not want to do is lose a case at trial. The second thing they do not want to do, after having given a victim or next of kin some closure on a case, is to go back to them several years later and tell them that the whole process has to start over. Remember the spectacle of Jimmy Ryce’s parents sitting through the sordid Rule 3.850 hearing recently? Who among us did not feel their pain and angst as they wondered when the process would end? When the Legislature takes away funding for experienced criminal defense attorneys, in the end, like some Greek Tragedy, they will hurt those they pretend to want to help- good people like Jimmy Ryce’s parents.

Perhaps it is not enough to pontificate on these pages that the Florida Legislature will get what it pays for. But it needs to be said. Tragedies are currently happening now in the criminal justice system, and they will accelerate at a greater pace. Eventually, some nephew of a politician will be convicted of enhanced criminal mischief and sentenced to a 20 year minimum mandatory, and someone will stop and wonder what all this pandering to “being tough on crime” has wrought.

Until then, we can do what we have always done. Continue representing accused individuals to the very best of our ability. And some time in the hopefully not too distant future we will look back on these as the dark days of criminal defense.


See You In Court, doing what we always do, and doing it well.

WHERE IS EVERYONE?

Don’t be surprised this week if you see an abundance of robed readers wandering through the hallways in the late afternoon and early evening looking busy, acting judicial, bellowing out nonsensical orders that nobody listens to anyway (get that cell phone!) . This past weekend the blog was rife with rumors that some media outlets are about to do a story on Judges leaving early. There are alleged surreptitious videos of our judges out on the golf course, picking up kids from school, or otherwise gallivanting about town during normal working hours.

Scene: Civil Family Courthouse. "Joes Cafe".

Chief Judge Joe Farina is on the phone with some colleagues who are on a golf course: "He did what on the ninth? With a five iron? Get outta here!"

A bailiff arrives with a reporter in tow: Bailiff: "Chief, this reporter wants to know where all the Judges are."

Reporter: "It's 2:15 pm on a Friday afternoon, and there is only one judge in the criminal courthouse, and I'm not naming names, but he's still on his arraignment calendar."

Chief Joe: " I am shocked, shocked to find out Judges are leaving early."

Here is the thing: In our opinion, the worst place a judge can be, from the prospective of a lawyer, is working. Keep them on the golf course and out of our hair we say. They will only cause trouble and mess things up if they start working late and paying attention to their cases. Things are just fine the way they are.

First of all, the worst thing a Judge can do is work late and keep jurors and litigants in court all hours of the night. It makes for a very poorly presented case, and jurors end up too tired to devote the time and energy necessary to do their job properly. We have always criticized judges, usually new county court judges, who think they are demonstrating some kind of macho attitude by working to midnight and taking verdicts at 2AM. If this happens as a result of the story, we will all be worse off for it.

There is a fine line between a Judge who works hard and wants to try cases, and if their calendar is clear and there is nothing to do, leave at 3-4pm, and the judge who treats the job as a 10-2 jackpot, and picks up their kids at 4 so they can shop and cook dinner by six. The former judge does not deserve criticism, while the latter does.

Lets face it: there is a prevalent criticism that says some judges sought the bench because they could not make it in private practice. Like any stereotype, it demeans our profession to deal in anything but particulars. Some Judges are great, some are good, and some stink. Just like lawyers or stupid Football general managers who waste a first round draft pick on a wide receiver who is injured and may not even practice before August. Where was I? Oh yeah- Judges.

As much as we have demonstrated a particular glee when any of our robed readers are taken down a notch or two, we truly hope that the upcoming story does not unfairly target a hard working Judge. We all know the Judges who are hardworking, dedicated, and willing to pitch in to try someone else’s case in a pinch. We hope the media has not happened on one of those and caught the rare occasion they took an afternoon off.

As for our robed readers we have a suggestion: if you want to play golf a few times a week at 3 pm, or spend a lazy Friday afternoon fishing, or wake up at 9 am and go to the gym before ambling into work, do what thousands of other likeminded individuals and great Americans have done: run for Congress.

See You In Court, hopefully not working too late.

COURT APPOITNMENTS KAPUT

David S. Markus said...


The Monday meeting in Au Bon Pan is off.

Thank you to the many lawyers who responded to Joel and I, stepped up and contributed. We were too little, too late.
We all should have gotten involved months ago. Now, the battle will be trying to undo this system. It can be undone. We need to have concrete ideas on how to reduce the costs of conflict representation.

Perhaps now would be a good time to seriously address the need to depose every "A" police officer in every case, particularly where a detailed report is provided........... Or how about if the SAO were to review death penalty cases at the front end to determine if the case is really a death case. Most of my "death cases" begin with the ASA saying that they will probably waive death, but can't right now. A second chair is appointed and tens of thousands of dollars in atty fees, expert fees and investigative fees (for penalty phase investigation)are generated in cases where the facts and the defendant's age and lack of significant priors drive the decision to waive the death penalty-facts that are known in the beginning of the case. The SAO has to deal with the next of kin and often it is easier to get their assent to a waiver after the case is delayed a couple of years- but that should not be the reason to unnecessarily spend so much money preparing a penalty phase case that everyone knows will never be presented to a jury. I truly believe that the role of second chair counsel only matters in about 25% of the cases. Those are the cases where the fruits of our mitigation evidence search really matter.

I invite all to think about these ideas, and others that will save money yet not deprive our clients of a meaningful defense. The legislature cares only about how much money the system will cost. We can undo what they have done this year only if we present alternatives to the old way of doing things. We need to do more than simply tell them to "Stay The Course"- It's not working for Bush in Iraq and it won't work here.
Time to think outside the box.
Anyway, these are my random musings on a Sunday night.

David S. Markus

Rumpole says: Haven't we been saying "think outside the box" ever since we started this blog? Nobody listens to us (except juries).

Anyway, to paraphrase another of our favourite movies: "My advice to you is to start drinking heavily."

COURT APPOINTMENTS

The court appointments are on life support. A gunshot wound inflicted by the Florida Senate has left the system in Dire Straits (money ain't for nothing and the court appointments are not for free.)

David S Markus (Not FACDL Prez David O Marus) is convening an emergency cabinet meeting in Au Bon Pain at 11AM Monday. The issue is money. Some lobbyists are telling some attorneys down here that for a nice steak dinner, some good red wine, (and 200K), they can..ahem...solve our problems. Here is our new lobbyist.





This is what he says he's going to do: "I'm gonna make Crist an offer he can't refuse."


David S Markus writes:

To all attorneys who accept court appointments:It appears from recent posts by Rick Freedman and FACDL Secty Brian Tannenbaum that the court appointment system as we know it is dead. I think Rick, Brian and others put forth a great effort on our behalf and this post should not be read as a criticism of those efforts.They are probably right, but may not be. There is a week left in the legislative session and I and others are not ready to quit yet. About ten thousand dollars has already been raised to hire a different lobbyist from the one used by FACDL and more money is needed. The lobbyist has given us a concrete suggestion on how to allocate any funds raised. A group of us are going to meet in the cafeteria at 11AM on Monday to discuss this issue further. Please come and bring your checkbooks.I am not a political person and this is a new area for me. I do not pretend to know all the answers.


David S Markus



Rumpole says: So it's time to go to the mattresses huh? I suspected Crist, but he could never have out-fought Sonny. Here is what I did not know until today: "It was Barzini all along."

Go get em guys.

DRAFT DAY

2PM UPDATE:
DOLPHINS DRAFT SHOCKER. Fins pass on pretty boy passer Brady Quinn. Big reach for Ohio State WR Ted Ginn, Jr. What's going on here?

Rumpole says: all is not lost for long suffering Fin fans. Our Dolphins have loads of second round picks, including the number 40 overall (#8 in round two). Watch the Dolphins grab Drew Stanton from from Michigan State or our personal favorite: Trent Edwards from Stanford (Blake). He's big, he's smart, he has a gun for an arm.
If that happens, the Dolphin brain-trust might just be smarter than we are all thinking at the moment. Stay tuned.


Today is the NFL Draft. If you read the papers this morning, the Dolphins are primed to blow it again. The Herald reported that the Dolphins want to move up in the draft to get Notre Dame QB Brady Quinn (warming the heart of Federal Judge Moreno) IF he is available after the Cleveland Browns pick at 3.

IF Quinn is available at 3, the Browns will draft him. So If the Dolphins want Quinn, they need to move to number 2, and at that spot there are better players.

But more importantly, IF Quinn is not drafted at 3, then in all likelihood, he will fall to 9, where the Fins can grab him. So IF Quinn is not drafted at 3, there is no need to move up.

That's our expert draft analysis.


Rick Freedman reported yesterday that the Florida Legislature has killed the Court Appointment system as we know it. That might not be a bad thing. More on that next week.

Rick Freedman also reported that Judge Venzer was not aware of the Orders of the Court posted on the front of the door to the entrance to her court banning cell phones.
Here are our thoughts: 1) Ignorance of the law is no excuse. This is a constructive possession case, and we still think she knew or should have known about the orders posted on her courtroom's front door. 2) Judge Venzer is not a bad judge and this is not a personal attack on her.

The point of the post yesterday is that judges need to be aware that the Public follows the orders of the court because that is what they are supposed to do. The integrity and respect a court has is a fragile thing, and every judge needs to be aware of everything the pubic sees and hears when they enter a courtroom.

Point made, controversy over.

See You In Court Monday complaining about the Dolphins. Again.

R...E....S....P....E.....C.....T

BREAKING NEWS: COURT APPOINTMENTS: DEAD. FLORIDA SENATE HOLDING SMOKING GUN. Read Rick Freedman's comments in the comments section today on who actually fired the weapon. Rumpole thanks Rick for keeping us updated, and the work of FACDL reps Brian T and Old Man Hersch for their valiant efforts to keep the current system viable.



Courts and Judges walk a fine line. They are respected and obeyed because our culture and society require us to do so. If the institution loses the respect of the public, there would be little anyone could do to enforce the orders of the court.

As attorneys we are officers of the court and required to uphold the rules of the court and respect the authority of the court. The court is required to issue lawful orders.

We are serious when we write that Judge Venzer and her staff should immediately remove the sign hanging from the door leading to the courtroom BANNING cellphones and beepers. The order is quite clear that no one may enter the courtroom possessing a cellphone and/or beeper. The order cites to a Judge Farina administative order banning THE USE of cellphones or beepers in the courtroom.

There is a marked difference between possession and use. We who labour in the criminal courts should know that better than anyone. Furthermore, unless there is a box for us to deposit our offending cellphones and beepers before we enter, how can we as officers of the court follow Judge Venzer's order?

What is now happening is that the public and the officers of the court are just brazenly disregarding Judge Venzer's order. Most people probably say to themselves "what she means is we can't use our phones in court."

However, the practical effect of Judge Venzer's order is to breed complete disrespect for the orders of the court. Since a fair amount of defendants leave any criminal court with orders to follow, Judges should take their orders seriously if they want them to be followed.

It may seem like a small matter. but respect is something that is earned. Once you lose it, it is almost impossible to regain.


Respect for the Justice System and the orders of the court is the topic of the day.
We depend on those who make and enforce the rules to respect those rules as well.
Isn't that right Attorney General Gonzales? You know what we are getting at, right?

See You In Court, without a beeper (who even carries one of those these days?) or a cellphone in a certain courtroom on the sixth floor.

AUTHOR ARTHUR

Controversy surrounding the State Attorneys Office's unannounced policy of revoking plea offers for Defendants who request Arthur Hearings has been making the rounds lately.

Here is what we think:

Do not give into this “policy”. If a prosecutor insists on threatening your client, request that they put it in writing. If they refuse, ask why they will not commit to their policy in writing.

Ask them what they are afraid of? If they refuse to put the threat in writing then you should confirm the conversation in writing and file a copy with the court. Of course the prosecutor would not put something like that in writing, because they know, and we know, such a policy is unethical and would be grounds for discipline from the Bar.


Lets game play this out a little bit.

A prosecutor that threatens not to make any plea offer if a defendant elects his or her rights under the Florida Rules Of Criminal Procedure to seek a bond in a life felony case, is basically abandoning their responsibility to seek justice. If a client has an Arthur Hearing would the prosecutor continue to prosecute the defendant if they later learned the defendant was innocent? How about the requirement to seek justice and proper punishment? Is it ethical to seek life in prison for an individual who otherwise should be placed on probation, house arrest, or receive youthful offender sanctions based on the specific facts of the case?

A prosecutor who threatens you with a "policy" is stating that they will no longer evaluate a case based on the specific facts. Does that seem right? A prosecutor would never publicly admit to abandoning this responsibility, and therefore like any bully, like any individual who makes illegal threats, the way to handle the threat is to cast the light of truth on the situation. And like any bully, publicity is the last thing they want.

Can you imagine Kathy Fernandez Rundle standing on the courthouse steps and proudly announcing her office’s new policy of seeking the maximum for any defendant who has the audacity to defend themselves and invoke rights guaranteed by the Florida and Federal Constitution?

If we as defense attorneys let them get away with this, what is next?

A policy to seek the maximum sentence for any defendant who does not confess?

A policy to seek the maximum sentence for any defendant who takes deposition?
Sy Gaer already has more than enough business.

Make no mistake that such a policy is a direct attack on the criminal defense bar, the Constitution, the courts, and our clients. We cannot and shall not allow prosecutorial bullies to scare any defendant into forsaking any right they are guaranteed.
If we do, we as defense attorneys bear the shame, because we know better.


A prosecutor's case load is too heavy? Tell it someone who cares. We don’t ask prosecutors to offer lesser sentences because we’re too busy. A responsible lawyer handles their own problems and does not let their problems effect any particular case.

It takes a lot of time to prepare for an Arthur Hearing?
Do your job.
As citizens of Florida, we depend on good and honest prosecutors to do their job and prosecute those individuals who deserve it. A person who kills someone or commits a sexual assault may well deserve to spend the rest of their life in prison. A 17 year old kid with no priors driving a car occupied by someone who has just committed an armed robbery may well deserve youthful offender sanctions. And any prosecutor who would have the vicious and evil intent to punish him with a life in prison sentence because his attorney requested an Arthur Hearing deserves to be disbarred.

David O Markus, who runs the Federal Blog is president of the FACDL Miami chapter. He has been receiving emails on this issue. If you are currently having a problem, you should contact him. But take our suggestion and see if the prosecutor who threatens your client will put it in writing. And if they refuse to do it, write them a letter confirming their “policy” and send a copy to Kathy Rundle Fernandez and she how she responds.

We have nothing to fear from this except our own temerity and inaction.

Our system of adversarial justice depends upon both sides aggressively advancing their cause. The system stops working when one side gives in prematurely. The only thing that can come out of a well contested Arthur Hearing is a well developed set of facts for the rest of the case to proceed on. What's wrong with that?

Tragedies happen- and innocent people are convicted- when defense attorneys pre-judge a case and abandon their job to challenge the evidence aggressively, ethically, and legally.

See You In Court, and at Arthur Hearings in any and every case where our client is entitled to one.

STRINGS AND LEVY.

The other day we inquired about this gent Bob Levy. He has been mentioned of late in the comments section. He is apparently a political consultant much active in the judicial election fray.

We received this email (edited by Rumpole) in answer to our question:

Rumpole - the "thing" about Levy is that he is responsible for such bright minds as Peter Adrien, Barbara Areces, Sarah Zabel, Judy Rubenstein, Ana Pando and Will Thomas. In the last elective cycle he alienated himself from Al Lorenzo because Al found him to be too dishonest and too unethical. Now that is the pot calling the kettle black. Levy's influence over the judges throughout the system makes him the subject matter of this blog and any discussion regarding the administration of justice in Miami-Dade County.


Rumpole responds: putting aside the under-handed compliment about the above named Judges, we agree that political consultants who are hired by judges or judicial candidates are fodder for this blog. Lord knows one JA -cum-consultant made the pages of this blog last election cycle as frequently as Paris Hilton makes the pages of the National Enquirer.

The individual who left the above comment went on to write that Mr. Levy uses the familiar yet odious tactic of running individuals against Judges who do not hire him. Judges Adrien and Areces defeated very experienced judges. While both of these Judges are very pleasant to deal with on the bench, our limited experience leads us to conclude, in our own personal opinion, that the voters did not make the correct choice. Our own firm opinion is that the bench is not the place to get experience. It is the place to dispense justice based on experience. Ergo, a Judge who lacks experience cannot complete the equation.

However, the issue at hand is political consultants and whether they “threaten” judges to hire them, lest they run other candidates against them.

Having approved Mr. Levy as “blog worthy”, and despite the fact that Mr. Levy occupies one of the very small gaps of knowledge we have about any and all things, we invite comments on him, his profession, and the troubling topic of political consultants who make judges miserable. (hmm….perhaps we have overreacted. If someone makes a judge miserable, well, lets just say that cowpoke is drinking for free when we are around.)

1+2+3+4+5......

Speaking of threats, we are about to go to war with our own beloved Miami Herald.
For a few weeks we did not get our morning paper. The Times carried us through the tough spots, but who can live for more than a few weeks without Joan Fleishman telling us who is divorcing whom, and how much the attorneys are getting?

So we picked up the phone and made a call. And lo and behold, the morning paper arrived…and arrived. Now we were getting two a day.

Being greener than Al Gore, we began to fret about the harm to the environment our multiple papers were causing. So we fired off an email, and followed it up with a well placed phone call…and you guessed it- we started getting four a day. Now, living a few weeks without the damsel of dirt giving us the dish is one thing---but getting a daily dose of two national headlines interspersed with a hundred and ten pages of Burdine ads to the power of four, is quite another thing.

Sooooooo….account number in hand we asked (nicely) to speak with a supervisor.

Then, in broken Spanish, we demanded (not as nicely) to speak with a supervisor who spoke English, not that we had any trouble saying “No deseo cuatro heralds diarios” ….and…this past weekend, on Sunday…the big Herald Day….SIX PAPERS ARRIVED.

Now, luckily, our Herald delivery lad is not familiar with Fibonacci number sequences, or the entrance to our abode would soon be blocked with ads for Best Buy. But, and correct us if we are wrong, we sense a disturbing trend here. It may just be that the karma of the universe is equaling out our jibes at Judges Adrien and Areces. And it is the universe's role in this expanding mystery that has us worried.

M Theory in physics is currently attempting to account for the proposed "dualities" of string theory. M Theory has succeeded in "unifying" five superstring theories. And string theory proposes to unite the division between the large universe (General Relativity) and the super small universe (Quantum Mechanics).
This seemingly irreconcilable division occupied most of the rest of Albert Einstein's life after he proposed general and special relativity during his Annus Mirabilis .
[On a related topic, we believe Judges Slom and Blake are on their own "Einsteinan" quest to unite Circuit Court (large scale ineptitude ) and County Court (small scale ineptitude)]

Now here is what keeps us up at night: For String Theory to unite the two major prongs of cosmology, it must have strings that vibrate in at least ten separate dimensions. We can't even imagine the number of Heralds that are currently arriving at our doorstep in the other seven dimensions.

But we intend to do something about it.
Even if it means writing nicer comments about certain Judges.

See you in court, handing out the Herald.

Rumpole In Trial

Blog will be slow for a few days. Sorry. I will try and get the comments up as soon as possible.

You ever get the feeling a Judge just doesn't want to pick a jury?

Newly minted Judge Joe Fernandez responded to a complaint:

Joe Fernandez said...
Wow! What an inauspicious way to finally make the blog, huh?

A concerned friend alerted me to the post to which I will respond as follows:

I do not have a policy of not calling lawyers out of turn. I only have one announced policy and that is a policy of accommodation...I haven't had the need to come up with any others. In fact any lawyer can walk up at almost anytime and ask to be called out of turn on any calendar. This is generally not possible when dealing with a trial calendar becasue of the unique logistics of a trial calendar. Sometimes, I know, I fail to announce that private lawyers can come up and call their cases. It's because I simply forget to do so...still getting used to this judge thing, I guess. Some lawyers come in and sit in the audience and never say anything until their case is called. It is a large, poorly lit courtroom. I will often ask my bailiff to approach these folks and ask if they are attorneys and, if so, to tell them to come up and call their case. Some lawyers come to Court dressed informally (which I generally don't mind) so there is no way for me to know until I call the case.

I make an effort to call folks with children or scheduling problems out of turn even if they are pro se. This past friday was unusual because there were 3 infraction trial calendars in a row, with an average of 42 cases per calendar. The majority of these are accident cases with civilian witnesses and police officers. These cases often involve lengthy testimony. I only have 45 minutes for each calendar and everyone wants to get out of there. No one (attorney or pro se party) has ever taken me up on my offer to return after lunch or later in the day. Again, I am still learning.

Regarding the "yell[ing]" at a "defendant" (I usually call them "drivers" in infraction cases, by the way): I don't yell. If, as the poster says, he/she was in the courtroom for an "unusually long" period of time that morning, he/she knows that.

As a lawyer for 17 years (12 as a criminal defense attorney) prior to being elected, I never thought it inappropriate for a judge, when called upon and when appropriate, to make an impression on a party by speaking firmly. To avoid any possible violation of the canons by discussing the case, I invite anonymous to call my office (anonymously, if he/she wishes) to discuss any concerns.

Rumpole says: well done.

SWEETWATER SHENANIGANS?

We keep getting emails from someone in some place called Sweetwater. Things do not appear to be so sweet there these days. This email was interesting enough for us to post up front. We plead ignorance on the goings-on in this little bayou of Miami. Perhaps someone can fill us in.


SWEETWATER UP DATE, APRIL 19, 2007;AGAIN THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE GIVES SWEETWATER A PASS ON CLEAR CRIMINAL CHARGES.

Today, Mayor Marono and his band of thugs were caught red handed illegally in possession of absentee ballots which they had illegally collected and had in their position. At about 6:00 p.m. units from the Miami-Dade Public Corruption Unit, who we are informed were monitoring the activities of these thugs, stopped Sweetwater commissioner Manuel Duasso and Mrs. Antelo,the wife of the City Maintenance director who happens to be the uncle of the Mayor, while they were traveling in the Mayor’s Chevrolet Tahoe with full campaign regalia. Chief Robert fulgeria, who was campaigning for the Mayor along with commissioner Guerra, responded to the scene of the detention, as did other Sweetwater units to assist law enforcement.

Upon a search of the Mayor's vehicle, the PCU found about 12 absentee ballots, which obviously did not belong to any of the occupants of the vehicles who were in possession these ballots. Upon contacting the SAO, PCU was instructed not to arrest any of those who were illegally collecting and in illegal possession of the absentee ballots. The Mayor responded to the scene, arriving while several Sweetwater units were on scene. The Sweetwtaer units were ordered to clear the scene by Sweetwater brass, Chief Fulgeira, but before clearing from the scene the Mayor was overheard calling a "Bob" and screaming into the phone to call "Kathy" (we assume this was KFR.)

About two hours later, and supposedly after contacting the SAO and having received instructions from the SAO, the PCU allowed all those detained with illegal possession of the absentee ballots to leave, PCU did retain the 12 or so absentee ballots.

WHY we ask did the SAO, after the Mayor called "Bob" not arrest these ballot brokers. Could it be that these ballot brokers have helped those in power in other campaigns. Is this a great country or what. Way to go KFR and Joe Centorino. Oh can Joe centorino and KFR tell us who "Bob" is in case we stop him for some illegal act we want to extend our courtesy.

We dumb cops in Sweetwater have figured "Bob' is not Bob Graham because Bob Graham does not run campaigns. KFR and company until when will you allow The Sweetwater Family to run this corrupt enterprise. Will you allow another beating to occur before you preten to act or send your sidekick Ulysis to suck up to Marono and Duasso for votes.

Here is the link: LINK

Perhaps this link will help you build a case. It seems the Mayor is confessing to illegally collecting absentees ballots, what do all you fine lawyers think.Oh we posting here because we think the Defense Lawyers are more committed to fighting corruption than the SAO.

Please send this to the real Corruption Busters.

A FRUSTRATED SWEETWATER OFFICER WHO PRAYS FOR SOMEONE TO ACT

IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY

Too often we as lawyers ignore the human element that sits a few feet above us in court. When we win a case, or a motion is granted, or a downward departure is given, we take the credit. When we lose a motion, or a higher sentence than we were expecting was given, we criticize the Judge as being “prosecution oriented”.

The truth is that like all of us, a judge's decision is guided by experience (or lack of experience), the law, the facts, and emotions. The fascinating issue is when a judge's emotions come into conflict with what the law and justice require.

Judge Scott Silverman and the late Judge Henry Leyte Vidal have authored a wonderful article about the feelings local judges have had when confronted with imposing the death penalty.

ARTICLE

As lawyers is that most of us have never sat on the bench. Even those of us who worked as prosecutors and defense attorneys have never had the unique prospective of sitting above the fray. We as criminal defense attorneys value Judges like Reemberto Diaz and Stan Blake who were excellent criminal defense lawyers. We feel they know our problems and concerns because they have stood where we are standing. And yet to become a really great lawyer, you need to know what is going on in the Judge’s mind. How will they feel about a particular motion, or about imposing a less serious sentence than the prosecution is asking for?

This is the value of Judge Silverman and Leyte-Vidal’s article. It give us, as trial lawyers, insight into what a Judge thinks and feels when considering the most serious of sentences.

The article is not that long and is worth reading.


And speaking of death sentences, word reaches us today (Wednesday) that the jury in the Carabalo case has recommended a sentence of death. Now the final decision comes down to Judge William Thomas. Judge Thomas joins the long line of REGJB Judges who have had a defendant's life in their hands. Some of the great ones, like Judge Cowart, who sentenced Ted Bundy, among others, to death, are remembered for their wisdom and humanity even in the face of imposing the death penalty.
Some Judges like former Judge Philip Bloom, are remembered for their courage. Judge Bloom stood firm against public opinion and a jury recommendation, and sentenced a defendant to life in prison.

In the end, after all the fine lawyering in the Carabalo case, it will be Judge William Thomas who makes the final and most difficult of decisions.

We believe that this is Judge Thomas's first possible death penalty sentence. Judge Thomas comes to the REGJB as a former ace Federal Public Defender. We will neither applaud nor criticize his sentence, whatever it is. The defense bar was closely watching this case. Not for the final outcome- but,we speculate- for how Judge Thomas ran his courtroom and the process of this death penalty case. From all appearances, Judge Thomas did a very professional job so far. We await his decision in this matter.

See You In Court.

OF JOHN ADAMS, NAME CALLING, AND THE SELLING OF BROWARD

MODERATION

Maybe its time to explain in detail, for the less intellectually gifted among our fair readers, exactly why this blog moderates it’s comments.

We want people like Brian T, Bobby Reiff, Jason Grey, Phil R, Abe Laeser, Judge Pinero, Judge Glick, and many others who sign their name to contribute with comments. What we don’t allow, is a tidal wave of comments that follow their comments calling them (anonymously) all sorts of names. If that’s what you want to do, go to another blog. We will not be a part of that.

We have steadfastly held to the belief that some anonymous comments about the practices of Judges are appropriate. Comments about whether a Judge is habitually late, or is not being reasonable with continuances, or for that matter well thought out comments on a particular case- sentencing, or the granting or denying of a motion, are also under many, but not all circumstances, appropriate. Who decides? We do. It’s our blog-get used to it.

So, since we have now said in the most clear terms possible that calling someone an asshole will not make the blog, stop wasting your time writing the comment, because it will not be posted.


PENALTY PHASE BEGINS

The defense opened today in the penalty phase of the Caraballo case.
A comment in yesterday’s section noted that Mr. Joel Denaro was acting in the finest traditions of a defense attorney. We second those comments.

Many alert and well schooled readers know that John Adams was our second president and principal author of the sixth amendment (the right to counsel). Many of our colleagues also know that in 1771, before our nation declared independence, Adams successfully represented 8 British soldiers in Boston, who were accused of murder when they fired into a crowd of civilians.

Hardly the most popular of cases- defending soldiers of an occupying army who killed citizens of Boston. Yet, Adams took on the case and six of eight were acquitted, and the other two were found guilty of manslaughter. Adams defended those who many thought had no defense and deserved no defense. Out of that episode, came many of Adams’ beliefs which he codified into the right to counsel.

Many people in our community do not believe any of the five people in that truck in which two people were abducted, deserve a defense. But Mr. Rosenberg and Mr. Denaro have spoken up and defended their client in the best traditions of our country. And eight other defense attorneys representing the other four accused men are right behind them ready to do the same thing.

The defense does not diminish the memory of the victim. The defense is an exercise of the rights the Constitution guarantees. For if these men get the very best defense, then no one else need worry when they need a lawyer.

THE SELLING OF BROWARD.

File this under truth is stranger than fiction. Many readers had a chuckle at our April fools post in which we announced the selling of corporate sponsors for the courthouse and personnel. Now comes news that the folks North of The Border are about to do just that:
BROWARD

We always suspected the powers that be read our humble blog, and now we have some proof.

DANIEL PEARL

Finally, because the story bears repeating, the Miami Herald reported Monday on the touching story of Daniel Pearl’s grandparents lighting an candle in his memory this weekend in Miami Beach. Let us remember that shortly before he was murdered, Mr. Pearl was forced to kneel and state “I am Jewish”.

The popular saying in response to the holocaust is “never again”, and yet, in this decade, more than 67 years after the holocaust, a man again was killed simply because he was Jewish. That is why U.S. troops were sent to Afghanistan. To remove those band of thugs who terrorized a nation, and believed it was appropriate to behead a man, simply because he was Jewish.
You can read the story here:
DANIEL PEARL

See you in court raising money to sponsor the "Miami Defense Attorneys" Broward Courthouse. Wouldn't that make a certain segment of the population (who happen to wear black robes to work north of the border) sick?

SUNDAY IS DIARY DAY

Monday Update:

We think it's important to remember those who died at the hands of tyranny. American soldiers are now fighting, and dying, to defeat the type of people that
be-headed Daniel Pearl. The Post from Sunday stays up today, as we reflect on Mr. Pearl's life.
(It's either that, or complain about taxes, and who wants to be predictable?)



We wrote and posted this yesterday, but it bears repeating today:

The Herald reported that murdered Wall Street Journal Reporter Daniel Pearl’s name will be read today on Miami Beach at a ceremony at the memorial to the victims of the holocaust. Pearl’s name will be added to the wall of names and read, along with millions of other names, all who were victims to hate and intolerance.

Daniel Pearl was killed by Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan in 2002 because he was Jewish. Pearl was beheaded because he worshipped a deity who was different from the deity that those who killed him worship. In Pearl’s religion, life is sacred, and the lord commands that one should do good deeds for others for the sake of humanity. Those who killed Pearl, worship hate and intolerance, and they condemn themselves, and their religion, to a fate much worse than that they inflicted on Daniel Pearl.

May Daniel Pearl’s name always be remembered and spoken, as a brave man, who was killed by cowards.

We will speak Daniel Pearl’s name aloud today, and everyday that courage is celebrated.

It is unfortunate in a sense that Pearl's name will be read along with those who are also remembered as victims. To be sure, Pearl and those who lost their lives in the holocaust were victimized. But in the end, their memory will outlast those of their killers. They may have been victims, but their humanity outlives the ideas of those who murdered them. It is their names that will be spoken today, not the names of those who killed them.

Daniel Pearl will be remembered by me as a hero. And in a sense, from the youngest child, to the oldest person, all whose names are spoken today, and who are remembered individually and as a member of "the six million" are heroes. Their lives were taken in a struggle against inhumanity. By our very existence today; by our very act of speaking their names and remembering them, we celebrate the victory of humanity.


DIARY OF A MAD JURIST.

A Judge emailed us this week to express some displeasure over our regular series: Diary of a Mad Jurist. We were sufficiently chastised to remind everyone that this post is emailed to us anonymously, and we have no idea if the writer is a Judge.

All rise.....

DIARY OF A MAD JURIST.

Rumpole, I've had occasion to read some case law lately on judicial vindictiveness. I have to tell you that some of my colleagues do not make me proud. If you read the case law, you see, in limited circumstances, sarcastic and sneering Judges handing out outrageous sentences. The worst cases are where the offer was something like 3 years, and the defendant gets 40 after trial, and the judge sneers "he should have taken the plea when it was offered."

These are people's lives you know. Criminal conduct must be punished. But conduct worth three years (the length of law school) does not suddenly become worth 30 years because someone had a defense and it didn't work. Do not get me wrong Rumpole. People who use violence and hurt innocent people need to be removed from society, unless some rare circumstance can convince me otherwise. But the sentences I am reading about are just awful. How do some of these Judges sleep at night after taking away a 1/3 or 2/3's of a person's life? Don't they know how horrible prison is?

And that's another thing. There are so many things that need our tax dollars. Hungry children, health care, education, and yet I can't help thinking that a civilized society needs to treat its inmates better. I'm not talking about color TV's and the best gym equipment. I'm talking about making prison a quiet and sobering experience. Where time is spent in thought and remorse, and not some hell hole ruled by thugs where the guards have no control. I guess, having sent my fair share of people to prison, I just wish I could believe that there would be a chance of some of them coming out better than they went in.

Anyway Rumpole, thanks for the time.

A BUSY DAY

Friday was a busy day for our intrepid local scribe, Herald reporter Susannah Nesmith. She was busy covering the guilty verdict in the Caraballo case before Judge Thomas, while in the Locasio case, the jury was returning a recommendation of life in prison. Judge Blake promptly sentenced the convicted accountant to life in prison, no deductions, no exemptions, no amortizations.

Here is Ms. Nesmith’s opening sentence in her coverage of the Caraballo case: it’s a good one:
Victor Caraballo's best hope is to live to be an old man in prison, because he will definitely die there.

Alas, says Rumpole, there will be an appeal, so while “definite” is not really “definite” in the theoretical sense, one cannot imagine an appellate decision discharging the Defendant in this matter.

Ms. Nesmith and the Herald also reported that in the Locasio case, Judge Blake, before sentencing Locasio to life in prison, commented that the case was one of the toughest he has ever handled.

We have a few questions: Was the decision to impose life in prison for a man who ordered the death of his wife difficult? Was the Judge wrestling with an override of the jury’s recommendation? Or was the evidence in the case, including the lack of a body, the difficult part of the case? Or was the case difficult because Mr. Locasio might be innocent? It would be nice to get a better picture of what made this case so difficult for Judge Blake.


Our favourite federal blogger Mr. Markus spent the week crowing about the interesting federal cases currently being tried. We’ll take a good old fashion REGJB murder case over a federal disorderly conduct in a post office case any day of the week.


And finally, the Herald also reported that murdered Wall Street Journal Reporter Daniel Pearl’s name will be read Sunday on Miami Beach at a ceremony at the memorial to the victims of the holocaust. Pearl’s name will be added to the wall, and read, along with millions of other names, all who were victims to hate and intolerance.

Daniel Pearl was killed by Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan in 2002 because he was Jewish. Pearl was beheaded because he worshipped a deity who was different from the deity that those who killed him worship. In Pearl’s religion, life is sacred, and the lord commands that one should do good deeds for others for the sake of humanity. Those who killed Pearl, worship hate and intolerance, and they condemn themselves, and their religion, to a fate much worse than that they inflicted on Daniel Pearl.

May Daniel Pearl’s name always be remembered and spoken, as a brave man, who was killed by cowards.

We will speak Daniel Pearl’s name aloud tomorrow, and see you in court on Monday.