Going to bring down some polls next week. This is Florida, so vote early and often. Stan Blake holds a slim lead over Rosa Rodriguez on the poll about who you would want as a Judge if you were arrested. Luise Krieger Martin with a very respectable showing as well. New Poll on the current topic: BENNETT BRUMMER: LOVE HIM OR HATE HIM- actually there are several categories and you can check more than one box. A new feature!
Mr. Tannebaum writes about his picture:
I apologize to the overwhelmingly offended individual who took the time to ask that my picture not be posted, but as a fellow blogger, my picture automatically appears when I comment, unless I comment anonymously, which I do not do. Unfortunately, I choose to be named, and seen.
Rumpole responds: Your wife has authorized us to accept your apology. She was a mite angry at the time she left the post. Seriously, We applaud your courage in signing your name.
Rumpole in 08???
Anonymous writes:
brummer will have democratic opposition in '08. the kid should have run as a democrat in '04instead he tried to play ethnicpolitics by running as a CubanRepublican.the head PD has got to be a Democrat - you just can't winotherwise.any takers for '08?from the likes of these comments,it sounds like you've got a built in base of support.
Rumpole replies: Please do not mistake our commenting on Brummer for the belief he should not be PD. We have never said that. We believe several PDs would commit various forms of aggravated battery upon us if they could verify our identity. However, all we did was 1) BREAK the story about the 200 grand settlement. 2) Opine that Mr. Brummer was wrong in his actions.
To paraphrase the 36th President of the United States "I will not be a candidate in 2008. I shall not accept the nomination of mah party."
We have no political aspirations beyond getting one of those appointments to be a Judge at the Hawaiian Tropic Beauty Contests.
Finally, Prosecutors are brought into the sentencing fray: Anonymous writes:
I agree with Hersch, but to add to the discussion I would also like to point out that it is just as much a disgrace or probably more for prosecutors to ask for harsher sentences than they offered prior to trial. I think its even worse than the judges actions, since at least the judges can say they did not know all of the facts prior to trial. The prosecutor on the other hand knows all the facts and yet asks for 20 years after trial when they had offered 10 prior to trial.
Rumpole replies: There is a prohibition against vindictive prosecution and vindictive sentencing. However, lets say a prosecutor truly believes a defendant deserves 20 years, but the victim is reluctant and begs the prosecutor to offer 5 years to settle the case and the prosecutor agrees. The Defendant rejects the offer, goes to trial and loses. What then? We can posit a myriad of possibilities that would support or criticize a prosecutor's decision to offer a more severe sentence after trial. That is why the position of prosecutor is so special and the people who hold that office must be taught to understand the power over people's lives they hold. We do not see enough training and enough emphasis on justice versus punishment.
Being a prosecutor requires the extremely important ability to- right in the middle of fighting for something you passionately believe in- stop and give your opponent more ammunition (Brady Material) that may cause you to lose. Prosecutors need to be passionate about winning and protecting victims and society and just as passionate about justice and upholding all of the law, including Brady and its prodigy. It's that final point that we do not see enough training being done at the SAO.
We are not foolish enough to believe any training is required by the FEDS. Anyone who has ever had to deal with 2000 pages of Jenks after the witness gives direct testimony knows that "discovery" and "Brady" and "fair trial" are all quaint notions that the Attorney General believes should go the way of the horse and buggy.
See You In Court (unless the feds get me first).
I also heard that Brummer forced his appeals section to conflict on the Chavez appeal, so as not to get any BAD publicity for his office either.
ReplyDeleteCan any PD verify this?
I was a p.d.. the rumor is true. but not a conflict. instead mr. brummer paid a p.a. to take the case over. can you really blame him?? rumpole seems to think so but i don't.
ReplyDeleteThere was no legitimate reason for the pd to conflict on Chavez. So, given the timing of it, and given what we know about BB, is there any rational (or even irrational) reason for the conflict other than election politics? And the pd did give out 30k to the private, and Stanton ghost-wrote the brief.
ReplyDelete