CASE AGAINST ATTORNEY NO ACTIONED
The case against Attorney Robin Blake, recently accused of bringing marijuana into TGK was NO ACTIONED today by the prosecution at arraignment.
Kudos to ASA Howard Rosen for working quick and hard to verify that the State should not proceed.
And of course, Kudos to
Richard “I never turn down an interview” Sharpstein for doing his normal excellent job in defense. The only suspense left is to see how the Herald mis-reports the case.
So where are all the stupid prosecutors and former stupid prosecutors to comment how upset they are that justice was done?
ReplyDeleteI was a former stupid prosecutor. Now I'm a mensa crushing freak of nature prosecutor with the ability to recite from memory the evidentiary code for each and every state. Oh... and justice was done.
ReplyDelete"So where are all the stupid prosecutors and former stupid prosecutors to comment how upset they are that justice was done?"
ReplyDeleteHow stupid are you to suggest that prosecutors would object to a colleague doing the right thing? What a joke. It always amazes me how the same attorneys who cry about prosecutors allegedly stereotyping defendants routinely lump all prosecutors together as "stupid" or "lazy" or "overzealous." Grow up moron, there's good and bad everyone. Most prosecutors (like many defense attorneys) are good, honest, hard working people.
I agree - I was only asking to hear from the stupid ones, and as to your comment:
ReplyDelete"Most prosecutors (like many defense attorneys) are good, honest, hard working people;"
You meant most prosecutors AND MOST defense attorneys, didnt you? Or did you?
The party is at Robin's place Saturday night. BYOM
ReplyDeleteThe point of the post is that ASA Howard Rosen is not one of the good ones, he's one of the BEST.
ReplyDeleteThis blog (more the writers than you) often mocks asa's and any judge who doesnt let defense attorneys play the games that make us famous all over Florida. Howard is definitely one of the best and I am glad that you have the sense to give props to a great asa who, in spite of your cynical readership who says the sao never fights corruption, spends his days fighting corruption and in this case making an ethical decision.
ReplyDeleteAll you defense attorneys who love to whine about the intoxilizer and
how bondsman steal your clients, you should write to applaud Asa Rosen.
RUMPOLE, HOWARD ROSEN ONE OF THE BEST? WIERD COMMENT.
ReplyDeleteWeak ruling by Lopez. The city made a deal, live with it. And let the voters determine who pays the price. Cop-out decision by Lopez.
ReplyDeleteYeah, what's Lopez thinking? The citizens got screwed by their idiot administrators. Why should a judge make things right? Screw the people, it's all about the government. Judges are supposed to just close cases, not make important decisions.
ReplyDeleteYeah, like Lopez is going to uphold a deal like that. 93,000 people pay an illegal fire fee for a few years and seven plaintiffs become millionares (along with Hank Adorno). If those seven plaintiffs want to hit the lotto at the expense of the public, do it the old fashioned way- either sell the city some graveyard they cant build on or open up a construction company and build a building or road for double the estimate. Kudos to Lopez.
ReplyDeletevery weak by lopez!
ReplyDeleteSay what you will about Lopez, He is as strait, fair, and honest as they come. It was a dirty deal, and it took a hell of a lot of guts to rule against power brokers like Adorno and Ariola.
ReplyDeletea deal is a deal. he was the judge who approved the settlement. they all had lawyers and all agreed. the deal should stand. now the politicians are not going to be held accountable. all will be forgotten.
ReplyDeleteso jason, the next time you get a sweet sweet deal and the public is outraged, we will just say that you tricked the other side and take the settlment back.
Here is the most interesting part of the case you posted.
ReplyDeleteSupreme Court of Puerto Rico.
Angel Luis García, Carmen García et al., Plaintiffs and respondents
v.
World Wide Entertainment Co., Darrin McGillis, Defendants and petitioners
No. CE-92-126
San Juan, Puerto Rico, December 24, 1992
"The plaintiffs alleged that both contracts were void because they were contrary to law, morals and public policy. As second cause of action, plaintiffs alleged that defendants (McGillis and boyfriend) had physically abused and sexually harassed the minor, for which they sought damages."