Good news for those young ASA's we see trudging every morning from their county court headquarters-lair, via an easement appurtenant behind a row of houses/offices (and they know what that is since they have all recently studied for the Bar) and through our Lot 26, bleary-eyed, lugging strollers laden with boxes filled with cases of driving while not wearing corrective lenses, and possession of undersized Snook. These new eager lawyers are caffeine fueled, snapchatting their double espressos and extra-large caramel cafe latte's. Drink-up we say, and now says the World Health Organization- as reported by the Lancet Oncology magazine that we often peruse.
COFFEE IS NOT A CARCINOGEN. Hurray!
This study reverses a twenty-five year old study which seemed to indicate that coffee caused bladder cancer.
But, don't drink it too hot. Anything about 175 degrees is a danger zone. Consuming hot beverages could cause esophageal cancer. So make that double-caramel-cafe-latte iced, and have one on Rumpole. And Snapchat it.
BROWARD SENTENCING
Check out the JAA Blog.
They have a portion of a sentencing transcript where a defendant of color asked for leniency saying that he had learned his lesson after being incarcerated after what appears to be a burglary. The defendant said he didn't want to be judged on the color of his skin. The judge, who appears to be a person of color (no one is identified in the transcript except) replies that s/he has been judges by the color of their skin their whole life, and even worse, the actions of the defendant will make the victim in the case judge everyone of the same race of the defendant they encounter worse, based on the actions of the defendant.
Good sentence? Bad Sentence? Would a Miami Judge say that? Would Ovalle's finger's explode as he tried to tweet that while covering a sentencing?
See You In Court.
Another approximately 100 deaths by handguns yesterday that didn't make any headlines because they weren't the results of a mass shooting.
What the judge said was unfortunately true. Equally unfortunate is the fact that he/she identifies him/herself with a person harmed by the defendant's actions, which should be grounds for recusal.
ReplyDeleteKind of like a presidential candidate who objects to a judge who is a member of a political organization that has targeted him and his followers:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/san-jose-police-chief-fire-allowing-attacks-trump-supporters-affiliated-la-raza/
ain't it?
That judge in Broward u referred to is of Indian descent and his skin is dark. I heard he's taken some time off upon learning this was being published. Can't understand why he said it. Horrible comment to make.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteFinally .....
THE JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES BEGINS WITH ONE STEP ...
Senate Democrats ended a nearly 15-hour filibuster early Thursday after Republican Party leaders reportedly agreed to allow votes on two proposed gun control measures.
Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, said that a compromise had been reached. Votes would be held on whether to ban people on the government's terrorist watch list from obtaining gun licenses and whether to expand background checks to gun shows and internet sales, he added.
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/06/16/filibuster-ends-after-gop-agrees-to-allow-gun-control-votes-sen/21396315/
Cap Out .....
Captain4Justice@gmail.com
The no-fly list is not subject to any due process, judicial review or meaningful way to challenge inclusion or get off it. First notice a person receives of inclusion is a denial of boarding a plane. It's also full of errors and inclusion can be based on secret "evidence" the accuracy of which or its probative value cannot be ascertained. The governmment can put anyone in it. That's why this legislation is so pernicious because it would allow the governement to deny constitutional rights without due process of law by arbitrarily putting someone in the no-fly list with unfettered discretion. People with ideas different than the government's or who expressed unfavored views in their speech can be included with no reason given. Even worse, people can be denied constitutional rights based on different spellings of their names. Such legislation would be a major, but silent and sneaky, leap towards tyranny.
ReplyDeleteThe other bill proposes something that already takes place. Internet sales have to be done through FFL dealers and include background checks. Background checks are also done at gun shows.
Still trying to get it straight. Any advice / help is appreciated.
ReplyDeleteJudges are supposed to be chosen and celebrated for their ethnicity? (Ex. Sotomayor is a "wise latina" who can bring her specific life experiences as such to the bench, adding value and spice that yet another white guy cannot).
Or judges' ethnicities are entirely irrelevant and Trump is a POS for even suggesting that a judge's ethnicity could play a role in overseeing the case?
Hey 8:40 I wasn't aware that an objection had been filed with the court complaining of bias because of the judges membership in an organization. Last I heard the ignorant, blowhard, douchebag who bears the standard for the Republican party told a nationally televised journalist that a man born in Indiana was unfit to preside over the civil case accusing him of being a sniveling thief because the judge was a "Mexican" and he was going to build a wall. Where did you learn of a legal "objection"?
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to race everyone is always wrong. That's just how it is
ReplyDelete5:08 it's not just a wall, it's a huuuuggggeeeee wall
ReplyDeleteRemember, Senator Ted Kennedy was put on the no fly list when a Republican was in the White House.
ReplyDelete"If it saves just one life..."
ReplyDeleteTed Kennedy should have been on the no drive list.
Hayden Panettiere and her crew were spotted at the REN, chowing down on the famous Bernie Burgers- kobe beef sliders- last night. Quite a scene.
ReplyDelete