Here is the final installment of the Ragusa fiasco (10 years prison + 15 years probation). What a mess.
I listened to the sentencing pronouncement on BayNews9 this morning. I think that if Judge Tharpe could have given her more time, he would have. His comments were elegant and very well thought out, but tingend with the anger of the community. His main point was her arrogance at her own betrayal of the teaching profession.
If you want to check it out, click here: Ragusa Sentencing video.
This is interesting. A guy who changed his given name to “Jordan Jordan” almost 20 years ago, and now is a chiropractor, wanted to be a judge – BUT UNDER HIS OLD NAME (“Breslaw”, which apparently is Jewish. The sitting judge was wise and wiley enough to file for an injunction, prohibiting this chiro from using his given name as it is no longer his LEGAL name. She was right, and he was booted off the bench.
We have all kinds of people running for governor and Senate. Now we have people who (1) are weird/unhappy/whatever enough change their name, (2) think that being a chiropractor qualifies him to be a judge.
The moral of the story: THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT YOUR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES. The bLAWgger will have a Bay area judicial candidate comparison coming up soon – stay tuned.
Jordan Jordan a/k/a Breslaw runs for a Broward judgeship – South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Today at 5PM at Mailo’s Restaurant (400 North Ashley Street). Check out www.vasquezforjudge.com!
See you then!
JOE
OK, as a defense lawyer I never want to see the Feds rush into anything. However, the Gulf disaster is something near and dear to my heart. I love the Gulf. Now, somebody bad has hurt someone I love. And they have to pay.
I grew up swimming in, boating on, and living around the Gulf. I have always loved marine biology and the study of the Gulf, its mysteries and all its creatures. I love to take my family on the boat in the Gulf. I have fished in it many, many times.
The LA Times article that I am sharing with you here reports that:
The senators — seven Democrats, including California’s Barbara Boxer, and one independent — asked Holder to examine whether BP “made false and misleading statements to the federal government regarding its ability to respond to oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico.”
Misleading statements? Who cares about that – what about the fact that they ran the oil rig with (1) no way to shut off the oil flow in case of an emergency, and (2) had no plan in place to contain ANY spill at all? That’s criminal.
In the law, we have two tenets that are at play here. First: NEGLIGENCE. If you do an act that is not designed in and of itself to kill, but is an act that is so dangerous that it does, then you are guilty of murder. If you have a duty to others that you wipe your butt with, then you are negligent and liable for damages. Second: FORESEEABILITY. The old case on foreseeability had to do with a moored ship catching afire, then eventually burning down the whole marina. The ship owner was liable for everything because of his own negligence in burning up his own boat, but also for the other boats as it was forseeable that such an accident could happen.
In other words, BP has clearly been negligent, and should pay for every wage, every cleanup, every animal rescue, EVERYTHING related to this spill. And there is no doubt that the damage BP has caused was foreseeable.
Where did they think the oil was going to go . . . back in the earth?
I say charge them criminally. I say everyone use them. I say boycott BP products (I have been boycotting BP since about 1991, for other reasons). Then call your senator and your Attorney General and demand that the United States not bow to the pressure of Big Oil, but that it protect its citizens and natural resources.
Here’s the article: Gulf oil spill: Senators call for criminal, civil charges against BP | Greenspace | Los Angeles Times
This is a phenomenal article. It describes how easy it was to cash in on defendant’s strange mix of greed and fear.
The targets? Defendants with violation of parole warrants. The gimmick? Coppers used a website, an e-mail account, and appointed an agent to the fictitious post of “amnesty program director. They sent 2,700 letters to relatives of parolees-at-large advertising the reward and fake amnesty program. The promise was that the people with warrants would get amnesty and $200 if they turned themselves in to authorities.
How dumb do you have to be to (1) jump parole in the first place, and (2) think that law enforcement is going to give you a break when you have violated the law. It never ceases to amaze me that people think that they can do whatever they want and pay no consequences for it.
Here is the link: Calif. agents use award ruse to reel in fugitives – KansasCity.com.
Attention All Carrollwood Community Bar Association Members:
Our next membership meeting is approaching quickly! We are happy to announce that Criminal Defense Lawyer, Joe Bodiford, will be our guest speaker for the day. The topic of discussion will be: “If your client gets arrested…”
Please take a moment to RSVP promptly.
When: Thursday May 13, 2010 at 12:00pm
Where: Emerald Greens Golf and Country Club
13903 Clubhouse Drive, Tampa, Florida
Cost: $15.00 per person including tax, tip, and water or iced tea.
Please bring a check payable to Emerald Greens Golf and Country Club.
Members of Emerald Greens may charge their own account.
http://www.carrollwoodbar.com/
My Trial Ad class after the final trial of the semester. Fantastic group! Everyone worked so hard. I am proud of each and every one of them!
This is an interesting article. Makes you think about the Constitutional rights we all share, and the duty of the courts to enforce those rights – even when the “popular” thing to do may not be the Constitutional thing to do.
Here’s what happened:
The Supreme Court by an 8-1 vote Tuesday struck down a federal law that makes it a crime to sell videos and other depictions of animal cruelty, saying the law infringed on free speech rights.
"We read (the law) to create a criminal prohibition of alarming breadth," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, noting that nowhere in the disputed law was there a requirement that the depicted conduct actually be "cruel."
The text of the law, used to prosecute a Virginia man who had advertised videos of dogfights in an underground magazine, sweepingly covered "any depiction" in which "a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed."
Yet as the justices struck down that prohibition, they specifically said they were not deciding the validity of a law that would target only so-called "crush videos," which typically show women’s high heels digging into kittens and other small animals and which had inspired Congress to write the 1999 law in the first place.Robert Stevens, who had run a business known as "Dogs of Velvet and Steel," appealed his conviction under the law, saying it violated his First Amendment speech rights. He also contended he was trying to provide educational and historical materials about the pit bull breed, not promoting illegal dogfighting.
Reminds me of the flag burning cases – you know, the “I don’t agree with what you are doing, but I agree with your right to do it” cases.
What about that Federal court case last week, where a Wisconsin federal judge ruled that the National Day of Prayer was essentially a call for religious action:
"It goes beyond mere ‘acknowledgment’ of religion because its sole purpose is to encourage all citizens to engage in prayer, an inherently religious exercise that serves no secular function in this context," she wrote. "In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience."
So, if we have a constitution (our universal rules to live by), we have to have someone to interpret it. That’s what judges do, everyday, all across the country (although some that I know could step up their Con Law knowledge and prowess!). If you want that job, go to law school, pass the Bar, and then try (try!) to get a judicial appointment. Or, spend hundreds of thousands trying to get elected. Then you can be in a position to try to interpret the Constitution and put your name on the line. Remember: NO LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH, NO LIBERAL JUDGES, NO JUDICIAL ACTIVISM (not to be confused with judicial ActiVision). See, it’s pretty hard!!!!! We cannot have it “our” way all the time; what we can hope for are judges that put their names and reputations on the line to make the hard decisions for us.
As always, here’s the article: Breaking Legal News – Headline Legal News – Law Firm & Lawyer News – Court News – Law News
Yes, you read it correctly. It appears that some of the local DUI cops are now running stops in Europe. This tops the DUI lawnmower cases I used to see in Pasco County. Thanks to lawyer-radiogogue and former WFLA funnyman LIONEL for this one (he is NOT the one in the above photo).
Here’s the link (yes, the British spell things funny): Man loses licence after drink-driving in toy Barbie car – Telegraph
Governor Charlie Crist has upset many Republicans with his decision to veto SB6, and Thursday night former U.S. Sen. Connie Mack, resigned as Crist’s campaign chairman in his race for the U.S. Senate.
Wow . . . dissention in the ranks . . . what say you, my Republican and teacher friends??
Here’s the story: Connie Mack Quits Crist Campaign – cbs4.com