~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Proof that the British judicial system is more civilized than ours: they overturned a jailhouse snitch-based conviction.

Proof (in the same article) that the British judicial system is less civilized than ours:

"The judges also ruled that Alexander Benedetto, a 37-year-old New York publisher, had been properly acquitted of murder. They set aside an order by the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal that Benedetto should be tried again on the charge."

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Connecticut's citizens aren't all that thrilled that their prisoners are being sent to Virginia's prisons. But if they don't fill all those slots and keep the citizens of Virginia employed who will? You can only fill so many cells by arresting your own citizens and Virginia's got to be pretty close to that point.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The FBI is trying to find new ways to invade our privacy.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And the US now has over 2 million people in jail.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Russian criminals are selling WWII weapons to their mafia. What would a criminal do to with a german trench mortar?

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Corporate attorneys are having trouble getting and keeping jobs.

I thought about faking some sympathy here but as a guy who went into incredible debt to go to a "top 20" law school and then had to start his own law practice and is still struggling just trying to get his head above water . . .

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It just keeps getting worse for Malvo's lawyers.

Perhaps the only ray of hope is the resources that VC3 can throw in.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lawyers, pitbulls . . . Gotta love the 1st Amendment.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A law firm represents a judge for years without taking a fee. Then it tries cases in front of him. And when the other party finds out the judge refuses to recuse himself. But at least the Mississippi Supreme Court stopped the silliness.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At least the Israelis have kangaroo courts for people they claim are terrorists (3 witnesses you know won't testify and the rest in camera). In the US we seem to have decided that it's just fine to hold someone forever without any proof they did anything. Maybe this guy is a "material witness" but - if so - you'd think they'd talk to him.

Of course, he did give money to a Moslem charity which the government believes to have terrorist ties. This places him square in the path of one of the Justice Department's new tactics. "Part of the appeal for prosecutors is that they do not have to prove that the defendants actually supported terrorist attacks, only that they helped a group tied to terrorism." Funny, I don't remember this statute being used to prosecute people who donated to Sinn Fein.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you are being held for a crime and you can escape without violence it is just a misdemeanor.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What the fedgov prosecutors can do and what they are trying to get away with both are just plain scary.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As always, when I get upset about Virginia I look to Texas:

An officer who lied so often and so grievously that numerous lawyers from numerous States got together - pro bono publico - to rip him up.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The prosecutor didn't prove that you killed him but you were in the car the shot came from so you get 30 years.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

South leads nation in locking people up, study finds.

Is anybody shocked by this?

"Louisiana's incarceration rate is 800 per 100,000 residents. The rate for the South is 526 per 100,000 -- higher than that of 63 percent of countries in the world, according to the report generated for the group by the Justice Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. The West is a distant second at 408 per 100,000."

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The jury is deliberating in the police shooting case and police show up at a juror's house just by chance. This leads to a mistrial asked for by the defense. Hmmmm . . .

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No alibi for Malvo. Did anyone actually think there would be an alibi offense?

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sorority sisters getting all sorts of punishment for hazing.

Hazing laws are just wrong. They are created and enforced against a particular group. No matter how much people will try to tell you these laws reach everyone when's the last time you saw them enforced against someone other than a fraternity or sorority? (yes, I know it happens once in a blue moon)

Two questions:

Why don't we just cover these sort of cases with assault & battery charges?

If hazing is allowed at military schools (i.e. VMI) because it is a positive good why is it an evil elsewhere?

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gasp! A massage parlor turned out to actually be a house of ill repute. I know I'm shocked.

Good to know it gave student discounts.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A kid in Henrico has been charged with threatening to kill his teachers.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-=Off Point=- But very important

Read this.
..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I listened to the Michigan racial preference cases last night (from C-Span). I was working on prepping a jury trial at the time so I'm sure I missed some minutiae but three strong themes stick out in my mind:

(1) Ginsberg scored some powerful points at the beginning of the argument when she committed "hijack by amicus" (from Slate; see last entry). The anti-preference attornies appeared totally unprepared to discuss the military brief and the implications for the military (figure the odds - there were only amici briefs filed by every organization under the sun). I did not hear what I consider to be a satisfactory answer from anyone. Perhaps it was misplaced because the military academies don't fall under the 14th Amendment like Michigan but it was a powerful moment.

(2) When Justices tried to get a number for "critical mass" the pro-preference attorney fired back but never answered the question. There is obviously an absolute minimum number at which critical mass must be presumed to occur. To state otherwise is disengenuous.

(3) When Justices put forth the question, "if the problem is that not enough minority students qualify under the standards you've set, why don't you lower the standards for everyone until there are enough qualified minorities?" the pro-preference attorney blustered but never actually answered satisfactorily. Points were scored; the question is whether this is the type of solution which might bring O'Connor to the anti-preference side.

(4) Collaterally, the information came out that Boalt Hall has raised the number of minority admissions back to the level where they were prior to the abolition of the use of race as a factor in California. My question is whether this has been done honestly and the admissions are all held to the same standard or whether Boalt is redlining (proxy of location in place of race).

In any event, from the questioning alone I see three solid anti-pref votes (Scalia, Rhenquist, Thomas), one probable anti-pref vote (Kennedy), two likely but not ones I'd bet on (O'Connor & Stevens). I foresee and opinion written by O'Connor or Stevens for a fractured court. Hopefully Stevens will write it because it will waffle less and be an intelligently written decision. But politically it will probably make more sense to assign the opinion to O'Connor to keep her onboard.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Breakdown of the argument today on Michigan's schools' use of racial preference for admissions.

..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Richmond police shooting case went to jury today.

Facts as they apparently came out in court.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That was quick! The NYTimes has already spun today's argument on Michigan's preference system. And you'll never guess who the signs and portents favor . . .

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The coalition, which is working with the state Crime Commission on proposals to reform the system, suggested that Virginia should develop Standards of Justice, along the lines of its educational Standards of Quality and Standards of Learning.

SOJs could introduce statewide oversight and accountability where there is neither, and set qualification and performance standards for court-appointed defense lawyers. And the state could, and should, increase their compensation, along with the pay of salaried public defenders where they exist.

Virginia needs to set standards. Being Virginia, it will not want to pay to actually meet them. But, being Virginia, it might be shamed into making an effort to fall not too far below fair."

SOJ is a silly idea. What are they going to do test my knowledge of all the possible means by which a person can be convicted of grand larceny? True/False - stealing a mixed breed dog from its abusive owner is a felony in Virginia? The abilities which matter most are research and oral argument. Damn near impossible to test research abilities: computers, books, service subscriptions - what quailifies? What do you test? And if you start grading in-court performance you will run into politics so fast it will be amazing. Let me be as vague as I can be here - my experience is that in some jurisdictions you are a good lawyer if you belong to certain firms - no matter how well you actually perform in court. Competency has nothing to do with being a "good lawyer," favored by the court and bar**. Anyone who practices in these jurisdictions for a period of time sees this.

I do like the increased compensation idea (and this article is correct in the payments allowed). Virginia is just pitiful in this. At a CLE I attended the Chief Justice of Virginia's Supreme Court justified the rates because, even though we complain, he has never seen a court-appointed lawyer in front of his court not strive to do his best. Which, of course, misses the point because the place where the harm is done is when the lawyer in General District Court or Circuit Court has to balance 60 ongoing cases and cannot do adequate, individualized discovery or argue matters in courtroom motions or do sufficient pre-trial investigation or . . . or . . . or . . .


** To be fair these places usually also have a few "very good lawyers" who are both politically well connected and good at their profession.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Normally, warrants require "probable cause" to believe that a crime is being planned or committed. But FISA warrants do not. They require only that the FBI show probable cause to believe that "the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power."

Prior to the advent of the USA Patriot Act, the law also specified that "the purpose" of a secret warrant must be counterintelligence (basically, spy-versus-spy activity). Now, however, intelligence gathering need not be "the purpose," but rather only "a significant purpose" of the warrant.

The "significant purpose" language opens the way for FISA secret warrants to be used for dual purposes -- one of which is simply normal criminal law enforcement. Indeed, the Bush Administration has defended, and the FISA Court of Appeals has upheld, this very practice.

And that, in turn, raises the specter of a possible end run around the Fourth Amendment. Spurious or ill-founded "counterintelligence" purposes might be used as a pretext to get warrants to spy, in a regular law enforcement context, even when probable cause of a crime is lacking."

As a criminal defense attorney this worries me. As a citizen it scares the crud out of me. Taking away the ability of the citizenry to have some sort of oversight - independent of government agents (whether they be judicial or law enforcement) - is dangerous and will eventually lead to abuse. We eschew dual use now but someone will get away with it (if reviewed at all the excuse will be good faith). Then it will (slowly) become a standard procedure available to law enforcement.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remember how the PATRIOT Act was supposed to help us root out terrorists?

I bet you didn't know Paypal was engaging in terrorism. They certainly didn't.

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is unconstitutional to make a law ex post facto (after the fact). California and a number of States have extended statute of limitations so that they can reach really bad criminals after the limitation had run. The other States all struck the extensions down in the State courts. California's didn't.

"The fact" is the running of the statute of limitation. "After" is self explanatory. Still, "rather than engaging in this very simple analysis the court is trying to make the case fit under a 1798 precedent, Calder v. Bull. I forsee one of those almost-useless, fractured, 60 page supreme court decisions. How will it turn out? I know how it should turn out, but who can tell what the decision will actually be?

.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
God Bless our Troops.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gasp! Shock! The NY Times is editorializing and it's actually doing it ON THE OP-ED PAGE. The NYTimes is slipping; it should have worked all this into an article on the front page.

Oh, by the way, it it's pro reverse discrimination. (I know - you're stunned)

.