No, not an organized one. I'm on my way to meet Calpundit and his mother, who are in Denver doing geneological research. We've never met, so this will be fun. More later.

Update: Kevin Drum, aka Calpundit, is personable, handsome and very smart. He looks exactly like his picture on his blog, only happier. Since we read his blog every day, we've seen that picture about 300 times, so seeing him in person for the first time is like seeing an old friend. His mother is delightful as well. We chatted for a little over an hour--about blogs, individual bloggers (anyone's ears burning yet?), politics, our real lives and more. We think he's a little more liberal than his blog makes him out to be--by design. If you aren't already a steady reader of Calpundit, you should be.

After leaving Kevin and his mom, we had the opportunity to meet Colorado's Governor Bill Owens for the first time. He was doing the Fox segment after our's. Owens is a staunch Republican, and very tough on crime. He has a well-known, purposeful habit of appointing ex-prosecutors to the bench. Apparently, he doesn't trust us defense attorneys. Still, it was fun to meet him and he couldn't have been nicer (although we were on good behavior as well.) He told us he saw our tv segment and that we did a good job, especially when we mentioned that a gag order in the Peterson case would be beneficial in stemming police leaks. (Owens knows all about police leaks from the JonBenet Ramsey investigation.) We told him he was doing a good job as governor but we'd like to see him move a little to the left on crime issues.

Gov. Owens looked very healthy and happy too--maybe its the moon or something in the Colorado air, but all the men we've seen today, from our client at court this morning to Calpundit and the Governor all seemed to radiate good health and good feelings.

Cursor is all over the media's obsession with the Laci Peterson case today, even linking to one of our posts from over a month ago, Guilt Sells.

We think the coverage is excessive, but we continue to be part of it. Why? Is this what we went to law school for? To repetitively cover the murder of one woman when there are thousands of murders every year that get no coverage because the victims were neither attractive, white nor in possession of a winsome smile?

In a sense, yes. We do it to remind people of the presumption of innocence, and to try to stem the media lynch-mob mentality that has convicted Scott Peterson when there is not a shred of physical evidence in the public domain linking him to the crime.

This is a death penalty case. Peterson is entitled to a level playing field when his trial starts. Can you imagine sitting in a jail cell, innocent, having just lost your wife and your soon-to-be born son, and facing a death penalty trial? That's how you should be picturing Scott Peterson now. He's entitled to that as are all persons accused but not convicted of crime.

As long as the prosecutrix pundits are out there proclaiming his guilt , we'll be out there doing our part to preserve and protect his constitutional rights--including the most basic one, the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

Tonight, Hannity and Colmes....debating OJ former prosecutor Marcia Clark.

We started a new archive category today--Misconduct--to cover injustice news related to police and prosecutorial misconduct. Such as the news that the Los Angeles City Council has agreed to pay a $1.3 million settlement in the case of a police officer who raped women while on official duty on three separate occasions.

Former Officer Joseph Evan Robinson, 27, was convicted this year of raping the women while on duty. The former 77th Street Division patrol officer, who had been relieved of duty in April 2002, is serving three consecutive life terms.

In the first case, Robinson and his partner confronted a woman in January 2002 as she sat in a car with her boyfriend at 64th and Figueroa streets. Prosecutors said Robinson determined the woman had an outstanding warrant, then took her to an alley out of sight of his partner and her boyfriend, and raped her, according to a probation report.

Two weeks later, Robinson handcuffed and sexually assaulted a woman in a Figueroa Street motel room after allegedly finding marijuana in the room she shared with a boyfriend, according to a probation report.

A month later, Robinson forced a woman from a bus stop at 47th Street and Figueroa into his patrol car and drove her several blocks away, where he handcuffed and raped her, the report said.

The category will include future posts pertaining to lab fraud, withholding of exculpatory evidence, false forced confessions, etc. Feel free to e-mail tips.

Max Factor Heir Andrew Luster lost his appeal of his conviction and 124 year sentence for rape and drug crimes. Luster vanished during his trial. He was convicted and sentenced in abstentia. The California appeals court threw out his appeal saying he forfeited his right to appeal when he jumped bond.

We hear that Luster may be found very soon, by this man. We know Dog, and have no doubt he'll get his man.

William Safire provides an insightful explanation in today's New York Times why Martha should fight the charges against her.

I hope she beats the rap because I don't like the idea of a prosecutor — eager to deter others from doing wrong — twisting the law to make an example out of a celebrity. In doing justice, righteous ends don't justify unscrupulous means.

The U.S. attorney has not accused her of the crime of insider trading. After a yearlong investigation, that central matter is nowhere in his indictment. Why not? Because he decided that would be too difficult a charge to persuade a jury to believe.

....Rather than drop the weak case and his chance at national fame, the prosecutor James Comey handed off the insider-trading charge to the S.E.C., which seeks civil damages, not criminal penalties, and must meet a much lower standard of proof. Instead of focusing on what the case is about, Comey told a rapt press conference: "This case is about lying" — to investigators and to investors. "Lying" is a harsh word....But "perjury" is a much harsher word, meaning "lying under oath." Martha Stewart has not been accused of perjury.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to expedite the appeal of Government-proclaimed "enemy combatant" and alleged "dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla.

The case likely will be heard between October and the end of the year. Padilla has been held for a year in a South Carolina military brig without access to a lawyer and with no charges filed against him. He is a U.S. citizen.

Judicial Nominee William Pryor came face to face with his past statements in his confirmation hearing Wednesday. While he admitted that his calling the Supreme Court Justices ""nine octogenarian lawyers" a mistake, he refused to abandon or distance himself from his other controversial views:

At yesterday's hearing, Pryor was asked several times about his past assertions that Roe v. Wade "is an abominable decision" and "the worst abomination of the history of constitutional law." He said he still believes that. "I believe that not only is the case unsupported by the text and structure of the Constitution, but it has led to a morally wrong result," he said. "It has led to the slaughter of millions of innocent unborn children. That's my personal belief."

Call your Senators now....toll free...1-800-839-5276 and protest Pryor's confirmation. This man does not belong on the federal bench--especially when his appointment would be for life.

Here's a synopsis of the reasons, provided by Lisa English of Ruminate This:

• He's a Federalist Society ideologue.

• He has successfully fought against federal protections against the disabled and elderly.

• He has a long record as an opponent to Roe v. Wade and women's reproductive rights.

• He is opposed to the separation of church and state. According to People for the American Way, Pryor is "unfit" to be a judge. Dig this: "At a public rally on behalf of a judge who was sued for praying and displaying the 10 Commandments in court, Pryor announced, 'God has chosen, through his son Jesus Christ, this time and this place for all Christians...to save our country and save our courts.'"

• He has fought against civil rights legislation enforcement.

• He has fought against the Family Medical Leave Act.

• He has fought against environmental protections.

• He has fought against consumer and worker rights.

For more, go here and here.

[comments now closed]

The U.S. military is investigating whether U.S. troops are responsible for the mystery death of an Iraqi POW.

One military official said tonight there were indications of "foul play" in the death of a 52-year-old Iraqi whose corpse was found last Friday at a prisoner camp run by the First Marine Division near Nasiriya.

The official emphasized it was unclear whether American soldiers, other prisoners or something else was to blame, and that a preliminary autopsy was inconclusive.

British authorities are investigating the deaths of two Iraqis under British control, and accusations that British forces tortured Iraqi prisoners.

It is unclear whether, "whether the prisoner's illness or injuries were related to the interrogation or whether other prisoners, suspecting he had cooperated with the Americans, may have attacked him. "

Here's more. And here's the press release from Headquarters, United States Central Command.

The Judge in the trial of John Lee Malvo, the younger defendant in the "sniper case," has been scouting out alternative venues for the trial.

Roush and her staff traveled to Virginia Beach on Tuesday and are planning to visit adjacent Chesapeake soon, sources familiar with the trips said. Both cities have relatively new courthouses and may be considered far enough away from Washington and Richmond to have avoided the voluminous media attention paid to the sniper cases.

Mark J. Petrovich, one of Malvo's attorneys, welcomed the news that Roush was looking at other locations. "We're sure that in either of those two places, we'll be able to find well-intentioned, well-reasoned, intelligent jurors to hear the case," he said.

We think it's a no-brainer that the trial has to be moved.

The 16th Texas exceution of 2003 took place today. Another 9 are scheduled before August 20. Here is the list from the Texas Department of Corrections.

The Indiana Court of Appeals ruled this week that police cannot force drivers who have been involved in accidents to take blood tests.

The court overturned the conviction of a repeat drunk driver who got in an accident in which two people were killed. He was arrested by the Marion County Sheriff's Department which has a policy that directs deputies to take a blood sample from drivers involved in serious crashes, "by force, if necessary."

The court ruled such a policy is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The requirements of the Fourth Amendment cannot be lowered based upon the heinousness of the particular crime," Judge Michael Barnes wrote for the court. The ruling said that legally obtaining blood is a "relatively simple matter" that would require officers to ask drivers to voluntarily give blood or obtain a warrant from a judge.

For daily updates on Fourth Amendment cases, don't miss John Wesley Hall's FourthAmendment.com

It's going to be a long, hot summer.

In Shreveport, LA, police pumped 8 bullets into the back of young black man they thought was holding a gun. He was holding a cell phone.

The cops chased the man for five miles because he was weaving in and out of traffic and they thought he might be drunk. When he pulled over and got out of the car, he had a shiny object in his hand. The cops say they thought he was adopting a "shooter's stance" and began firing. The cops have been exonerated by the local authorities. The prosecutor said the cops acted in self defense and this was a case of "justifiable homicide."

The community is angry.

.... many Shreveport residents were outraged, especially members of its black community. "That man was shot down like a dog," said one resident.