Today's Crime Postings

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 09:54:51 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I just got an e-mail asking me when TalkLeft was going to return to covering the politics of crime now that the nomination has been decided. Just today, TChris and I posted these:

Considering we are practicing lawyers with day jobs, and it's been 24 hours since the nomination has been decided, that's a fairly prodigious amount of writing. [More...]

We write a lot here in a day -- usually 20 posts or more. You either need to scroll down the front page or put TL in your RSS feeder so you can see the headlines of the last ten or so stories without having to open the site. You can just click on those you are interested in.

I also find it somewhat amusing that after 6 years there are still so few comments on the crime posts, yet when they slow down, as they did during the nomination race, I get a slew of e-mails from irate lawyers who tell me how disappointed they are in TalkLeft.

Judging by the comments and the rise in our traffic over the last six months, the coverage of the primaries is what readers want. Nonetheless, silent lawyer lurkers can rest assured, TChris and I are back on crime duty.

< News Reports: Obama And Clinton Meeting | Late Night: Wait For Me >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Today's Crime Postings | 83 comments (83 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I know nothing about criminal law (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 09:57:40 PM EST

Law and Order fans would write better stuff about it than me.

That's why I said (5.00 / 2) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:00:02 PM EST

TChris and I are back on crime duty.

You are all politics and we're glad of it.


: Phew! (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:01:19 PM EST

You mean to say (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:00:51 PM EST

that you're not a Law and Order fan? ;-)


It's like this BTD (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:07:41 PM EST

In the Criminal Justice System the people are represented by two separate, yet equally important groups. The police who investigate crime and the District Attorneys who prosecute the offenders.

There, that's all you need to know.

Oh yeah - they have stories.


and on law and order (5.00 / 2) (#20)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:15:14 PM EST

the third group, those who defend the rights of those accused of crime, are the dirty, f'g hippies.

Years ago I had a mini-debate here with Dick Wolf. He got mad because I wrote a post criticizing an interview he did in which he said prosecutors are doing G'd's work. I pointed out that public defenders and those who defend death penalty cases are doing G-d's work too. He took great umbrage in the comments section, first because I mispelled his name, and then with my criticism. (The comments are no longer there -- you'll have to take my word for it -- every few years I purge the comments from older years to save bandwidth.)


I would have liked that debate (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:21:19 PM EST

Yes, the defense lawyers do get the shaft on that show. The most principled ones always get screwed by their clients in a little morality play.


You should repost that (none / 0) (#25)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:19:52 PM EST

Sounds fascinating.


Ooops (none / 0) (#28)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:21:30 PM EST

No longer there.

sounds great though.

Invite him back.


Much like Obama's 2002 speech, (5.00 / 3) (#44)
by oculus on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:36:14 PM EST

J could recreate from memory.


: You made me choke on a Frito. (none / 0) (#50)
by Teresa on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:42:00 PM EST

: and do a film simulation of it as Obama did his (none / 0) (#73)
by andrys on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:03:31 AM EST

The post is (none / 0) (#43)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:36:11 PM EST

here, it's just all the comments that are gone.


Ha! Tossed your commenters (5.00 / 4) (#61)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:05:10 PM EST

under the TL bus, I see. So that means we'll all end up there someday.

Bandwidth uber alles. Sniff.


: it will be years from now (none / 0) (#66)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:18:41 PM EST

Only 2002-2004 comments are gone for now. The next batch to go will be 2005-2006, but that won't be for a while. The 2008 comments will be up for at least another three years. By then, you'll probably be happy if I take them down.

JUST the comments? (none / 0) (#74)
by andrys on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:08:54 AM EST

Is that just? :-)

- commenter

PS I would love to read that thread someday if you have it on backup!


That's a very good story (none / 0) (#26)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:20:27 PM EST

But how do you know it was really Dick Wolf? ::commercial::


Because I know him (5.00 / 2) (#38)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:34:46 PM EST

we used to do Rivera Live shows together and not that long before I wrote that post I had run into him at dinner in NY. He was telling me about a new documentary series he was producing about cops or prosecutors (I forget which now) and actual trials and I was telling him about a pilot I had done for TNT on wrongful convictions. He asked me how many episodes we had filmed and I said "one." I asked him how many he had done and he said something like "247." The show I did never progressed past the one pilot. Like I said, guilt sells, innocence doesn't.

But, I'm very proud that in the two cases we "reinvestigated" for the pilot I did, both defendants ultimately got freed -- after serving years in jail, of course, for crimes they didn't commit.

Anyway, it was Dick Wolf.


: Cool (none / 0) (#45)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:36:56 PM EST

I'd love to see the video of the show you did.

: Definitely g-d's work there (none / 0) (#75)
by andrys on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:11:11 AM EST

That show drives me nuts (none / 0) (#67)
by fuzzyone on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:23:51 PM EST

There always seems to be a scene where the suspect, with his defense attorney, negotiates with the DA and then spills the beans. I've been a criminal defense attorney for almost 15 years, still waiting to see that one. It will certainly never happen on my watch.


I remember that post well (none / 0) (#70)
by s5 on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:55:31 PM EST

It actually shaped my current view of criminal defense as an important public service, rather than thinking of them as the people you hire if you get in trouble.


You forgot the (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:25:54 PM EST

chuh-CHING.

Buh-duh, duh-duh duh-duh, DUH-duh. . . .


Heh (none / 0) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:12:20 PM EST

I stopped watching once Ben Stone left.


: I basically stopped (none / 0) (#19)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:14:57 PM EST

when reruns went off A&E, which I think was right around when Carey Lowell left. I didn't like the Texan they replaced her with.
And now I can't look at Sam Waterston without thinking of Unity 08. Ugh.

: I stopped when I realized (none / 0) (#24)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:17:39 PM EST

I always fell asleep before the end and never saw if the defendant got convicted or not. So it wasn't worth the 40 minute time investment.

Dun dun! (none / 0) (#16)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:13:17 PM EST

: My little nephew loved that opening music (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:15:23 PM EST

as a baby. We are pretty sure he is going to end up on some end of the criminal justice system.

We read them even if we don't comment much (5.00 / 7) (#7)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:03:24 PM EST

I don't have much to add to those discussions beyond "that's so wrong" or "that's great". That does not indicate lack of interest however.

I found you for the Hillary safe harbor, I'll stick around for the interesting legal discussions.

I always feel bad (5.00 / 4) (#9)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:07:08 PM EST

because I have nothing to say about those posts. But I rationalize that I'm not using up bandwidth by commenting.


: Me too (5.00 / 3) (#13)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:11:21 PM EST

I feel like if Jeralyn took the time to write a good post about something important, I should have something to say besides 'Wow'.
but yes, I will feel good about not blogclogging those threads.

HIllary brought me here also. (none / 0) (#42)
by befuddledvoter on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:36:10 PM EST

As it turns out, I am a criminal defense attorney and never knew of this site!! Great site and much appreciated. Thanks Jeralyn and BTD. You provided much respite during the most trying time of the campaign.


I'd comment on crime posts... (5.00 / 4) (#23)
by dianem on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:17:03 PM EST

...but in all honesty I'm a bit intimidated. I'm a biologist/computer analyst, and this place is packed with lawyers. In a few instances I feel safe providing an opinion, but mostly I just read. Occasionally I start a comment and then realize that I don't know what I'm talking about and delete it. I'm betting I'm not the only one.

You win that bet (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:24:50 PM EST

I do the same thing.


Don't delete it (5.00 / 2) (#46)
by befuddledvoter on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:37:24 PM EST

It is great for lawyers to hear what non-lawyers think. Kind of gives you a juror perspective.


Don't be shy.... (5.00 / 1) (#77)
by kdog on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:46:49 AM EST

I'm a college drop-out jack-of-all trades, and the criminal justice posts are my fav's.

I like to think I bring a "undesirable degenerate man of the street" angle to the discussion:)

All the non-lawyers should comment from their unique persepective...can't speak for others, but how people from all walks of life think interests me greatly. It's how we learn...

So glad to see TChris posting up a storm, and the hostess with the mostess focusing on the politics of crime again. Keep it up!!


I occasionally have to work with attorneys (none / 0) (#36)
by ChuckieTomato on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:32:30 PM EST

which is why I say, everything you've heard about them probably is true. No offense to the site owner/mods., and obviously present company excluded.

They're interesting, but to back and forth on them beyond just giving an opinion, you'd have to really know your legalese and technical jargon


Half of my siblings are lawyers (5.00 / 3) (#49)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:39:16 PM EST

and I come from a sizeable family.

Worse, they're all litigators.

Family reunions can be sheer h*ll for the timid. The sisters-in-law just leave. But the nieces and nephews, just kids, can find themselves having to speak for the defense. About just about anything.

And yeh, the contest seems to be who can come up with the most multisyllabic obscure Latin term.

Luckily, I'm so old that I took Latin. But that was so long ago, I have to cheat now. I love the Internet; I just look up some obscure Latin term that lawyers wouldn't know and save it to spring on them, claiming it was cited in some precedent-setting case.

That's how bad it is with lawyers in the family. I have to prep my brief for a family reunion.


I had to listen to a roommate fret (5.00 / 0) (#60)
by ChuckieTomato on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:05:04 PM EST

over the LSAT for a whole semester. I empathize.


Just try to actually TAKE the LSAT. . . (none / 0) (#62)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:06:21 PM EST

: Ha try taking an (ARE) (none / 0) (#64)
by ChuckieTomato on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:14:18 PM EST

then I'll here complaints.

Would it help if I complained (5.00 / 5) (#32)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:28:03 PM EST

that there's not enough about politics on this site?

: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:30:30 PM EST

Petition to request Howard Dean resignation (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by differnet on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:34:23 PM EST

Hey, there is an active petition that is requesting that Howard Dean resign from the DNC chair. If you want to sign, please google the words "petition howard dean resign" and the petition should be the first link.

I'd sign (5.00 / 2) (#51)
by Emma on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:42:29 PM EST

a petition to permanently banish Donna Brazile from the Democratic Party. Where's that petition?


: Different petition (none / 0) (#69)
by standingup on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:48:36 PM EST

One up for her to be the Ambassador to the North Pole.

TL (5.00 / 2) (#40)
by txpolitico67 on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:35:43 PM EST

is where I came to hang out during the Valerie Plame situation. In fact, that's when I first started blogging. The Plame case was fascinating on so many levels. Being a law school drop-out (I am getting the itch to go back), I find the aspects of a juicy case to be fascinating, but the whole red tape of it all BORING. Contradiction in terms? ;)

Welcome back (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:35:50 PM EST

Wow, Jim (5.00 / 5) (#53)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:43:05 PM EST

you're back too?

To our newer readers, JimakaPPJ is our longest standing ultra conservative who makes the liberal commenters here crazy when we write about the war and a variety of other topics. He's too smart to violate the comment rules (mostly) -- and he is always the first to contribute when I throw up a donation request -- so he gets a little extra leeway.

If you think BTD and commenters go at it, you should see jimakaPPJ and Squeaky and a few others.


Ah yes.... (5.00 / 2) (#78)
by kdog on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:55:08 AM EST

the one, the only, the infamous PPJ:)


Ultra Conservative??? (1.00 / 0) (#76)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 08:16:24 AM EST

Please Jeralyn...... You know I am a social liberal! What conservative would post in favor of gay marriage, women and minority rights, drug law rationalization, national health care among other items.

But I am strong supporter of the military and believe the war on terror is really WWIV and that we have no choice but to finish a war they started.

Anyway, I'm glad to see the subject matter veer back towards social and war issues instead of politics 24/7..

BTW - Did you know we missed our fifth anniversary a couple months back? Many marriages don't last that long!

;-)


I agree with PPJ here. (1.00 / 0) (#79)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 12:28:03 PM EST

He's only "ultra conservative" when measured against TL which, to be sure, is way, way, WAY beyond-the-edge liberal.

For those who've only been here for the election, wait until the next abortion thread comes up.

J's position is that a baby is not a person until and unless it is 100% completely born. iow, she supports the right to abort a baby up to - and including - it's actual birth.

Still got one leg in your mom's birth canal? Sorry, you have no more rights than a hangnail.

She believes in open borders. Anyone, at any time, for anything, may come to the US and once here has every and all rights of a citizen. No other county, of course, must do that, only the US.

I could go on...

All that said, these positions are the result of her unquestionable love of humanity. What makes TL so great is that others with the same love of humanity, but who come to different positions, can express them here.


ah yes..... The Demos won (1.00 / 0) (#81)
by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 08:47:53 PM EST

And in 2/2007 oil was $55.00 a barrel and unemployment around 4.5%.

15 short months later oil is $136. and unemployment 5.5% and rising.

Way to go Demos! You have shown us you can screw anything up!

Don't you wish I had been right????

hehehehe


heh (none / 0) (#83)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:44:21 PM EST

Oil was $22.00 a barrel when Bush came in. 72 months later it was $55.00. That is a $33.00 increase or less than 50 cents a month.

From the $55.00 a barrel when the Demos took over Congress in 2/07 oil has increased to around $137.00 a barrel in 15 months, a rise of $82.00. That is about $5.80 a month increase.

What is that? a 1000% increase??

And that was with California Pelosi and Surrender Harry promising to lower the price of oil.

God knows what it would be if they hadn't have promised....

And about three weeks ago Surrender Harry again blocked a Repub bill to start drilling in the US, a move that would immediately bring relief.

DA, tell me why the Left wants to bankrupt the country, make old people have to decide between paying their utility bills and their medicine while enriching OPEC???


You can tell when DA (none / 0) (#85)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 11:36:33 PM EST

is in trouble, he writes a lot and tries to change the subject.

Won't work, DA.

Here is what happened.

Prior to the Demos taking over, OPEC was slowly increasing prices but was afraid that if they became too greedy the American people would scream and the Repubs would be able to force the Demos to give in and let drilling start in the US.

After the Demos lied their way to power through promises of lower oil prices, OPEC knew they could do what ever they wanted and the Demos would do nothing. OPEC was right, and you can see the result.

As I said. Gasoline was about $2.25 in 2/2007. It is now over $4.00 after only 15 short months of Demo control.

How does it feel to be a member of a party that is letting OPEC bankrupt the country, starve our elderly and have everyone uncertain on how they will be able to buy food and pay their energy bills.

Congrats, DA. You and the Demos deserve each other.


: hehe (none / 0) (#87)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 05:10:50 PM EST

Thanks for making my point.

But there wasn't any increased demand from India, Russia, China, etc
And if the Demos had not blocked drilling in the US the effects of this demand would have been minimal as OPEC would not have had the whip hand they knew they had when the Demos took over.
yadda yadda DA. You can run but you can't hide.
The energy policies of the Demos have caused untold damage to the country and I would bring them to the dock of public opinion. Their actions have been shameful beyond belief.
How many senior citizens this winter will have to choose between heat and drugs needed to keep them alive? How many children will go to bed hungry because their parents have lost their jobs in this downturn induced by OPEC being set free to rape the country by the Demos?
And all done so that the Demos could placate their base of Environmental Wackos of the Left.
What great people you hang out with, DA. Loverly. Just loverly.

Jeralyn, I know you from the (5.00 / 1) (#52)
by zfran on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:43:03 PM EST

O.J. days and subsequent cases on MSNBC. I always was very taken with your delivery and willingness to fight your opposition on those shows. So I know, now, where to come to get legal info on ongoing cases. I, too, don't have much to say on these cases, but I like reading them.

Great to know (5.00 / 0) (#55)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:53:37 PM EST

that people read the crime posts. It really is my primary interest and while I will keep writing about the election as well, it means a lot to know they are read, even if they don't generate comments.

I read them but try to restrain myself (none / 0) (#56)
by oculus on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:55:06 PM EST

from commenting. Prosecutorial bias of something.


: I think of you and Jeralyn as the odd couple. (5.00 / 0) (#59)
by Teresa on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:02:06 PM EST

I'd wager (none / 0) (#65)
by Asa Dotzler on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:16:53 PM EST

I'd wager that 90+% of your pre-2008 readership reads and prefers the crime posts.


: hear hear (none / 0) (#72)
by progrocks on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 12:37:05 AM EST

today was the best day here in months

Apropos of I'm not sure what, but (5.00 / 3) (#63)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:10:11 PM EST

we seem to have turned two threads in a row into open threads.

Power to the people! The commenters are revolting!

<yes, I know that sentence has a double meaning :-)>

I think it means (5.00 / 0) (#68)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 11:45:06 PM EST

we're all exhausted and drained. I know I am.


: Yes, definitely. I need time (none / 0) (#71)
by Cream City on Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 12:06:49 AM EST

in my garden, but it has been storming nonstop for two days, as if the heavens were thundering their disapproval of human events. At least we haven't lost electricity, so I haven't lost TalkLeft, too.:-)
But a lot of loss with which to deal these days. Take care of yourself, as you have taken care of us -- and TL Kid, embarking on his career. Turning points abound around us, and exhausting, that can be.

Good News (none / 0) (#1)
by squeaky on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 09:56:47 PM EST

You guys have a great RSS feed (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:01:29 PM EST

It's fast and gives you the whole text, which is very useful for emailing a posting--and I do that often.

Are you sure the emails (none / 0) (#8)
by ChuckieTomato on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:04:56 PM EST

weren't from Obama supporters?

Actually (none / 0) (#12)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:08:07 PM EST

I'd bet they are from lawyers who support Obama. Criminal defense lawyers are famous for their inability to play well with others. I'm no exception.


Civil litigators (5.00 / 4) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:11:44 PM EST

on the other hand, are very civil.

Look at me . . .


OMG (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:13:29 PM EST

What? (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:14:46 PM EST

He means (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:15:32 PM EST

"Don't you ever be civil!"


You are civil (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by ruffian on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:27:57 PM EST

and when you're not you have the decency to ban yourself from your own site. ;-)


Oh I am not (5.00 / 4) (#34)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:31:36 PM EST

Not at all.

And my briefs are pretty harsh too.

This will shock you I know, but I sometimes take a condescending tone.


Oh Really?? (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:37:59 PM EST

Never noticed.

When you argue in court, I assume you (5.00 / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:38:58 PM EST

frequently say "with all due respect...."


I bet he says (5.00 / 2) (#57)
by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:55:45 PM EST

"Briefly, Your Honor" and then talks for an hour. <smile>


: Followed by a terse: can you not read? (none / 0) (#58)
by oculus on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:56:51 PM EST

Yeh, but it's not like leaving the room (5.00 / 3) (#35)
by Cream City on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:32:23 PM EST

because he can see what we said about him while he was gone. Sorta like this nun I had who had psychic powers, we were sure of it. She always came back from the school office and immediately collared the transgressors who had sinned.

Took us years to figure out that the classroom intercom could be two-way, so teachers could hear us from the office, the teachers lounge. . . .

Also took us years to figure out that the nun wasn't really in the office. She was in the lounge, having a smoke. Heck, having to face a roomful of sixty-plus grade-school-aged kids (it was the baby boom, big classes), I'm surprised she wasn't smoking crack.


: hehehehe (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by andgarden on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:35:00 PM EST

Your mom wants you to stop practicing (none / 0) (#10)
by jerry on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:07:38 PM EST

Isn't it about time you took your work seriously?

I always read these posts, too, Jeralyn. (none / 0) (#54)
by Teresa on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 10:49:57 PM EST

My older brother was an attorney in a smallish town. He did a bit of everything but he did more criminal defense cases than others. He only had one death penalty case before he passed away (at 42) and I really believe that case and one really big civil case he worked on at the same time brought on the heart attack that he died from.

The stress was terrible in the death penalty case. The guy was caught just after he murdered someone and my brother was sure he'd get the death penalty. He obsessed over that constantly. I don't know how you all deal with that. He ended up getting life rather than death and his family was so grateful. When you know the circumstances (drugs) and the people involved, I don't see how anyone on a jury could decide to put someone to death.