Page 1 of 19
Posted on October 10 at 7:53 p.m.
"The prosecutor has far more control over life, liberty and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated, and if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations …While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficial forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst." Justice Robert Jackson, prior to serving as chief U.S. Prosecutor at Nuremberg
On Prosecutor Faces State Bar Complaint
Posted on October 10 at 7:30 p.m.
NOBODY (certainly not a 3 year old) should be victimized, but just because Justin did right by you in NO WAY equates to him being a good and ethical prosecutor and it certainly does not atone for all the people he has Victimized and they are many IMO, So heed your own advice: easy! Your welcome
Posted on October 10 at 2:46 p.m.
Not saying the whole office is corrupt, or even the majority of the office.Are you suggesting that you randomly found an article online that is not visible on the front page of the online paper, and were so I sensed that you jumped into action and enrolled on the INDY with an anonymous screen name because JG couldn't possibly be anything bad? You know him so well after a single case, right?
Posted on October 10 at 2:08 a.m.
I'm implying that it looks like you were asked by Justin or possibly Hilary to make this post, or worse that the post was actually made by one of them or someone close to them. I'm also saying that even if you are legitimately a complaining witness in the case of People v. Jorge Serrano, who was happy with how Justin treated you, and even assuming Justin did nothing wrong in that case, and was the textbook example of a gentleman prosecutor, that does not undo his wrongful behavior in Santana, or Kathleen Jo Porter (watch this video http://www.keyt.com/news/mistaken-ide... or or any of the other wrong doings in literally dozens of other cases.
Posted on October 9 at 7:32 p.m.
User profile: ThankyouJoined: Oct. 9, 2014
Comments posted: 1 (view all)
Contact (log-in required)
seems not so legit, but even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while, so who knows?
Posted on October 2 at 9:08 p.m.
He claims widely acclaimed local defense attorney Robert Sanger did not competently represent him. How's that's going to play out?
On Accused Scammer Gets Cold Feet
Posted on September 15 at 6:27 p.m.
Placing my client's wishes before my own regarding is not a misgiving, Yeti. And Lawdy, it's 12 real live egg laying chickens, not a dozen eggs. We used to have a cranky old nasty rooster but we got tired of his squaking. His name was, well your namesake (just kidding about the name part)
On City Settles Excessive Force Cases for $170,000
Posted on September 14 at 5:48 p.m.
MJ:Actually, we have three rescue cats (one of which disappeared two weeks ago), three rescue dogs, (one, a Siberian husky which we had to put to sleep a few months ago at age 14 because of cancer) and twelve chickens several fish and a ball python. Not to mention two kids. Ponies? I don't play ponies, but aren't they down at Del Mar? Oh, if you followed me to Del Mar, my mom and Dad live there. Nice try.
And Yeti: I was really more referring to DeNunzio compared with the $30K that SS&D got Jerry Cox (the homeless vet) and the fact that while my co-counsel thought 30K was a good deal on Cotledge, I almost doubled it (thanks to the opportunity the City Council gave me when they rejected the first proposed settlement). If it were up to me, I would have rather both cases went to trial. That would be my way of showing really good lawyering. But in the end, it is all about what the client wants. That's my point.
Posted on September 13 at 10:03 p.m.
Not as modest as the $30,000 she had agreed to accept without my input, but I held my opinion private until after City Council rejected that settlement because it is not good lawyering to speak of things which you lack first hand knowledge (and Tom Beck, but not I, was the only one present when that first settlement was tentatively reached), nor is it a good practice to make a client feel bad about a decision made with another member of the team. Of course she pays her lawyers out of the gross. Did you think we were pro bono publico? Do you work for free Yeti? Maybe you would like to offer your services to Tony as a counselor for free since you are concerned about his drinking and decision making. I could arrange to discuss it with him for you.
Posted on September 13 at 7:18 p.m.
'Hockey Puck', 'can we talk?'