24 November 2004

Around the Web

1) Todd Chatman discusses the law and facts behind the removal of the jurors in the Scott Peterson trial.

2) And Peterson's attempt to get the sentencing phase heard by another jury has been turned back.

3) "I was then further surprised, when I read out the verdict in front of the court. The DA seemed like he was going to come over the rail at me, he was so mad! I would have thought this was a crapshoot at best on his part." Read the rest here.

4) Respecting the right not to be seized.

5) Sadly, I doubt many Defense attorneys are shocked that prosecutors will run NCIC records to get rid of jurors they don't like.

6) DNA dandruff.

7) Is there federal jurisdiction when a legal intrastate act effects illegal interstate commerce?

8) If you advertise nationally that you don't pay taxes you may have your tires flattened by the feds. Lv OK@VC.

9) Craig, Scalia, & Crawford.

10) A little off point from Blonde Justice's vent: I must admit that I have had 2 clients admit to me that they got arrested to spend the winter in jail. I have had others where I suspected it when they told me point blank they didn't want a bond hearing.

11) The lesson here? Never, never, ever talk to anyone involved in federal law enforcement about anything. Oh, and don't taint your witness by sleeping with her.

12) Someone out there agrees with my opinion of Wordperfect v. Word.

3 comments:

David Wagner said...

Thanks for the link! Think people can tell I get hot under the collar about Confrontation? :)

Ken Lammers said...

Glad to see someone else disturbed by Craig.

The last case I had wherein the government invoked Craig the government attorney, attorney for the father, attorney for the mother, and girl were in the room at the end of the hall. The parents and judge were in the hearing room. The really disturbing part was that the "counselor", whom we felt was encouraging some pretty outrageous lies, was in the room (over objection) encouraging the girl as she told her story. The case was so weak that the government lost anyway. Still, I grit my teeth whenever I think of the girl looking at the counselor for encouragement every time she said something that wasn't true.

John Jenkins said...

It's standard practice for the DA's here to do NCIC checks of every juror, as I understand it. Next time one of the PD's goes to trial, I am going to try to gin up a motion of some sort to require them to either turn over the NCIC checks (a la discovery) or not to use them during voir dire. Mainly it's an exercise in annoying the DA, but that's a joy in itself.