forums

Reilly Gibbons transferring

2jamaicanecane said:
Seriously how is this stupid *** thread still going on? game is in an hour and other threads about commmits aren't getting any love right now but this kid has everybodys attention? Wow
Click to expand...


Sadly, people, myself included, rather bash a kid who ditched us, than think about Golden and the team.
 
Advertisement
crimson_cane said:
TheMatador said:
The Franchise said:
If he wants to be a lawyer he's on his way. He already lied to and shafted two organizations that put their trust in him.
Click to expand...

As a lawyer, I won't criticize what you just said. I spent most of my career away from litigation. (Not all lawyers go to court). When I got involved in some litigation, I was shocked at the ethics, especially involving Justice Department lawyers. I've only been involved in civil litigation against the government, not criminal, but their mentality is the same. Win at all costs. The judges let them get away with it. It's not surprising--it seems most federal judges do have a pro-government bias. After all, they often are former DOJ attorneys. I've seen a lot of lying and deceit by DOJ attorneys. Unfortunately, most other people involved in the litigation system are afraid to complain to the disciplinary authorities or to the professional responsibility office of DOJ (staffed also by former Asst. U.S. Attorneys).

This has gotten off topic, but I don't have a very good opinion of many in my profession.
Click to expand...

As another lawyer and litigator, I totally agree. I've seen lawyers, judges, cops, and "experts" lie their *** off in court and sacrifice constitutional protections for "efficiency".
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by "efficiency," but in the case of judges they'll throw out a lot of cases that don't interest them on summary judgment, violating the rights of one of the litigants, just so they can move onto some other cases that interest them more. This is a particular problem in the federal district courts. They can't get away with this as easily with criminal cases because the right to a jury trial is pretty much sacrosanct and guaranteed. They will pull it in civil cases, especially in employment and discrimination cases because they can. The civil rights plaintiff is usually one with limited means and the judges have a built in scepticism about such cases. Such scepticism is sometimes very unjustified and misplaced.

I don't know what you mean about "efficiency" in the case of cops, but they will lie because they don't want to give Miranda warnings until after they question a suspect. They'll also lie about probable cause and how they came to find evidence.

Lawyers? Well heck, lawyers lie all the time.

I've wondered whether to turn in some opposing counsel who are AUSAs to Bar Counsel. It will bring down the wrath of the Gods if I start such stuff against the Justice Department but I'm not sure what they can do to me anyway, since I'm pretty much retired. They'll have to get me in a dark alley, i guess. The biggest problem is, I think sometimes state bar ethics officials are intimidated by the Justice Department. There's a new book out on prosecutorial misconduct. The foreward is written by Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit. He's quite a character himself, having had to undergo a Judicial Council proceeding for various things he did like putting softcore **** on his court computer, I think it was.

Interesting that you got into Harvard but not Penn. Luck of the draw, I guess. I guess from your handle, "Crimson," you might have gone to HLS. I only applied to one of the law schools on that list, because I was older, working and wanted to go to a law school with an evening division. There's only one school on that list with one.
 
Good thing this kid is a big guy. He is going to take a lot of verbal abuse for being such a woose.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top