Can there be murder without malice aforethought?

The PE reports on a case where the DA accuses a reckless driver of first degree murder. The DA contends the drivers intended on sideswiping another vehicle which ended up killing a third party and that this is murder. Obviously there is no malice aforethought and one wonders how this can be first degree murder.

Inland empire's unemployment rate soars

Unemployment in the area is now 9.5%. See here for the report.

Give credit where credit is due

The PE reports that the DA plans on pursuing the killer of Anthony Martinez and will seek his extradition. As many will remember, Anthony was the 10 years old boy snatched from his home by an evil man. His murderer's fingerprints matched one recovered at the scene and it appears clear that the suspect is likely guilty.

The author of the story does a hatchet job on the DA by making it seem as if the extradition is pointless. Apparently the killer was already convicted of murder and sentenced to death for another murder and kidnapping in federal court. Anthony, his mother, the citizens of Beaumont and the county deserve justice even if it will spend some tax dollars.

If you fail at the ballot box, sue

The PE reports here that

"Even before the last votes were counted Wednesday on a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, gay-rights groups and a married lesbian couple were turning to the courts to overturn the measure. "

As readers know, the people in 2000 approved another proposition which created a law that marriage shall only be between a man and woman. When the state Legislature created civil unions with all the same rights and privileges as marriage, the state supreme court found that this violated gay citizen's rights of equal protection. The people as is there right then sought to amend the state constitution to re-implement the law. It passed. The plaintiffs in the above action will surely once again try to get from the courts what they can't get from the people.

Local Riverside resident Jill Johnson-Young is quoted:

"Jill Johnson-Young, who in September married her partner of 21 years, Linda Johnson-Young, at a Riverside church, said she was angry that same-sex marriage opponents were trying to void her marriage."

"It makes me sick," she said. "We wish our marriage and family can be left alone. My marriage has never affected them, and for them to try to take this away from me and force Jerry Brown to spend tax money on this -- the level of hatred they have is unbelievable."

It can't possibly be that supporters of Prop 8 really believe in their hearts that society has an interest in seeing that children are raised by a husband and wife. No, it has to be hatred.

This article also has another quote from Karthick Ramakrishnan, an assistant professor of political science at UC Riverside who is also sited previously on this weblog.

The good professor is quoted:

"many people who voted for Obama and Prop. 8 were social conservatives who typically vote Republican but voted Democratic this time because economic concerns trumped beliefs on social issues."

This doesn't quite square with the demographics of the state or the failure of proposition 4. Prop 4 would have required parental notification for abortions. A similar proposition was also defeated several years back. It received approximately 46% of the vote. This proposition was widely supported by social conservatives. There can't be many more social conservatives than that. So how does Professor Ramakrishnan account for the additional 6 percent who voted for proposition 8? Could it have been that a majority of people have closely held views that that society has an interest in seeing that children are raised by a husband and wife.

The author of this article does what many attorneys do in trials: Get an expert to state the point they want made. Whereas attorneys are advocates and need to make their point, why is a journalist trying to make a point? Just report the news!

Rod Pacheco in the news

The PE reports here that

Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco's new $126.5 million headquarters will supply more space per employee than many prestigious private law firms provide, several outside brokers and planners said.

About 600 district attorney employees are set to move into the 260,000-square-foot building in downtown Riverside when it's completed in about 20 months. That averages out to more than 430 square feet per employee, well above the average for private legal firms, four office brokers and space planners said. They cited averages ranging from 200 to 320 square feet per employee.

So apparently, these well meaning government bureaucrats will enjoy amenities better (25-50% more space) than an average law firm. That's your tax dollars at work.

OLPH victimized by hate crime

The PE reports here that some unidentified individual used "Yes on Prop 8" signs to create a swastica and left it on the lawn of "Our Lady of Perpetual Help" catholic church. The perpetrator surely fancied himself a tolerant person.

Gay Murrieta residents feel isolated

The LATimes publishes an account of a lesbian couple who live in Temecula and Murrieta here. The Times laments:

Opposition to gay marriage, Republican domination and a strong evangelical Christian base have combined to make southwest Riverside County a bastion of social conservatism in a largely liberal state.

You can always count on the Times to find an expert to support their thesis:

Karthik Ramakrishnan, associate professor of political science at UC Riverside.

"In the Inland Empire in general, people are more involved in the church than in other parts of the state," said Ramakrishnan. "There is much less civic involvement. There is less of a nonprofit infrastructure and not as many other venues to get involved in."

There you have it. Murrieta and Temecula residents are less likely to be involved in civic matters and that's why this lesbian couple does not feel comfortable. You'd have to be an intellectual to believe that.

Man nearly gets thumb bitten off, kills attacker

The PE reports here that a dog nearly bit off a man's thumb. In defense, the man took a rock and severely injured the dog who was later destroyed. The dog's owner can't bear to live next to the man who killed her dog. She may want to review the strict liability section of the code and temper her allegations. She's going to be on the hook for his medical care. Strict liability is an aberration in the law which doesn't care about such things as negligence. If you or in this case do the offense, your liable.