Sunday, October 5, 2008
13 years late the Juice gets squeezed
$10m award against CalTrans
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Report on the state of the courts
"Prosecutors stand by their filing policy, and say judges are to blame for refusing to open non-traditional courts such as family law and probate courts for criminal cases facing constitutional speedy trial dismissals."
Was this in the report? Was this journalistic liberty or an actual quote from the report? If it's the latter, what total hubris. My BP is rising along with all civil litigants who can't get their day in court because of the DA's outrageous position.
Imagine you're a small contractor with a very large contract with a giant general contractor. You've got 10 people on your payroll working on a $250,000 contract. The way these contracts work, the sub contractor has to advance costs for payroll, including payroll taxes and worker's compensation in addition to maintaining a surety bond and insurance. If the subcontractor doesn't pay these, he is in deep you know what. The state is merciless with employers who don't keep current with these. Well suppose the general contractor screws up and determines that it is going to pass the buck to the subcontractor. What is the contractor do? He's between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The courts are impacted and he can't get a trial, so what? bankruptcy? Maybe the state will give him a break?
Please stop laughing.
Move along there's nothing to see.
You knew it was gonna happen.
In 1998 California's voters said emphatically that marriage shall only be between a man and a woman. Ten years later our robed masters in the California Supreme Court determined that the voters violated the state's constitution.
During this time period, the state Legislature decided that same sex couples should have the same rights as married couples and provided a Domestic Partnership equivalent. Now, some unmarried couples of different sexes want the same rights of domestic partnerships but don't want to get married. These couples say its discrimination.
Gov. Schwarzeneggar vetoes home lending bills
Mateo's saga comes to an end
Second degree murder is defined as murder which is not first degree. See Penal Code section 189 which says:
The key words being all other kinds of murders are of the second degree. As such, under Penal Code 187 "malice aforethought" is necessary. I can see where the jury could find her delay malicious, but I just don't know whether the DA could really prove and the jury could find malice aforethought.All murder which is perpetrated by means of a destructive
device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of
ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, poison,
lying in wait, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate,
and premeditated killing, or which is committed in the perpetration
of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery,
burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable
under Section 206, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, or any murder which is
perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle,
intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the
intent to inflict death, is murder of the first degree. All other
kinds of murders are of the second degree.
As used in this section, "destructive device" means any
destructive device as defined in Section 12301, and "explosive" means
any explosive as defined in Section 12000 of the Health and Safety
Code.
As used in this section, "weapon of mass destruction" means any
item defined in Section 11417.
To prove the killing was "deliberate and premeditated," it shall
not be necessary to prove the defendant maturely and meaningfully
reflected upon the gravity of his or her act.
Daniel Heath given 127 years prison time for fraud
Capping proceedings filled with emotional and sometimes angry testimony, a judge Friday ordered the key defendant in a $190 million investment fraud scheme that bilked nearly 1,600 victims to serve 127 years in state prison.
Prison sentencing hearings are some of the most interesting court proceedings. The law allows victims a chance to address the guilty as well as to allow the guilty to have some words by him or his friends/family.
One item that was interesting about this article was DA Michael Silverman's comment:
"For someone who shows no remorse for what he has done, the only right thing to do is to keep him away from society for as long as possible."
Yet the journalist stated that Heath was choking back tears. Sounds like remorse.