Engorgeous George

An unexpected name for the President of Mexico. Seems well qualified, faar more qualified than either of the U.S.'s leading two candidates. I wish her well.

Just not a fan of tats. Fine with me that others are.

Flat ass and trampy tats. She's a hard pass for me, not that she would care.

Take It Where You Find It (Remastered)

If he was going to make the donation, yes. He could have simply not made the donation. I get the doubt as the amount is next to meaningless in the scheme of things but he did, affirmatively, allow the question of his bias to rise by his donation. Most Judges I know are fanatical about not doing so, and for the reasons we have seen here. I am comfortable believing that Judges with far stronger biases conceal them by not documenting their positions. Judge Merchan is undoubtably not the most biased Judge sitting in Amderica's courtrooms. I simply take the position that in this matter he was wrong. I am going to leave this discussion for now as it is clear to me that I am not changing any minds. This is certainly not the first time for that nor will it be the last.

They did not have no problem with it, they cautioned him not to repeat the behavior. He also did not, to my understanding, ask for permission before doing so, he asked for forgiveness and understanding after doing so. He asked whether that trespass against the clear spirit of the Code was sufficient to warrant recusal. The Ethics Board did not think so, but they certainly did not endorse the behavior.

It matters as it runs contrary to the Code of Judicial Ethics. It matters in that the Judge created an issue where there need not have been an issue. The Judge allowed questioning of his bias and thus of the fairness of the proceeding where there need not have been any. The Judge created a distraction calling the proceeding into question for many. Now I grant that the many would have looked for other matters to hang their hats on, but a good Judge would not have supplied ammo to shoot holes in his proceeding. Some day I expect the Judge to admit as much. Some day I expect those arguing otherwise here to admit as much. Not today though. Today passions still run deep. When the inevitable appeal happens I don't necessarily believe any one error will prove fatal to the verdict, though one may. I believe the ruling, if it overturns the trial will be based upon an accumulation of errors. Right now, from the limited amount I know about this matter, and it is limited, I place the odds of the verdict being overturned at around 75%. I know right wing pundants have the odds at nearly 100% but I know that great deference is given the trial Judge and jury verdicts.

I feel dirty defending Trump's rights, but I would feel diminished if I did less as this is a question of how the system ought to function.

My judicial philosophy in criminal matters is that the ties and the close calls should all go to the defendant and the defense. That is how one insures a fair trial, that the accused gets the presumption of innocence. This is especially important in capital cases but it flows through my view of how the justice system ought to work. Many liberals or progressives here would absolutely agree were we discussing a conviction in a capital case involving an even mildly sympathetic defendant. They may want to examine why they don't give Trump the same courtesy and consideration they might give a rapist murder. There is a clear double standard here by many. I get it, I find Trump an abhorant, abominable narcisist of subminimal morals and questionable intelligence. I still believe that even the least among us deserves the full consideration and tolerance of the justice system, no matter how offensive they may be.

I was just hoping there would have been a judge who would have satisfied me, like the vast majority of judges I appeared before. I agree that Trump is his own worst enemy which is saying something given the number of enemies he has righteously earned.

I think his Mom owes you.

https://sentinelcolorado.com/metro/aurora-officer-and-suspect-fatally-shot-during-may-23-arrest-identified/

Wow the years have passed. Bennet actually had to put his key into the lock on his car door to open it.

That reminds me, I have to pick up some Hebrew Nationals, some buns and some condiments for later on.

I am aware of what a caution means in this context.

My take on the Judge's contributions is not to try to create the impresion I find it a heinous violation of Judicial ethics as i do not. My take is that I would prefer, in an historic and precedent setting trial that there not be these collateral issues. The first time a past president and current front running candidate of a major party is put on trial for felonies I would prefer the jury be unquestionably unbiased, the same for the judge, and that the charges be clear and not based on a novel legal theory. Of course the law is never so pristine in practice, never, but that would have been my preference and Judge Merchan could have gone a long way in removing these collateral issues. I believe a model jurist would have.

The only clear line uis at don't do it at all. Otherwise we now have to make value (literally) judgments. I hzave not looked to see whether there was a ruling by the Ethics Board. If there is a written ruling i bet they condemned giving any amount but found this amount low enough that they were not going to censure the past act but they would if it were repeated. I bet even without a law degree you can find the ruling of the ethics board if you choose to look. There is nothing terribly unique about a law degree. Law school is nothing more than a three year reading comprehenson test. My brother told me so. Dismissed with a caution. Also looks like it was $15 not $20, with an additional $35 going to another democratic cause. The actaul written opinion is not released unless it comes with a censure rather than a caution.

The only clear line uis at don't do it at all. Otherwise we now have to make value (literally) judgments. I hzave not looked to see whether there was a ruling by the Ethics Board. If there is a written ruling i bet they condemned giving any amount but found this amount low enough that they were not going to censure the past act but they would if it were repeated. I bet even without a law degree you can find the ruling of the ethics board if you choose to look. There is nothing terribly unique about a law degree. Law school is nothing more than a three year reading comprehenson test. My brother told me so.

The Supremes were not subject to a Code of Ethics but had they been i might guess such gifts would have been highly frowned upon.

And failing, obviously.

In fully agree. That said i don't think police departments ought to be hiring Diecks. Seems a recipe for trouble.

Model Code of Judicial Conduct (americanbar.org) I would suggest any campaign contribution is imprudent for a sitting judge. That his contribution was 4 years ago seems irrelevant as presidential campaigns are every four years so his donation was in the last campaign. If this is brought up in the apeal it will nmot, in my estimation, be sufficient to overturn the verdict. It will result in a mild admonition from the appellate court. It may, however, begin to add color to Judge Merchan's other rulings, color those rulings do not need. I do note that the model code is not binding on jurists. CJC.pdf (nysba.org) (The New York Code which is based on the model code but is fleshed out a bit with definitions and commentary). I like my judges to be as pure appearing as Caesar's wife precisely so we don't devolve to these types of arguments. I say as pure appearing as i understand Caesar's wife was a saucy tramp in reality while officially maintaining cecorum.

I would suggest that every defense attorney and every public defender learned to shout "Batson!" every time they orgasmed and every time any person of color was struck from a jury beginning in 1986. In my experience the courts were stringent in enforcing Batson challenges. They seemed to err on the side of caution.

I find he gets carried away in his hyperbole. When that happens I think his points are diminished. I do not, however find his points negated, I simply find thier impact diminished, for me. I mostly stay out of it with he and others in this thread. I find the back and forth tedious. That said when arguments or hyperbole involves misrepresentaion of the law, whether substantive or procedurally, I comment. I probably should not as folks on a rant or a roll (the differenece is in the ear of the beholder) rarely take correction as a learning opportunity. They tend to take it as opposition even when it is not meant to be.

I believe the author may have been looking for the term "remorse and contrition" I have difficulty taking the article seriously as written. I also doubt the premise of the article without lookng into it. The verdict came down late in the day. I imagine the probation office was closing. I find it difficult to believe Trump was suppose to report there that evening, but I suppose anything is possible even if I find it unlikely.