#the point of a defense attorney is not that they automatically believe their client is innocent
Text
I think the ethos of Ace Attorney fascinates me so much because Phoenix Wright is just a bad lawyer. And how that comes through in farewell my turnabout when he has to defend Engarde.
#the point of a defense attorney is not that they automatically believe their client is innocent#and that whole idea is why defense attorneys get a bad rep when they defend people who are obviously guilty#(which in and of itself is a problematic notion)#(but for the sake of brevity let’s use the term obviously guilty)#Pheonix who up until then has only defended clients whose innocence he could verify / trust#suddenly has to defend someone who while not committing the actual crime#is its mastermind#how does that square with his 4th grade understanding of justice#vs Edgeworth and his year long sabbatical where he comes to understand that justice is the pursuit of truth#and not just guilty or not guilty#is a person any less worthy of a defense attorney because they’re guilty?#is it ok to through someone to. the instability of the justice system alone simply because they are guilty#do guilty people not have rights ?#those are the sorts of questions that these games have been getting me to think about#ace attorney
26 notes
·
View notes
Note
Narumitsu in justice for all really confuses the sh*t of me. First of all did Phoenix really think Edgeworth was dead because when Edgeworth came back you would think he would be more shocked to see a dead person and happy to see he’s alive. Or is it that he wasn’t sure if he was alive or not. All i know is that Phoenix was angry at him because he thought he was gone because of his perfect win record.
huh interesting output.
personally, i like to think Phoenix thought Edgeworth was dead. (although the game didn’t directly address he thought Edgeworth’s literally dead or just dead figuratively, like stopped being a lawyer and ran away or smth since i’m sure Phoenix didn’t attend any burial, i guess this is up to our own interpretation but most ppl seem to see it as Edgeworth faking his death so-). but then Edgeworth showed up again out of thin air, suddenly offering to help.
i think Phoenix was angry because :
a. Edgeworth is apparently still alive, Phoenix immediately realized and made assumptions that Edgeworth faked his death to run away due to how stand-offish he was back in AA1 being the “demon prosecutor” he was, Phoenix automatically assumed Edgeworth ran away because he lost his dignity from losing to him. thus forming this bias that “prosecutors are bad people who only cares about winning”, because even though Phoenix devoted his life to him, became an attorney because of him, and even opened his eyes to the truth, Edgeworth still ran away by faking his death. either that or Edgeworth is just that emotionally distant, he thought everyone knows he’s talking about how his “demon prosecutor” self died and not him, figuratively speaking, and accidentally made a suicide note.
b. ever since Edgeworth was presumed “dead”, Phoenix’s seen to feel betrayed, grief and disappointed, maybe even guilt? because he thought he’s the one who pushed Edgeworth to the... edge? //IM SORRY-. he felt betrayed because he thought Edgeworth has changed after the events in RftA (or Turnabout Goodbyes pre-development of AJ) and he get to see him be like his old self again, his best friend who used to protect the innocent and inspired him, but he was met with disappointment when he saw the note that Edgeworth was gone, because he thought its because Edgeworth, a prosecutor, couldn’t handle loses that much he “chose death”. (which was not the case, Edgeworth was just trying to find himself again.)
c. Franziska came in and put even more emotional baggage on Phoenix, was in denial and blaming him for her brother’s “death”. not only that she sorta fed into Phoenix’s bias of how prosecutors only cares about self-ego and winning, made Phoenix feel even more bitter at Edgeworth indirectly.
d. this inner-bitter feelings carried Phoenix throughout the game, and make him think that his clients are all innocent and somewhat shifted his views on the truth. he pulled a reverse-AA1 Edgeworth and only pursued his client’s assumed innocences. (that is until his friend’s life is on the line and he realized not all of his clients are innocent, he began to trust Edgeworth again after opening his eyes to the truth mid-trial during the last case.)
you know, when the person you thought you can trust, the person whose words stuck around to you for years, and the person who you built your life around for years and finally get to meet them again but not only they didn’t follow their own words, after you saved them they left a suicide note, then a year later just came back to you, you’d definitely won’t feel “happy” about it. its not like Edgeworth was missing or kidnapped, it was his decision to leave his office with “Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth chooses death” written on a piece of paper. i think Phoenix’s feeling of betrayal is normal and not out of left field. he was led to believe that Edgeworth’s gone because of his ego and reputation ruined and tried to cope (but failed)
and yet there he was, walked through the door of the police department as if nothing ever happened.
i like how the dev tried to make Phoenix and Edgeworth switch perspectives here. in AA1 it was Edgeworth who was blinded by the fact that his late father’s killer wasn’t brought to justice and thought all defense attorneys are horrible people for defending criminals, in AA2 it was Phoenix who was blinded by betrayal after years of work and thought all prosecutors are horrible people for accusing the innocent.
the narumitsu plays more on the angst here tbh, as it shows Phoenix antagonizing Franziska and indirectly Edgeworth himself. when he started to lose trust in him to the point of having existential crisis and broke down during a suspenseful trial where Maya was kidnapped.
but at the end of the day, Phoenix realized he’s been wrong about prosecutors, that being an attorney is more than just protecting his clients but perceiving the truth, just like when he was accused of stealing Edgeworth’s lunch money back in grade-school, and thanked Edgeworth for his help opening his eyes. which marks a new chapter for their character development and bond.
... uh oh i rambled again lol.
#AA2#narumitsu#wrightworth#i think AA2 is still about finding oneself#and what it means to be an attorney#the narumitsu here is that Edgeworth tried to make amends and help Phoenix out just like how Phoenix helped him out in AA1#qna
89 notes
·
View notes
Link
It’s become a punchline. On a famous episode of “30 Rock,” Liz Lemon fails to avoid jury service, even after dressing as Princess Leia and explaining that she shouldn’t have to serve on a jury given that she “is a hologram.” One defense attorney told the New York Post that his most memorable jury-dodger was an aspiring novelist who, in trying to get himself recused from a police brutality case, said that “he did not accept the idea of ‘causation’ for emotional damages,” said the attorney. “He explained, at some length, the nature of emotional life and its relationship to internal and external factors.” He was excused, and later the attorneys realized they had just met Jonathan Franzen....
The importance of juries is not academic. People accused of crimes feel it every step of the process. Even though most cases end in pleas, it is the threat of trial—the anticipation of what a jury may or may not decide—that anchors plea negotiations. Reliably critical juries, like those I encountered as a public defender in the Bronx, help hold prosecutors to their burden to prove every element of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. When I would sit down with prosecutors to negotiate, I would point out that jurors in the Bronx do not automatically believe every word police witnesses utter, so they will need to do more than put a cop on the stand to win their case. This anticipated juror scrutiny did as much as any skillful lawyering to get reasonable offers for my clients.
The best argument I have read against jury duty came from a man who served on a jury that ultimately sent a first-time offender with no history of violence to federal prison on drug charges. The man was sentenced to 40 years but died in prison less than a year later. The juror, Paul St. Louis, said that he had trusted the judge’s instruction not to consider the potential sentence when handing down a verdict. “That ‘civic duty’ I was so sure of? Today, I feel like a pawn used to send a man down a path that led to his unjustified death,” he wrote in a Washington Post opinion piece. “I thought the system would break down if we all tried to get out of jury duty. Now I know the system is already broken.”
At the time, he was not aware of the concept of jury nullification, when a jury believes someone is guilty but chooses to acquit because the potential punishment is too harsh, or because jurors are opposed to the law itself. “If I could go back in time,” he wrote, “I would nullify.”
This, then, is my answer to the next person who asks for one thing they can do to help combat mass incarceration. It isn’t sufficient, but it is crucial: serve, and nullify.
135 notes
·
View notes
Text
Under The Influence
Peter Stone one-shot (NSFW)
This is a writing exercise I did to try to write in present tense, because @mforpaul does that and I really like it. It’s also Smutty McSmutface, which @mforpaul also does really well, but I am responsible for my own smut. (I’m so ashamed.) It’s long AF, sorry about that, but did I mention smut?
Shout out to @peter-stone and @thomas1340 because Peter Stone.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter Stone can’t believe his Monday morning is going to start with a garden-variety drunk driving arrest. He thought he’d graduated from these ten years ago. But when the suspect owns a major international oil conglomerate, D.A. Jack McCoy doesn’t want the news showing pictures of a junior-level A.D.A. handling the case. So Peter finds himself trying to drink his tall, double-shot, caramel macchiato with extra foam and run at the same time, because he’s late.
Alyson Sanders’ heels were not made for walking the long, tiled halls of a police station. Truth be told, they weren’t made for walking at all. And Alyson has no business being in a police station. Her last exposure to criminal law was as a first-year law student, and it was the last time she’d wanted to think about it. But Chester Palerisian had called her at an ungodly hour this morning, drunk as a skunk and demanding that she get him out of jail. So here she is. She should have had an associate handle this, and she would have, except that it’s Palerisian himself, and she just knows what she’ll have to listen to if he isn’t represented by someone whose name is on the door of the firm. Of course, having her name on the door of a firm that doesn’t do criminal law should mean that she doesn’t have to deal with the drunken fuckery of an overbred clown like Chester Palerisian. But his ownership of CTP Oil, and its status as one of her firm’s most lucrative clients, means that she does.
Alyson walks up to the Desk Sergeant she’s been directed to, and asks to meet with her client. Then she waits, taking the opportunity to look around at the diverse and fascinating group of people waiting with her. She listens to the conversations she can overhear, trying to identify languages and intrigued by the dramas going on around her. She is almost sorry when the Desk Sergeant calls her and escorts her to an interview room.
The room has the standard one-way mirror, which shows that today’s wet fog has done Alyson’s hair no favors. She congratulates herself on going wavy and messy with her long blonde bob today, because that was how it was going to end up, anyway. There is also the standard long, metal table with scratches, dents, and metal loops for handcuffing suspects who threaten to get out of control. The room reeks of alcohol. To be precise, her client, sitting on one of the mismatched and battered chairs haphazardly surrounding the table in a suit that had cost several thousand dollars and was probably now beyond repair, reeks of alcohol. The minute he opens his mouth, it is clear he is still very, very drunk.
“Aly! Thank God. Get me the fuck out of here,” he says, standing as though she is just going to lead him out this minute.
“That’s why I’m here, Chet. Are you all right?”
“Does this look all right to you? I’m in fucking handcuffs, for fuck’s sake! What am I, a criminal?”
Alyson is just annoyed enough to consider answering that question, but she hasn’t gotten to where she is by giving in to impulses. “All right, I just wanted to check on you before we talk to the cops. If you’re ready, I’ll let them in. And you are not going to say one word, all right? Let me do all the talking.”
“Fine, fine. I’m not stupid.”
On that wildly debatable note, Alyson suddenly realizes she has no idea how to summon whoever they need to meet with, presumably the cops and maybe an ADA. She puts her briefcase and purse down on the table to stall for time. Fortunately, very quickly thereafter, the door opens and tall, pretty man walks in, his very well-cut suit outlining what appears to be an insane body underneath.
Peter will later thank God for muscle memory, because the minute he comes through the door and sees the defendant’s attorney, time stops. “I’m ADA Peter Stone,” he says automatically, holding out a hand, because that’s what he always does when he walks into this room. If Peter had to think his way through this moment, the beautiful blonde would be standing there holding his hand while he had feverish sexual fantasies about her for a very long time. His vision is actually fuzzy, which tells him that, in addition to the things happening lower down in his body, his eyes are already dilating with lust. He has never seen a better-looking woman in real life.
Her hair looks as though it is doing exactly what she intended, although what it’s doing is making him picture himself doing things to her to get it gorgeously tousled like that. Her beautiful suit is tailored by a master, and her hand feels warm and soft and feminine and holy shit the dirty thoughts going through Peter’s head right this minute. She is wearing very small gold earrings, and he wants to nibble on them, for some reason.
Peter is fortunate enough that the woman’s moronic client begins to speak at that moment, stirring the alcohol reek in the room and reminding him why he is here.
“Well, this is my lawyer, Alyson Sanders. Of Ogilvie, Sanders and… somebody else.”
Alyson’s contemplation of the way the ADA is looking at her is interrupted, and she’s not happy about it. The man looks like he’s about to take a bite out of her, and she’s down with that plan.
“Fishbach,” Alyson says, still holding Peter Stone’s hand and looking into his eyes. The voice that comes out is not her usual “meeting opposing counsel” voice.
“Hmmm?” Peter asks, not letting go of her hand, either.
“Fishbach. My other partner’s name. Jared Fishbach.” The blush of shame at such a stupid statement begins very low on Alyson’s chest and blooms, rapidly and hotly, up her body.
“Right,” Peter says, realizing with a minute shake of his head that he needs to release her hand. “And your name is…”
“Aly. Alyson Sanders.”
“Pleasure to meet you, Ms. Sanders,” Peter says, and shakes her hand again. Both notice at the same time that this is a bit redundant, but they still shake. They just laugh nervously as they do it, and drop their hands quickly. “Ogilvie, Sanders… I wasn’t aware your firm does criminal defense.”
“We don’t,” Alyson responds, grateful she knows this one. Her neurons are not working correctly. She notes, however, that her autonomic nervous system is humming along nicely, increasing her heart and respiratory rate and hardening her nipples, as well as dilating capillaries and stimulating lubrication. Because damn. The way this Peter Stone has just the very slightest lisp when he says her name should be at least a Class C Felony. Don’t think about punishment, Aly. Don’t think about punishment. Client. Opposing counsel. Not spanking. Work mode.
“I guess I should explain,” she tries to fake coherence. “My firm represents Mr. Palerisian’s business interests. When he was arrested, he called me. I’ll be representing him for the time being, but I’m likely to be replaced at some point.”
“I see,” Peter answers, moving to sit down at the table in hopes she won’t notice that his legs are actually shaking. Also in hopes she won’t notice other things in the neighborhood of his legs that he is helpless to control now that he’s had a whiff of her perfume. He can’t remember the last time he had an involuntary hard on. “Well, I just need to ask your client some questions.”
“Right. I thought you might want to do that, but I’m afraid we’re not going to be answering any questions this morning. He’s been arrested, correct?”
“He has.”
“What are you charging him with?”
“Second offense aggravated DUI, felony assault, resisting arrest, disorderly conduct, and misdemeanor possession of marijuana.”
“What do we need to do to get him released?”
“He’s charged with 2 felonies and 3 misdemeanors. He can’t be released until he’s been arraigned, and even then he’ll only be released pending trial if the judge allows it.”
“That is bullshit!” Palerisian shouts, standing abruptly and basically falling onto the table, which fortunately is bolted to the floor.
“Chet, I got this,” Alyson says, giving him a steadying hand to sit back down.
“Fuck that! I’m not staying here one more minute. I demand to see this guy’s supervisor!”
“Chet, ‘this guy’s supervisor’ is the District Attorney. He’s got better things to do. And you’re not in a position to demand anything. Let me do my job.”
“I want out of here!”
Alyson wants out of here, too, but she doesn’t yell it and kick her feet into the table leg like a three-year-old. Instead, she asks whether it would be possible for her and Mr. Stone to meet privately. She immediately regrets her choice of words, because it sounds very much like she’s asking for the other thing she really wants right this minute.
“Of course,” Peter responds, standing up. He ignores Palerisian, who is making toddler noises and asking what’s happening, opens the door for Alyson and waves her into the hallway.
He escorts her across the hall to a small meeting room. As she passes him, she purposely moves too close. She has to see if he smells as good as she thinks he will. Oh, holy fuck. He smells better. Without her consent, Alyson’s hypothalamus sends a signal to divert additional blood and energy to her autonomic nervous system. She really doesn’t need to be this turned on right now. She is a bit lightheaded – there’s only so much blood to go around, after all – so she sets her briefcase and purse on a chair and sits down at the battered little wooden table that dominates the tiny room.
“My client is…” She begins, faltering almost immediately.
Peter raises an eyebrow.
She smiles then, tilting her head with a twisted, wry grin. “A petulant, entitled asshat.”
“So stipulated,” he grins despite himself.
“Unfortunately, that’s not illegal. Prisons are overcrowded enough already. So let’s talk about his actual crime. Bail?”
“I can live with releasing him to you, but he surrenders his drivers’ license.”
Her face clouds over, just a little. Just enough that he knows she is letting him see it. “Yeah…”
“That’s a gift, Ms. Sanders.”
“Oh, I fully recognize that. You’re clearly a man willing to make deals. But I think that, in this case, maybe not as much of a gift as you’d think.”
“I won’t go ROR.”
“No. And I wouldn’t ask you to. I’m thinking more in the neighborhood of a reasonable bail.”
Peter looks at her with surprise. “Ms. Sanders, I was offering to release him to your recognizance. No bail.”
“Mr. Stone… Peter. May I call you Peter?”
“Of course.” Call me Daddy. Call me anything the fuck you want.
“I understand your offer. I just don’t accept it.”
“You understand that, if he has to bond out, it’ll cost him money. That’s not as good as the deal I’m offering.”
“Mr. Palerisian wouldn’t need a bail bond. He has the cash.” Her face holds an expectancy that tells him she is sending a message she’s not willing to put into words. Peter gets the message anyway.
“And you don’t want to be responsible for him. Maybe you also think he should have to go to the hassle of putting up his own money.”
“This is DUI number two, and he’s been well above .18 both times. Besides which, he’s an asshat whether he’s drunk or not. Frankly, if it didn’t mean having to deal with my partners’ whining, I’d fire him. Maybe if I can’t get him ROR’ed, I’ll get lucky and he’ll fire us, instead.” Then, as if a switch has been flipped, Alyson sits a bit straighter and says mechanically, in a tone almost – but not quite – imitating robotic quoting of a statement that is not her own, “But I don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re suggesting I’m not advocating for the best deal for my client. That would be unethical.”
With a wide smile, Peter says, “Ms. Sanders – Alyson – you’re a tough negotiator. I don’t feel good about half a million dollars’ bail-“
“Don’t push it, Peter,” she tilts her head with a playful scowl.
“As I said, I don’t feel good about two hundred fifty thousand dollars bail…” He waits for her smile of agreement, then proceeds. “But you’ve twisted my arm.”
He reaches out his hand. She stands and shakes it firmly for the third time in under ten minutes.
“I’m sorry I had to be so rough on you.”
“Let me call, see if I can still get us on the arraignment calendar this morning.”
Alyson looks up at Peter from under her long eyelashes, muttering, “Don’t push too hard. A night in jail might do him good.”
He stops with his phone in his hand, just about to touch the screen. “It’s usually fairly difficult to get a last-minute addition to the arraignment calendar.”
“That’s unfortunate.”
“I’m sorry,” he says with an obviously faux chagrin, and puts his phone back into his inside jacket pocket. “I did everything I could.”
“I appreciate the professional courtesy.” They stand there, grinning conspiratorially at one another. “Once he sobers up, I’ll talk to my client and see if he’s open to a plea deal.”
“Who says I’m offering one?”
“Well, I’ve heard you are sort of a hardass. You might not. I’ll make sure he knows that. But, just in case, I’ll see what he’d be willing to accept.”
“I’ll see you at the arraignment tomorrow morning.”
“Looking forward to it.”
Peter can’t concentrate on the scumbags today. He needs to, and he needs to ride herd on all the Junior ADAs he’s responsible for, but for the life of him he can’t clear his mind of the picture of Alyson Sanders walking away from him down the hallway at the police station. He wants to find the person who tailored that skirt to fit her bum like that and shake their hand. Or perhaps punch them in the throat, because that picture is not helping him get shit done today. He wonders what she’ll wear to the arraignment tomorrow morning, and hopes like hell she won’t be replaced by then. Peter had no desire to see Randolph Dworkin in a tight, ass-hugging skirt.
*****************
The gods smile on Peter Stone and he sees Alyson Sanders sashay into the courthouse wearing another beautiful suit. He gets one look at the skirt and knows this will be the second day in a row shot to hell. She has an eager young man walking beside her, legs twice as long as hers but still running to keep up with her in her heels, and she is listening attentively to what he has to say. Peter recognizes him now; he worked for Peter until about six months ago, when he quit to go where the money is. Alyson’s eyes light up when she sees Peter and the smile she gives him wakes his cock up for the day.
After another handshake that goes on a beat too long, Alyson asks Peter whether he remembers whatever the kid’s name is. Peter remembers him, and instantly forgets his name again. The kid is there to give Alyson a crash course in arraignments, which aren’t rocket science, and she and Peter already have a deal. Still, Peter admires her preparation. He imagines she doesn’t like being out of her depth any more than Peter himself does.
“I’m going to need to get in there in a moment, and I don’t know when they’ll call Palerisian’s case. So I may not have a chance to talk to you again this morning,” Peter explains to Alyson. “I also have a crowded day, but we need to talk about what we’re going to do with your client. Are you, by any chance, available to have dinner with me tonight?” He hopes he got the inflection and expression just right, like he couldn’t give a shit, even though if she says no and he doesn’t get to peel off that skirt, he might just cry through the entire arraignment docket.
“I can probably do drinks, but dinner would be tough.”
“I see. You have another engagement.”
“No, I…” What Aly means is that she can probably keep her hands off of Peter Stone for the time it would take to have a drink, but knows herself to be entirely unequal to the task of behaving appropriately through a whole dinner. But that’s probably too much information at this point, especially in front of her young associate. “I meant that I had to reschedule some things to be here today, which means I have some catching up to do.”
Alyson actually has a dinner engagement with a potential new client, which she would be insane to miss. They’re a major retail chain just beginning to move into the online marketplace about five years after they should have. There is serious money to be made here, and quickly. But the dinner is small, the only guests being the owner, the Chairman of the Board, and the CEO, which means she has options. The weather has been unseasonably warm for fall, and the firm has a lovely boat for exactly this purpose. She’ll spend several thousand extra dollars this way, but Peter Stone would be worth it if she had to add an extra zero to that. Maybe two. She’d decide when she got his shirt off. In the meantime, she tells herself the first call she makes after the arraignment needs to be to her assistant, to get the dinner moved to later in the week, with the excuse that she thought her guests might like to take advantage of the lovely weather with a dinner cruise around Manhattan on the boat. Self-important business types eat that shit up. It’ll be fine. And she doesn’t give fuck one even if it isn’t.
“I’ll tell you what, Peter.” She likes the taste of his name on her tongue, and he can see that. “Let’s plan on drinks, and I’ll see if I can make dinner work. Let me know when and where.”
Peter nods as though she’s just agreed to do nothing more interesting than rotate the tires on his car. “I’ll see you in there,” he says, turning and entering the courtroom.
Stone doesn’t want to be meeting Alyson Sanders for drinks tonight. Oh, he does, heaven knows he does, but he also doesn’t. He’s done with women. After the hideous demise of his long-term relationship with Angelica, he has stuck to men. Women are just too … Well, they’re too everything. Absolutely not worth the trouble. He prefers women, if he had to choose, but lucky for him, no one is asking him to. Men are so much easier – the most they ask is that he buy them dinner first, and even that doesn’t happen much. Mostly they just want what he wants – a few laughs over drinks, a good fuck, and that’s it.
Which is why it’s kind of a step backward to have drinks with Alyson Sanders. Maybe she’ll turn out to be the rare woman who will just have sex with him and then leave him alone – which is very much all he wants from her. He’s going to run for the nearest hot guy if things start to go any differently with her. True, he wants her more than he’s wanted anyone in a very long time, but she is still a woman, after all, and therefore almost certain to annoy and frustrate him in the end. But he’s stuck now, he made the date himself, and his dick has been looking forward to it ever since. Peter does his dick’s bidding much more often than he wishes he did.
The arraignment is a snooze, as expected, except for the part where Alyson stands a few feet away from him. Judge Smithson, a woman of a certain age, insists on keeping her courtroom at a balmy sixty degrees in all seasons, and apparently Alyson finds that a bit chilly. Or at least her nipples do. Peter finds himself in the unenviable position of standing in front of a full courtroom trying to ignore the turmoil happening in his boxers. He’s had dreams like this. They were not good dreams.
He texts Alyson Sanders sometime in the early afternoon. Actually, he texts Alyson Sanders at precisely one in the afternoon on the dot, because that is the time he has decided will be early enough, but not so early that it looks like he’s eager.
Peter meets Alyson at Geraldo’s, where meets all his first dates. It’s small enough so they can hear each other talk, the bartenders know him and will send him an emergency text to get him out of a bad situation if he signals them, and it’s just around the corner from a fairly cheap parking garage for quick getaways. He’s early so that he can choose where they will sit. He chooses a small booth with room for only two people, one on each side of the table. It’s a good strategic first-date choice, for many reasons, not least of which is that he can sit forward and get close to his date, especially if it’s a guy with long legs, or he can sit back and put distance between them.
When Alyson breezes in, he notes that she waves to one of the bartenders. He is annoyed at her knowing the bartenders like he does, because he likes to be one up on everyone in all situations. His annoyance only lasts long enough for Alyson to slide into the booth across from him and announce that he’s chosen the bar well. Her firm has an account here, and since she and Peter are working on Palerisian’s criminal case together, drinks are on Palerisian tonight. He can’t help liking that Alyson Sanders has a bit of an edge to her. And he is struck anew by how beautiful she is. It’s not a conventional, fashion-model sort of beauty, exactly, although she certainly has that. What gets to Peter is a certain swagger and sass she has that are evident even when she is standing still, and a look in her eye as though she’s up for anything. Sassy women who are up for anything are Peter’s kryptonite, and he knows it.
“I’m a little surprised you’re so willing to piss off an important client,” he notes.
“I’ve been really fortunate,” she says sincerely. “I had some success early on, which allowed me to start my own firm fairly young, and we’ve worked really hard. These days, we’re blessed with a number of important clients and it lets me worry less about losing one. Not my partners, however, who act like we’re all going to be homeless anytime we lose a motion. It’s a good balance, actually. They keep my baser instincts in line, and I keep them from getting trampled by bully clients.”
“Sounds like a good partnership,” he says. She’s being modest. He’s done his research. Her firm bills eight figures annually, and it’s primarily because Alyson Sanders is a giant-killer. She’s won a number of huge cases, including several against the feds. She personally does less litigation now that she heads a team of over forty corporate and tax lawyers. She bills four figures an hour and still her firm has clients begging her to take them on. She’s also been very wise in her choice of partners, both of whom are as gifted as she is.
“It’s a very good partnership, as much as we bitch about each other.”
The waitress comes over with a cocktail for Alyson and asks whether Peter is ready for another. He says no. Drinking less than the other person is another way he likes to keep the upper hand.
“Your appetizers will be out very shortly,” the waitress says, deferential to Peter, but even more so to Alyson.
Alyson gives Peter a smile that he is unable to avoid returning. “Calamari, oysters on the half-shell, fried zucchini, and some more stuff I can’t remember. The appetizers here are great, and I don’t know about you, but I’m starving.”
Now Peter’s even more conflicted. On top of being seriously attractive, this woman is also an eater. Peter likes a woman with an appetite. Shit. This new development is good from his dick’s point of view (also his stomach’s – he’s hungry), but from a “not dating women anymore” perspective, it’s kind of a problem. He pushes the thought aside. It’s very, very early. She’ll say or do something to cool the attraction anytime now.
Alyson wonders whether they oysters were a bit much. They come with the platter she ordered, and it’s the one she always orders, but he doesn’t know that. And damn it, she wants to make a good impression. Not nearly as much as she wants to tear his clothes off and see if the raunchy fantasies that have plagued her all day match the reality, but still, she was very impressed by him in court and she’s done a little research. Peter Stone is one hell of a prosecutor. Well on his way to becoming District Attorney someday. Not that she’s particularly impressed by titles, but she is very impressed by talent. And he has it.
He can see that she is thinking about him, and if the glow under her skin is any indication, her thoughts are good ones. In no time, Peter is back to the level of arousal he was at this morning, only now there’s alcohol and opportunities. He leans forward to clink glasses with her. “To new acquaintances.”
Alyson toasts with him and takes a drink. When she’s done, she sits forward and takes off her suit jacket. It’s a fitted, tweedy suit with leather accents that is lovely, but she’s suddenly feeling warm. She seems to recall feeling a bit of a hot flash this morning when she saw Peter Stone, too, before entering the arctic chill of the courtroom. He smiles, mutters something about removing jackets being a good idea, then removes his, as well. There’s a hook for their jackets on the outside of their booth and Peter graciously hangs Alyson’s jacket up for her, along with his own. This gives her the opportunity to check out his body under the shirt, and suddenly she realizes removing their jackets is not going to be anywhere near enough. Her libido ratchets up several notches and she begins to think she doesn’t have the patience to be social. She wonders what he would do if she just straight-up propositioned him. She empties her glass at the same time he does.
A few minutes and a bit of superficial conversation later, the appetizers arrive and they order their second drinks. Peter’s leg makes contact with Alyson’s. He doesn’t move it. She grins and he doesn’t know whether it’s because of what he’s just said, or because their legs are touching. The way she eats oysters borders on obscene. He’s mesmerized. He thinks about trying to do it, but is certain he’ll end up with a red face and a dry-cleaning bill. She’s interested in him. She leans in and asks questions about what he’s telling her. She also laughs at his jokes, which always seems to inspire him. Even he thinks he’s being fairly witty. This is good. He’s definitely going to invite her back to his place and do all the things he’s been imagining, and he has no doubt she will accept, especially since there is some fairly intimate leg-pressing going on now. He’s hard, and he’s not alone; her blouse is giving him his second glimpse of her nipples today and holy crap he wants to rip that thin fabric off and just get to it. By the time the appetizers are worked over and their drinks about gone, Peter is feeling a very nice glow that is part bourbon, part lust. It’s a good combination, and it affects the risk/benefit calculations going on in his head about how to approach making a pass.
Alyson has imbibed two cocktails, and she drank them a little more quickly than she normally would, because Peter’s hazel green eyes and that little lisp are really getting to her. Since she met him about thirty-six hours ago, she’s been horny for him - sometimes more, sometimes less, but never not – and at this moment, she hits the limit of her ability to resist him. She makes a motion to the waitress across the bar and holds her glass out to Peter. There is one swallow left in the bottom. His is about the same.
“What are we drinking to?” He asks, very successfully trying to smolder.
“Elevators.”
“Really. Why elevators?”
“Because my apartment is at the top of this building, which means all that’s standing between us and my bed is an elevator.” Her grin is almost as lascivious as the way she eats oysters.
Peter clinks her glass and turns up the smolder. “To elevators, then. Sláinte.”
Shit. He likes women who make the first move, too. Especially when they’re that straightforward about it. He wonders how obvious it will be when he carries his jacket in front of his crotch. Maybe she will be lousy in bed. Not that he wants her to be lousy in bed, he just needs her to give him something to work with so that he can keep his usual distance. So far, she’s not been cooperating. The waitress brings a bill, Alyson signs it, and they scoot out from the booth. Peter would love to hold Alyson’s jacket for her to put it on, but he fears that, if he does, he’s going to make the 6 O’clock news. Or at least YouTube. Alyson notices what he’s hiding and she slides a hand down his chest, winking.
“Me, too,” she whispers. She is shaking. Shaking, she’s so hot for him.
Peter thinks he might have to pull the emergency button on the elevator. He knows he could come from a stray breeze right now, so he’s sure he can get off and think of a good story before the fire department arrives to rescue them. Besides, any male firefighters are going to take one look at Alyson and be completely on his side.
No such luck. Peter hadn’t thought about it, all he cared about was the bar, but this is a primarily residential building. So he and Alyson are sharing the elevator with an elderly Chinese woman with approximately seventeen shopping bags, along with two teenagers who are theoretically speaking English, although Peter has no earthly idea what they’re saying. There is also a young woman pushing a basset hound in a stroller. The basset hound needs a bath. It helps Peter regain a touch of his composure as they ride up.
Alyson’s apartment is one of three on the top floor. Peter’s a little humbled by the elegance and size of the space. The view is impressive, even for a life-long New Yorker like Peter. Peter has a great job, but working for the County of New York, he’s never going to make this kind of money no matter how high he rises. She gives him a few moments to look around, apparently used to this. When he turns from the wall of windows, she’s just sitting on the arm of a couch, waiting. She smiles at him.
“I know you get this all the time, but you are fucking gorgeous,” she says. While he’s been admiring her view, she’s been admiring his.
It’s the first F-bomb she’s dropped, and he’s delighted. “So here’s my dilemma,” he says, walking toward her in what he hopes is a measured way rather than running to her like the basset hound on the elevator, which is what he’s doing in his mind. “If I tell you how beautiful I think you are, it’s going to sound like I’m just returning the compliment.”
Her smile brightens as she gives just the hint of a giggle. “Well, you’ve had a bit of luck there,” she says, palming his crotch as he reaches her and she stands to meet him. “I believe this is what we in the law call ‘evidence’.”
Their first kiss is like most first kisses: awkward, not quite right, with imperfect aim and a little bit of nose mashing. But they’re experienced and they get better fast. Alyson is quickly all hands. Peter’s trying to kiss with some finesse, and she seems to really like what he’s doing judging by her breathing, but she’s touching and stroking and squeezing him everywhere at once. Something about that makes Peter feel very good. Well, sure, it feels good, but it also feeds his ego and lets him know he hasn’t been imagining the appraising looks she’s been giving him.
He tastes like bourbon, with a slight hint of the appetizers they’d shared. He’s delicious, but that’s no surprise. The surprise is just how thoroughly he’s kissing her. Firm, in control, the exact right amount of wetness, so far just the slightest tease of tongue… Oh, this guy can kiss.
He slides her jacket off her shoulders, trying to be careful but also trying to slow himself down. It’s not easy. He’s had a raging hard on for the last half hour, and she’s starting to make noises. Peter is aroused by the sounds his lovers make, letting him know they’re enjoying what he’s doing. Alyson pulls her arms quickly out of the jacket and starts on his tie. She loosens the knot only enough to slide it over his head, then tosses it onto the couch behind her. Their kisses get messy as she divides her attention between his mouth and his buttons, and when she thinks she has enough buttons undone, she just pushes his shirt up his chest.
“Holy shit,” she breathes, getting her first look at his bare torso. The beauty she expected is nothing to the reality. This man is a work of art. She’s not looking for love at this point, but damn, if she was, this chest would be a good place to start. She regrets skipping Pilates on Tuesday. Not that one class with Gunther would make her look like this; pretty much anyone is going to look soft and flabby next to this man. She cannot wait to see his ass.
She gives a frustrated grunt as she realizes she has forgotten the buttons on his sleeves, but together they fumble through that and he is finally, blessedly, shirtless. Kissing is forgotten for the moment. The look in her eyes has Peter pulling at her blouse now, but she’s not helping. She’s not resisting by any stretch, but she’s very busy feasting her eyes on the dirty dream of a man undressing her in her living room, and she’s preoccupied.
He gets her blouse off somehow, a little concerned that a couple of buttons may have been lost in the process, but she doesn’t seem to care so he certainly doesn’t. Besides, she’s begun to work on his belt and he doesn’t want to distract her. He strokes her shoulders and arms and closes his eyes while she starts running her face all over his chest. It couldn’t really be called kissing, because although there’s a lot of kissing involved, there’s also a lot of tasting and smelling and nuzzling. And appreciative noises.
Belt undone, Alyson takes a little longer to undo Peter’s slacks, but only because she’s distracted by his abs. She is going to run her tongue along them, but that will have to wait until after she gets him inside her because she is on fire and she could come just from looking at him. She hopes he doesn’t mind the artlessness with which she yanks his pants, socks, and shoes off.
Holy flying balls of shit his cock is gorgeous. Cocks are not, as a rule, particularly aesthetically pleasing appendages, but Alyson has just discovered that Peter Stone’s penis is as beautiful as the rest of his body. It’s perfect. It fits him; large and strong and hard and stunningly attractive. She’s mesmerized. Just as a few moments ago, she was distracted by his beautiful chest, and then his abs, now it’s his penis. She runs her hands along its length, awed, trying to find words to describe how well-shaped it is, with the exact right amount of veining, and a hot rosy pink color rather than the angry red some guys are, that she tries to ignore when she sees it. Can you compliment a man on his lovely penis?
She doesn’t get the chance, because suddenly he’s all over her skirt and it’s off before she really has time to drag her mind back from his cock. He makes the most wonderful noise – a gasp with a moan behind it – when he sees the lingerie and thigh-high stockings she purposely chose this morning in hopes he’d see them tonight. He doesn’t so much lay her down on the couch as throw her there. Fine by her. She would’ve jumped if he’d asked her to. She keeps her heels on.
He kneels next to the couch and suddenly, it’s him who is all hands and mouth, gliding his hands up her thighs and mouthing her breasts through the soft, satiny and barely functional bra designed for pretty much exactly that. She’s lost the ability to monitor or control the sounds she’s making. His huge hands have her entire attention, or at least the part that isn’t laser focused on his soft biting at her nipples through the slippery cups of her bra.
Peter kisses his way to the top of Alyson’s breasts so that he can flick his tongue under the cups. He wants to hear the noise she’ll make, and he isn’t disappointed. He hopes the hot drops rubbing from his cock onto her couch won’t be a problem – the couch is white. But he has much more important concerns at the moment, like whether to slide his fingers underneath the satin of her barely pink panties, or tease her through them first. He decides that the latter is the way to go, and at last touches her where he’s wanted to since the second he saw her the previous morning. The panties are soaked. Drenched. He can feel moistness on the inside of her thighs, even. Oh, this is good. Very, very good.
As soon as he touches her through the thin, wet fabric, she moans and begins to lift into his touch. She moves against his fingers, one hand splayed in his hair as he licks her nipples under her bra, and the other firmly grasping his ass. She knows she’s being selfish, but she’s beyond caring about anything but the way he is making her feel. It’s starting to drive her crazy that he won’t take her lingerie off. She wants him to touch her everywhere. Of course, he knows that and he’s doing this on purpose, the bastard. She tries to make a mental note to do it back to him, but her entire blood supply is shunted far away from her brain.
“Tell me when you’re close,” he says, looking into her eyes, pupils huge and lids heavy. “I’ll decide when to make you come.” He’s smiling evilly, and it is an absolutely outstanding look on him.
She can only moan and nod vaguely. He rewards her by slipping a finger under her panties and beginning to stroke the wet folds there.
“Oh, Peter, that feels so good, you’re so…” She slides her hand around from his buttock to grasp his pretty cock. “I want you…”
“Tell me.”
“I want you to tear my panties off and fuck me. Now.”
He smiles and mercifully slides a finger inside her. She arches her back and cries out, immediately beginning to rock into it. He leans over and begins to kiss her again, slowly and deeply, with a great deal of tongue, while he slides his finger in and out of her, enjoying her wanton, increasingly desperate response.
“More,” she begs.
She’s surprised – in a very good way – when he grants her request and slides another finger inside her and softly touches her clit with his thumb, coating her with her own moisture and rubbing lightly. She still has his cock in her hand, but her stroking is haphazard because she has too many sensations to focus on.
“Peter!” She cries. “Oh, fuck!”
“Don’t come,” he murmurs.
“I don’t– I can’t-“
He continues to use his fingers, allowing her to fuck herself on them and increasing his thrust slightly, but stops rubbing her clit with his thumb. Soon, his fingers slow.
“No…”_
“Do you want me to fuck you?” He asks with just the hint of a smirk.
“Yes! Oh, yes, I want you.” Her breathlessness makes it hard to speak.
“Then sit up.”
She does. He somehow manages to be aggressive and gentle at the same time as he unclasps and pulls her pretty bra from her. He sits next to her on the couch, then pulls her up so that she is standing before him. She’s fairly dizzy with lust, and he keeps an eye on her as he pulls her panties quickly down and off, leaving her thigh-high stockings where they are. He reaches behind her to the floor where his pants are, and fumbles his wallet out of a pocket.
She stands naked but for her heels and the stockings while he pulls a condom from his wallet. She takes it from him and knees down between his knees, tearing the packet with her teeth. There is a lot of eye contact. There is a lot of smiling. She leans in and takes him in her mouth for a moment, holding the condom between her fingers. She nearly loses her concentration when she begins to taste and feel that beautiful penis between her lips, but she is too desperate for release, and so is he.
“Put it on,” he groans between gritted teeth. She does, stroking him and kissing the insides of his thighs.
He immediately pulls her up, guiding her onto his lap until she is straddling him, on her knees. With his hands on her hips, both of them watching what she is doing, she takes his cock into her hand and guides him to her entrance, then pushes roughly down on him. Both of them cry out with pleasure, Peter’s cry a series of curse words Alyson hasn’t heard in that particular order before.
Her arms naturally encircle his neck and shoulders, and she begins to kiss him as though she’s missed him. His lips, the way he moves his mouth on hers, could easily become… Well, this is about sex. She refocuses, which isn’t hard because she is very, very close.
“Peter, you’re going to make me come…”
“Now, Aly. Come now.” He puts a hand on her backside and rolls his hips into her. On her knees, she can move her pelvis against him, and his pretty cock is about as much as she can take, so within the next several thrusts, she begins to feel the inevitable wave of pleasure start to roll through her, from somewhere deep inside, gaining momentum as it makes its way toward the surface. She pulls away from his lips and throws her head back, her groans almost grunts as she explodes, grinding against him and rolling her hips.
He watches her face, her flushed chest, her breasts bouncing lightly with her movements. This is a woman who knows how to ride an orgasm. And she looks like a fucking goddess doing it. So good, in fact, that he is already coming before he really realizes it. Soon he is lost to himself, jutting his hips into her and shouting.
It takes a very long time to come down for both of them. They’re gasping for breath. She needs to get off of him so he can remove the condom, but damn she doesn’t want to. Eventually, however, she resigns herself and lifts herself off of his lap. She stretches and arches her back while he goes into the powder room.
Alyson looks around. There are clothes in a wide semicircle around the couch. It’s kind of fabulous, actually, like a modern art piece. Peter catches his face in the mirror of the powder room. He looks fucked out. He is fucked out.
But Alyson is not done with Peter Stone. Oh, hell, no. When he saunters back into the room – he usually struts, and he does it very, very well, but apparently post-coitally, he saunters – she takes his hand and leads him into her bedroom. He makes no comment or protest as she yanks the covers down and climbs in, holding her arms out to him.
Post-sex cuddling with Peter Stone could cure cancer, bring about world peace and end famine. Alyson is sure of it. Nothing could possibly be wrong in life when this gloriously handsome male sprawled naked in your bed and put his powerful, sturdy arms around you. Actually, she realizes, this is not post-sex cuddling, but intra-sex cuddling, because Alyson plans to have Peter at least twice more before she lets him out of her apartment. It’s time to do that ab licking she’d planned earlier, so Alyson begins lazily stroking Peter’s chest.
Peter is fairly hormone-muddled at the moment, but he realizes that this is an extraordinarily comfortable bed. He also realizes that Alyson has not turned out to be lousy in bed – or on the couch, as the case may be – so he is going to have to find something else to dislike about her. But right now, she is worshiping his body, which he kind of can’t dislike, so he’ll have to think about that tomorrow. Or the next day.
52 notes
·
View notes
Photo
Jensen Klein
• 16 • straight • German🇩🇪 & Korean🇰🇷 • Manhattan • Taurus ♉
Jensen comes from an upperclass family in Manhattan. He lives with his mother who is the editor of fashion magazine and stays with his father, a high-powered defense attorney on the weekends. His parents' divorce when he was a child was one of the worst times of his life. He was remanded to primary custody with his mother whom he resented because at the time, she wasn't making as much money as his father and couldn't afford to put him in private school. He was bullied all throughout elementary and middle school because of his size and timid demeanor. Because his school was primarily black and hispanic, he grew to resent them. Although the high school he attends is prestigious by public high school standards, he hates the fact that so many non-whites were able to get in. He's also frequently bullied for trying to get with every pretty white girl at the school and failing. When he saw Tori Vasilevska for the first time, he automatically became obsessed with her and tried to win her affections though his friends tell him she's so far out of his league that he's crazy for even thinking about it.
Jensen is part of a bunch of incel groups online, being angered by having (white) girls reject him and for being a virgin.
•Although Jensen is half Asian, he posts many racist messages about Asians online.
•When Jensen's grandfather immigrated to the US, he changed the spelling of their last name from Klein to Kline in fear of facing anti-German bigotry following WW2 but his father changed it back citing that being ashamed of one's ancestry is anti-American
Lance: Hey Jensen! Your mom let me in. I’ve been texting you. What’s going on?
Jensen: Do you know who Tori Vasilevska is?
Lance: Uh, yeah, I think so. She’s in my art class. Why?
Jensen: That dyke who runs the gay club came up to me to ask me if I wanted to sign up...fucking bitch thinks I’m gay...and she was with her. And she smiled at me.
Lance: So?
Jensen: You ever have a really hot blonde smile at you?
Lance: Yeah, like the girl who makes my lattes at Starbucks, my mother’s secretary, my nanny from when I was a kid, Mrs. Wyn...but they were just being polite.
Jensen: I’m going to ask her out.
Lance: You barely even know her.
Jensen: That’s what the point of a date is, genius--to get to know girls.
Lance: Dude, Tori Vasilevska is not going to willingly agree to go out on a date with you.
Jensen: She will. I won’t take “no” for an answer. I’m going to borrow my dad’s Amex, call up a limo and take her to the nicest restaurant in the city, y’know the one that our mothers have their meetings at? She’ll have to fall in love with me.
Lance: So what your saying is, you’re going to throw your dad’s money at her until she falls in love with you.
Jensen: Precisely. Dude, I’m a fucking catch. I’m rich--
Lance: Your dad’s rich.
Jensen: I have a trust fund.
Lance: Which is only for college.
Jensen: When I turn 18, that money is mine to do whatever I want with it. I’m rich.
Lance: Your dad’ll disown you if you don’t use it for school.
Jensen: And I’m a fucking god with Aryan blood. (Laughs haughtily) It’s no wonder a gorgeous blonde like Tori smiled at me. She knows she wants me. I’m going to make her mine, Lance. Hell, she’s already mine.
Lance: Y’know, sometimes, I can’t believe you and your dad are related. He’s civil rights lawyer and you’re bragging about your German heritage like a white supremacist.
Jensen: I know. I can’t believe my father chose to represent a bunch of thugs when he could have been something cooler like a corporate lawyer.
Lance: “Thugs?” Your dad’s last client was a 12-year old private school girl.
Jensen: I wrote down some poetry and put them in velvet envelopes and I’m going to start leaving them in her locker and desk. I know she’ll love the attention.
Lance: You wrote poetry?
Jensen: Found some online. I can’t wait for her to read the first one. I’m going to do some epic secret admirer shit and have her eating out of the palm of my hand (laughs).
Lance: Or she’ll think you’re stalking her and find it creepy.
Jensen: Y’know, when you have a chance of being with the girl of your dreams which will probably never happen, you’ll want to do the same shit.
#original character#traditional media#traditional illustration#traditional drawing#traditional art#colored pencil#biracial#german and korean#german#korean#racist#bigot#bigotry#rotten apple high#rich kid#incel
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
**Clickbait headline for sure. The Herald (a glorified tabloid IMO) doesn't mention that a death sentence comes with an automatic 1st appeal....even if the inmate doesn't want it. Not saying Dzho wants to die but the headline makes it sound like he personally is begging to not be executed instead of court appointed lawyers doing their job in a government mandated appeal**
Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is appealing to stay locked up in a Colorado supermax prison instead of being executed — a fate an uncle of two bombing victims says he deserves.
“The punishment meets the crime,” said Peter Brown, whose two nephews lost their right legs in the April 15, 2013, blasts.
“He deserves the death penalty. How else are we going to send a message that terrorism isn’t accepted in this country?” Brown told the Herald. “There’s no doubt. The guilt is there for all to see — and he executed a cop.”
Those killed in the bombings included 8-year-old Martin Richard, Krystle Campbell, 29, and Lingzi Lu, 23. More than 280 people were injured and MIT Officer Sean Collier, 27, was murdered by Tsarnaev and his older brother Tamerlan at the start of a nearly 24-hour manhunt three days after the bombings that included a region-wide lockdown. Tamerlan was killed that night.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s attorneys are asking the court to reverse either the death sentence or his convictions and keep him locked up for life instead.
Tsarnaev is now on death row in the notorious ADX supermax prison in Colorado, called a clean version of hell that holds the nation’s worst terrorists and traitors.
In the 207-page briefing, Tsarnaev’s lawyers argue that their client could not have received a fair trial anywhere in Eastern Massachusetts because the entire region was rocked by the twin bombings. They also claim 69% of the jury pool believed Tsarnaev was guilty.
The lawyers also argue inadmissible evidence was used against Tsarnaev at trial and that two of the jurors allegedly lied during the jury selection process, violating their client’s constitutional rights.
In total, the appeal makes 13 points for why Tsarnaev’s death sentence should be reversed. Tsarnaev was convicted and sentenced to death four years ago for carrying out the attack with his older brother.
The appeal was filed by attorneys Clifford Gardner, Gail Johnson, David Patton, Deirdre Von Dornum, Daniel Habib and Mia Eisner-Grynberg.
The 490-cell ADX prison is located in the barren foothills of Colorado’s Rocky Mountains. Others locked up in the supermax include Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, Oklahoma City bombing cohort Terry Nichols, FBI traitor Robert Hanssen, who spied for the Soviets, and “Shoe Bomber” Richard Reid.
Brown added that taxpayers have done enough for the Cambridge terrorist and the original sentence should stand. “It’s mind-boggling we’ve been paying for his defense all this time,” he added.
Tsarnaev was a sophomore at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth at the time of the bombings. He had graduated from, and was on the wrestling team at Cambridge Ridge and Latin.
After Tsarnaev apologized for the bombings just before he was sentenced, the judge said it was too little, too late.
“What will be remembered is that you murdered and maimed innocent people and that you did it willfully and intentionally,” said federal Judge George A. O’Toole Jr. “You did it on purpose.”
#jahar tsarnaev#dzhokhar tsarnaev#tamerlan tsarnaev#abolish capital punishment#abolish solitary confinement#abolish the death penalty#tainted jury pool#jury misconduct#jury bias#juror misconduct#release the names of the jurors#change of venue#justice not vengeance#boston marathon bombing#florence adx#florence supermax#super max prison
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Kyle Rittenhouse incited violence on the streets of Kenosha by carrying a semi-automatic weapon to a rally and threatening others, and when the shooting ended, he walked away like a "hero in a Western," a prosecutor claimed in closing arguments in Rittenhouse's murder trial on Monday.
However, Rittenhouse's attorney said that the shooting began because the young man had been accosted by a "crazy guy" that night and was afraid that his pistol would be snatched and used to murder him as a result.
The jurors were instructed to come Tuesday morning for the start of deliberations in the case, which has sparked heated discussion in the United States over weapons, vigilantism, and law and order.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Eighteen jurors have been deliberating the case; the 12 who will decide Rittenhouse's fate and the six who will serve as alternates will be chosen using a lottery drum.
In the summer of 2020, a stormy night of rallies against racial inequality, 17-year-old Rittenhouse shot and wounded two men.
Rittenhouse claimed he travelled from Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, in the days following the fatal shooting of Jacob Blake by a white police officer. A former police cadet, Rittenhouse is white like the victims he shot.
Rittenhouse was described as a "want tobe soldier" by prosecutor Thomas Binger in closing arguments. Repeatedly showing jurors the drone video, Binger said the AR-style rifle was pointed towards the protesters.
"This is the provocation. "This is the beginning of this event," the prosecutor claimed.
"You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brings the gun, when you're the one who creates the threat, when you're the one who provokes other people," he told the jurors.
If convicted on the most serious charge against him, first-degree intentional homicide, which is Wisconsin's highest murder count, Rittenhouse, now 18, faces a mandatory life term in prison.
Binger honed down on the murder of 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, the first guy killed down that night and the triggerman for the others. The prosecutor constantly referred to it as murder, claiming that it was unjustifiable.
The prosecutor reminded the jury that Rittenhouse testified that he was aware Rosenbaum was unarmed. Binger also stated that there is no video evidence to back up the defense's assertion that Rosenbaum threatened to murder Rittenhouse.
Binger refuted Rosenbaum's claim that he was attempting to take Rittenhouse's gun. "When the first shot is fired, Mr. Rosenbaum is not even within arm's length," Binger explained. He denied that Rittenhouse had no option but to shoot, claiming that he could have fled.
more article from here : Microsoft has surprised everyone by releasing Halo Infinite multiplayer today.
And Binger contended that once Rosenbaum was injured, he was unable of removing the pistol that was strapped to Rittenhouse's body because he was falling to the ground with a shattered pelvis. Rittenhouse continued to fire, delivering what the prosecutor referred to as the "death shot" to Rosenbaum's back.
"I believe we can also agree that we shouldn't have 17-year-olds roaming around our neighbourhoods with AR-15s," Binger added.
The defence counsel, Richards, labelled Rosenbaum a "crazy guy" who was "hell-bent on provoking problems that night" and went after Rittenhouse unprovoked in his closing statement.
"Mr. Rosenbaum was shot because he was pursuing my client and planning to murder him, grab his pistol, and carry out the threats he made," Richards explained, adding that Rittenhouse never pointed his gun before being pursued: "It didn't happen."
Richards called an enlarged image of Rittenhouse aiming his rifle toward demonstrators "hocus pocus" that doesn't prove anything.
During the debates, Rittenhouse appeared mostly unconcerned, sometimes scribbling notes. Wendy Rittenhouse, his mother, sat behind him, listening carefully.
With a verdict imminent, Gov. Tony Evers stated that 500 National Guard personnel would be ready to deploy to Kenosha if local law enforcement requested them.
While attempting to push his way through the throng after shooting Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, 28. Rittenhouse testified that Huber beat him with a skateboard and that Grosskreutz attacked him with a pistol of his own, which footage and Grosskreutz himself verified.
However, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse was also responsible for the bloodshed. He said Huber, Grosskreutz, and others in the crowd were attempting to halt an active gunman.
When it was all said and done, Rittenhouse strolled away like a "hero in a Western - without a care in the world for whatever he's just done," according to Binger.
The defence, on the other hand, claimed Rittenhouse was attacked by a "mob." Prosecutors, according to Richards, chose the phrase "active shooter" for Rittenhouse because of "the strong overtones of that word."
In an apparent allusion to the police shooting of a Black man that sparked the protests, Richards stated, "Others in this community have shot individuals seven times, and it's been deemed to be OK." (There were no charges filed against the white officer.)
Some jurors appeared to divert their gaze when the prosecutor showed a photo of Rosenbaum's bleeding body on a stretcher during his autopsy, as well as another of his mutilated hand. When Binger showed a close-up of Grosskreutz's bicep, which had been entirely decimated by a bullet, some jurors flinched and moved away.
A small number of protestors yelling outside the courthouse could be heard at one time, but it was unclear what they were saying or whether the jury heard them from within the courtroom.
Supporters praise Rittenhouse as a hero who stood up to lawlessness, while detractors label him a vigilante.
Binger began his closing arguments by doubting Rittenhouse's sincerity in attempting to assist.
The prosecution stated that Rittenhouse possessed ammunition capable of traversing the length of five football fields and passing through vehicles, and he questioned the jurors, "Why do you need 30 rounds of full metal jacket (ammo) to protect a building?"
Rittenhouse, who worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha and helped clear up graffiti before the shootings, "feels for this neighbourhood," according to Richards, and "came down here wanting to assist, to witness the devastation."
The trial, according to the defence counsel, is a "political case" initiated by prosecutors who, he claims, are looking for someone to blame for the violence.
Earlier Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder dropped a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under the age of 18, a misdemeanour that seemed to be one of the most likely to result in a conviction. It is punishable by up to nine months in prison.
The defence contended that Wisconsin law makes an exemption for the length of a weapon's barrel. The court dismissed the indictment when prosecutors admitted that Rittenhouse's gun was not short-barreled.
Prosecutors may have requested the court to allow the jury examine additional lesser charges if they acquitted him on the initial counts, maybe in acknowledgement of flaws in their case. Schroeder consented to do so while delivering the jury 36 pages of legal instructions.
According to the judge's directions, the jury must conclude that Rittenhouse felt there was an illegal danger to him and that the level of force he employed was reasonable and necessary in order to accept his claim of self-defense.
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse?
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse and his attorneys have claimed that when he shot three individuals with his AR-15-style weapon, he was acting in self-defense. Rittenhouse claimed last week in a stunning turn on the witness that he feared for his life.
Lead prosecutor Thomas Binger detailed a tumultuous night in which Rittenhouse created and worsened the danger he faced via a sequence of irresponsible behaviours that made others fear for their own lives in his closing argument.
"People are getting in people's faces. There's yelling going on. There is yelling. There's even pushing going on. Despite this, the only person who shot and killed anyone in this entire sequence of events — from the killing of Jacob Blake on Sunday, Aug. 23, 2020, all the way through all this community went through — was the defendant "Binger said.
Rittenhouse, according to the defenders, was under assault.
In response, lead defence counsel Mark Richards depicted the people shot by Rittenhouse as dangerous rioters out to cause trouble. "This part of downtown was horrible," he remarked.
Richards also took aim at the prosecution. He accused them of prosecuting Rittenhouse too soon and in a "rush to judgement." He said that a state crime lab employee tampered with video footage in order to make it more useful to prosecutors. He also informed the jurors that Binger would "lie to your faces" in order to achieve a conviction.
"It's not a game in this situation. My client's life is at stake. You don't play fast and loose with facts, do you? "According to Richards.
Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, in a series of tumultuous clashes with demonstrators that night, then shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, then 26. Rosenbaum had no weapons. Huber was slamming into Rittenhouse with his skateboard. Grosskreutz was carrying a handgun.
During final statements, prosecution and defence attorneys hurled insults and charges that the other side had lied. The two sides presented virtually similar images and videos to the jury, claiming that the evidence revealed opposing results: Grosskreutz was pointing the pistol; Grosskreutz wasn't. Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, although he didn't actually threaten Rittenhouse. An unnamed guy swatted Rittenhouse's hat, claiming he was attempting to "rip his head off."
A critical question in the case: Did Rittenhouse incite violence?
Prosecutors received a boost Friday when Judge Bruce Schroeder decided that they might allege Rittenhouse initiated the original contact with Rosenbaum by lifting his firearm just before Rosenbaum began chasing him. Prosecutors have relied on video evidence obtained by a drone about a block distant from the event, in which Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum can be seen in the distance, to demonstrate this.
"The defendant's right to self-defense is forfeited if he causes the event. You cannot claim self-defense in the face of a threat that you have created "Binger said.
Richards spoke more plainly, constantly urging the jury to adopt "common sense" in assessing Rittenhouse's self-defense claim.
According to Richards, Huber pummelling him to the ground with a skateboard. He confirmed Rittenhouse's suspicion that Grosskreutz was aiming a gun at him. Rosenbaum described himself as "irrational and insane."
"Kyle shot Joseph Rosenbaum to protect himself from a danger. And I'm relieved he shot him "According to Richards. "Because I don't think for a second that if Joseph Rosenbaum had gotten that pistol, he wouldn't have used it against someone else."
The jury's assignment
Rittenhouse is charged with five felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree attempted intentional homicide, and two charges of first-degree willfully endangering another's safety.
He has entered a not guilty plea on all charges.
Jurors may potentially examine reduced versions of the accusations stemming from the Huber and Grosskreutz shootings.
Schroeder dropped a sixth charge, a misdemeanour involving the possession of a dangerous weapon by a child, on Monday morning.
Prosecutors sought the case based on Rittenhouse's age at the time of the incident, but his defence attorneys successfully claimed that a loophole in Wisconsin law permits juveniles to own firearms with barrels 16 inches or longer.
other article from new 24 hour
Is it appropriate to greet veterans with “Happy Veterans Day” or “Thank you for your service”? Here’s what veterans had to say:
”Robert Downey Jr’ He hails a “true maverick” movie-maker father’
source : apnews - timesherald#instagram #happy #nature #photography #fashion #instadaily #beauty #instalike #fun #friends #me #summer #tbt #cute #beautiful #likeforlike #smile #music #ootd #family #model #follow4follow #lifestyle #design #motivation #beach #sunset #amazing #dog #makeup
Read the full article
0 notes
Text
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Kyle Rittenhouse incited violence on the streets of Kenosha by carrying a semi-automatic weapon to a rally and threatening others, and when the shooting ended, he walked away like a "hero in a Western," a prosecutor claimed in closing arguments in Rittenhouse's murder trial on Monday.
However, Rittenhouse's attorney said that the shooting began because the young man had been accosted by a "crazy guy" that night and was afraid that his pistol would be snatched and used to murder him as a result.
The jurors were instructed to come Tuesday morning for the start of deliberations in the case, which has sparked heated discussion in the United States over weapons, vigilantism, and law and order.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Eighteen jurors have been deliberating the case; the 12 who will decide Rittenhouse's fate and the six who will serve as alternates will be chosen using a lottery drum.
In the summer of 2020, a stormy night of rallies against racial inequality, 17-year-old Rittenhouse shot and wounded two men.
Rittenhouse claimed he travelled from Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, in the days following the fatal shooting of Jacob Blake by a white police officer. A former police cadet, Rittenhouse is white like the victims he shot.
Rittenhouse was described as a "want tobe soldier" by prosecutor Thomas Binger in closing arguments. Repeatedly showing jurors the drone video, Binger said the AR-style rifle was pointed towards the protesters.
"This is the provocation. "This is the beginning of this event," the prosecutor claimed.
"You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brings the gun, when you're the one who creates the threat, when you're the one who provokes other people," he told the jurors.
If convicted on the most serious charge against him, first-degree intentional homicide, which is Wisconsin's highest murder count, Rittenhouse, now 18, faces a mandatory life term in prison.
Binger honed down on the murder of 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, the first guy killed down that night and the triggerman for the others. The prosecutor constantly referred to it as murder, claiming that it was unjustifiable.
The prosecutor reminded the jury that Rittenhouse testified that he was aware Rosenbaum was unarmed. Binger also stated that there is no video evidence to back up the defense's assertion that Rosenbaum threatened to murder Rittenhouse.
Binger refuted Rosenbaum's claim that he was attempting to take Rittenhouse's gun. "When the first shot is fired, Mr. Rosenbaum is not even within arm's length," Binger explained. He denied that Rittenhouse had no option but to shoot, claiming that he could have fled.
more article from here : Microsoft has surprised everyone by releasing Halo Infinite multiplayer today.
And Binger contended that once Rosenbaum was injured, he was unable of removing the pistol that was strapped to Rittenhouse's body because he was falling to the ground with a shattered pelvis. Rittenhouse continued to fire, delivering what the prosecutor referred to as the "death shot" to Rosenbaum's back.
"I believe we can also agree that we shouldn't have 17-year-olds roaming around our neighbourhoods with AR-15s," Binger added.
The defence counsel, Richards, labelled Rosenbaum a "crazy guy" who was "hell-bent on provoking problems that night" and went after Rittenhouse unprovoked in his closing statement.
"Mr. Rosenbaum was shot because he was pursuing my client and planning to murder him, grab his pistol, and carry out the threats he made," Richards explained, adding that Rittenhouse never pointed his gun before being pursued: "It didn't happen."
Richards called an enlarged image of Rittenhouse aiming his rifle toward demonstrators "hocus pocus" that doesn't prove anything.
During the debates, Rittenhouse appeared mostly unconcerned, sometimes scribbling notes. Wendy Rittenhouse, his mother, sat behind him, listening carefully.
With a verdict imminent, Gov. Tony Evers stated that 500 National Guard personnel would be ready to deploy to Kenosha if local law enforcement requested them.
While attempting to push his way through the throng after shooting Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, 28. Rittenhouse testified that Huber beat him with a skateboard and that Grosskreutz attacked him with a pistol of his own, which footage and Grosskreutz himself verified.
However, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse was also responsible for the bloodshed. He said Huber, Grosskreutz, and others in the crowd were attempting to halt an active gunman.
When it was all said and done, Rittenhouse strolled away like a "hero in a Western - without a care in the world for whatever he's just done," according to Binger.
The defence, on the other hand, claimed Rittenhouse was attacked by a "mob." Prosecutors, according to Richards, chose the phrase "active shooter" for Rittenhouse because of "the strong overtones of that word."
In an apparent allusion to the police shooting of a Black man that sparked the protests, Richards stated, "Others in this community have shot individuals seven times, and it's been deemed to be OK." (There were no charges filed against the white officer.)
Some jurors appeared to divert their gaze when the prosecutor showed a photo of Rosenbaum's bleeding body on a stretcher during his autopsy, as well as another of his mutilated hand. When Binger showed a close-up of Grosskreutz's bicep, which had been entirely decimated by a bullet, some jurors flinched and moved away.
A small number of protestors yelling outside the courthouse could be heard at one time, but it was unclear what they were saying or whether the jury heard them from within the courtroom.
Supporters praise Rittenhouse as a hero who stood up to lawlessness, while detractors label him a vigilante.
Binger began his closing arguments by doubting Rittenhouse's sincerity in attempting to assist.
The prosecution stated that Rittenhouse possessed ammunition capable of traversing the length of five football fields and passing through vehicles, and he questioned the jurors, "Why do you need 30 rounds of full metal jacket (ammo) to protect a building?"
Rittenhouse, who worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha and helped clear up graffiti before the shootings, "feels for this neighbourhood," according to Richards, and "came down here wanting to assist, to witness the devastation."
The trial, according to the defence counsel, is a "political case" initiated by prosecutors who, he claims, are looking for someone to blame for the violence.
Earlier Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder dropped a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under the age of 18, a misdemeanour that seemed to be one of the most likely to result in a conviction. It is punishable by up to nine months in prison.
The defence contended that Wisconsin law makes an exemption for the length of a weapon's barrel. The court dismissed the indictment when prosecutors admitted that Rittenhouse's gun was not short-barreled.
Prosecutors may have requested the court to allow the jury examine additional lesser charges if they acquitted him on the initial counts, maybe in acknowledgement of flaws in their case. Schroeder consented to do so while delivering the jury 36 pages of legal instructions.
According to the judge's directions, the jury must conclude that Rittenhouse felt there was an illegal danger to him and that the level of force he employed was reasonable and necessary in order to accept his claim of self-defense.
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse?
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse and his attorneys have claimed that when he shot three individuals with his AR-15-style weapon, he was acting in self-defense. Rittenhouse claimed last week in a stunning turn on the witness that he feared for his life.
Lead prosecutor Thomas Binger detailed a tumultuous night in which Rittenhouse created and worsened the danger he faced via a sequence of irresponsible behaviours that made others fear for their own lives in his closing argument.
"People are getting in people's faces. There's yelling going on. There is yelling. There's even pushing going on. Despite this, the only person who shot and killed anyone in this entire sequence of events — from the killing of Jacob Blake on Sunday, Aug. 23, 2020, all the way through all this community went through — was the defendant "Binger said.
Rittenhouse, according to the defenders, was under assault.
In response, lead defence counsel Mark Richards depicted the people shot by Rittenhouse as dangerous rioters out to cause trouble. "This part of downtown was horrible," he remarked.
Richards also took aim at the prosecution. He accused them of prosecuting Rittenhouse too soon and in a "rush to judgement." He said that a state crime lab employee tampered with video footage in order to make it more useful to prosecutors. He also informed the jurors that Binger would "lie to your faces" in order to achieve a conviction.
"It's not a game in this situation. My client's life is at stake. You don't play fast and loose with facts, do you? "According to Richards.
Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, in a series of tumultuous clashes with demonstrators that night, then shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, then 26. Rosenbaum had no weapons. Huber was slamming into Rittenhouse with his skateboard. Grosskreutz was carrying a handgun.
During final statements, prosecution and defence attorneys hurled insults and charges that the other side had lied. The two sides presented virtually similar images and videos to the jury, claiming that the evidence revealed opposing results: Grosskreutz was pointing the pistol; Grosskreutz wasn't. Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, although he didn't actually threaten Rittenhouse. An unnamed guy swatted Rittenhouse's hat, claiming he was attempting to "rip his head off."
A critical question in the case: Did Rittenhouse incite violence?
Prosecutors received a boost Friday when Judge Bruce Schroeder decided that they might allege Rittenhouse initiated the original contact with Rosenbaum by lifting his firearm just before Rosenbaum began chasing him. Prosecutors have relied on video evidence obtained by a drone about a block distant from the event, in which Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum can be seen in the distance, to demonstrate this.
"The defendant's right to self-defense is forfeited if he causes the event. You cannot claim self-defense in the face of a threat that you have created "Binger said.
Richards spoke more plainly, constantly urging the jury to adopt "common sense" in assessing Rittenhouse's self-defense claim.
According to Richards, Huber pummelling him to the ground with a skateboard. He confirmed Rittenhouse's suspicion that Grosskreutz was aiming a gun at him. Rosenbaum described himself as "irrational and insane."
"Kyle shot Joseph Rosenbaum to protect himself from a danger. And I'm relieved he shot him "According to Richards. "Because I don't think for a second that if Joseph Rosenbaum had gotten that pistol, he wouldn't have used it against someone else."
The jury's assignment
Rittenhouse is charged with five felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree attempted intentional homicide, and two charges of first-degree willfully endangering another's safety.
He has entered a not guilty plea on all charges.
Jurors may potentially examine reduced versions of the accusations stemming from the Huber and Grosskreutz shootings.
Schroeder dropped a sixth charge, a misdemeanour involving the possession of a dangerous weapon by a child, on Monday morning.
Prosecutors sought the case based on Rittenhouse's age at the time of the incident, but his defence attorneys successfully claimed that a loophole in Wisconsin law permits juveniles to own firearms with barrels 16 inches or longer.
other article from new 24 hour
Is it appropriate to greet veterans with “Happy Veterans Day” or “Thank you for your service”? Here’s what veterans had to say:
”Robert Downey Jr’ He hails a “true maverick” movie-maker father’
source : apnews - timesherald#instagram #happy #nature #photography #fashion #instadaily #beauty #instalike #fun #friends #me #summer #tbt #cute #beautiful #likeforlike #smile #music #ootd #family #model #follow4follow #lifestyle #design #motivation #beach #sunset #amazing #dog #makeup
Read the full article
0 notes
Text
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Kyle Rittenhouse incited violence on the streets of Kenosha by carrying a semi-automatic weapon to a rally and threatening others, and when the shooting ended, he walked away like a "hero in a Western," a prosecutor claimed in closing arguments in Rittenhouse's murder trial on Monday.
However, Rittenhouse's attorney said that the shooting began because the young man had been accosted by a "crazy guy" that night and was afraid that his pistol would be snatched and used to murder him as a result.
The jurors were instructed to come Tuesday morning for the start of deliberations in the case, which has sparked heated discussion in the United States over weapons, vigilantism, and law and order.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Eighteen jurors have been deliberating the case; the 12 who will decide Rittenhouse's fate and the six who will serve as alternates will be chosen using a lottery drum.
In the summer of 2020, a stormy night of rallies against racial inequality, 17-year-old Rittenhouse shot and wounded two men.
Rittenhouse claimed he travelled from Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, in the days following the fatal shooting of Jacob Blake by a white police officer. A former police cadet, Rittenhouse is white like the victims he shot.
Rittenhouse was described as a "want tobe soldier" by prosecutor Thomas Binger in closing arguments. Repeatedly showing jurors the drone video, Binger said the AR-style rifle was pointed towards the protesters.
"This is the provocation. "This is the beginning of this event," the prosecutor claimed.
"You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brings the gun, when you're the one who creates the threat, when you're the one who provokes other people," he told the jurors.
If convicted on the most serious charge against him, first-degree intentional homicide, which is Wisconsin's highest murder count, Rittenhouse, now 18, faces a mandatory life term in prison.
Binger honed down on the murder of 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, the first guy killed down that night and the triggerman for the others. The prosecutor constantly referred to it as murder, claiming that it was unjustifiable.
The prosecutor reminded the jury that Rittenhouse testified that he was aware Rosenbaum was unarmed. Binger also stated that there is no video evidence to back up the defense's assertion that Rosenbaum threatened to murder Rittenhouse.
Binger refuted Rosenbaum's claim that he was attempting to take Rittenhouse's gun. "When the first shot is fired, Mr. Rosenbaum is not even within arm's length," Binger explained. He denied that Rittenhouse had no option but to shoot, claiming that he could have fled.
more article from here : Microsoft has surprised everyone by releasing Halo Infinite multiplayer today.
And Binger contended that once Rosenbaum was injured, he was unable of removing the pistol that was strapped to Rittenhouse's body because he was falling to the ground with a shattered pelvis. Rittenhouse continued to fire, delivering what the prosecutor referred to as the "death shot" to Rosenbaum's back.
"I believe we can also agree that we shouldn't have 17-year-olds roaming around our neighbourhoods with AR-15s," Binger added.
The defence counsel, Richards, labelled Rosenbaum a "crazy guy" who was "hell-bent on provoking problems that night" and went after Rittenhouse unprovoked in his closing statement.
"Mr. Rosenbaum was shot because he was pursuing my client and planning to murder him, grab his pistol, and carry out the threats he made," Richards explained, adding that Rittenhouse never pointed his gun before being pursued: "It didn't happen."
Richards called an enlarged image of Rittenhouse aiming his rifle toward demonstrators "hocus pocus" that doesn't prove anything.
During the debates, Rittenhouse appeared mostly unconcerned, sometimes scribbling notes. Wendy Rittenhouse, his mother, sat behind him, listening carefully.
With a verdict imminent, Gov. Tony Evers stated that 500 National Guard personnel would be ready to deploy to Kenosha if local law enforcement requested them.
While attempting to push his way through the throng after shooting Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, 28. Rittenhouse testified that Huber beat him with a skateboard and that Grosskreutz attacked him with a pistol of his own, which footage and Grosskreutz himself verified.
However, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse was also responsible for the bloodshed. He said Huber, Grosskreutz, and others in the crowd were attempting to halt an active gunman.
When it was all said and done, Rittenhouse strolled away like a "hero in a Western - without a care in the world for whatever he's just done," according to Binger.
The defence, on the other hand, claimed Rittenhouse was attacked by a "mob." Prosecutors, according to Richards, chose the phrase "active shooter" for Rittenhouse because of "the strong overtones of that word."
In an apparent allusion to the police shooting of a Black man that sparked the protests, Richards stated, "Others in this community have shot individuals seven times, and it's been deemed to be OK." (There were no charges filed against the white officer.)
Some jurors appeared to divert their gaze when the prosecutor showed a photo of Rosenbaum's bleeding body on a stretcher during his autopsy, as well as another of his mutilated hand. When Binger showed a close-up of Grosskreutz's bicep, which had been entirely decimated by a bullet, some jurors flinched and moved away.
A small number of protestors yelling outside the courthouse could be heard at one time, but it was unclear what they were saying or whether the jury heard them from within the courtroom.
Supporters praise Rittenhouse as a hero who stood up to lawlessness, while detractors label him a vigilante.
Binger began his closing arguments by doubting Rittenhouse's sincerity in attempting to assist.
The prosecution stated that Rittenhouse possessed ammunition capable of traversing the length of five football fields and passing through vehicles, and he questioned the jurors, "Why do you need 30 rounds of full metal jacket (ammo) to protect a building?"
Rittenhouse, who worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha and helped clear up graffiti before the shootings, "feels for this neighbourhood," according to Richards, and "came down here wanting to assist, to witness the devastation."
The trial, according to the defence counsel, is a "political case" initiated by prosecutors who, he claims, are looking for someone to blame for the violence.
Earlier Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder dropped a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under the age of 18, a misdemeanour that seemed to be one of the most likely to result in a conviction. It is punishable by up to nine months in prison.
The defence contended that Wisconsin law makes an exemption for the length of a weapon's barrel. The court dismissed the indictment when prosecutors admitted that Rittenhouse's gun was not short-barreled.
Prosecutors may have requested the court to allow the jury examine additional lesser charges if they acquitted him on the initial counts, maybe in acknowledgement of flaws in their case. Schroeder consented to do so while delivering the jury 36 pages of legal instructions.
According to the judge's directions, the jury must conclude that Rittenhouse felt there was an illegal danger to him and that the level of force he employed was reasonable and necessary in order to accept his claim of self-defense.
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse?
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse and his attorneys have claimed that when he shot three individuals with his AR-15-style weapon, he was acting in self-defense. Rittenhouse claimed last week in a stunning turn on the witness that he feared for his life.
Lead prosecutor Thomas Binger detailed a tumultuous night in which Rittenhouse created and worsened the danger he faced via a sequence of irresponsible behaviours that made others fear for their own lives in his closing argument.
"People are getting in people's faces. There's yelling going on. There is yelling. There's even pushing going on. Despite this, the only person who shot and killed anyone in this entire sequence of events — from the killing of Jacob Blake on Sunday, Aug. 23, 2020, all the way through all this community went through — was the defendant "Binger said.
Rittenhouse, according to the defenders, was under assault.
In response, lead defence counsel Mark Richards depicted the people shot by Rittenhouse as dangerous rioters out to cause trouble. "This part of downtown was horrible," he remarked.
Richards also took aim at the prosecution. He accused them of prosecuting Rittenhouse too soon and in a "rush to judgement." He said that a state crime lab employee tampered with video footage in order to make it more useful to prosecutors. He also informed the jurors that Binger would "lie to your faces" in order to achieve a conviction.
"It's not a game in this situation. My client's life is at stake. You don't play fast and loose with facts, do you? "According to Richards.
Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, in a series of tumultuous clashes with demonstrators that night, then shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, then 26. Rosenbaum had no weapons. Huber was slamming into Rittenhouse with his skateboard. Grosskreutz was carrying a handgun.
During final statements, prosecution and defence attorneys hurled insults and charges that the other side had lied. The two sides presented virtually similar images and videos to the jury, claiming that the evidence revealed opposing results: Grosskreutz was pointing the pistol; Grosskreutz wasn't. Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, although he didn't actually threaten Rittenhouse. An unnamed guy swatted Rittenhouse's hat, claiming he was attempting to "rip his head off."
A critical question in the case: Did Rittenhouse incite violence?
Prosecutors received a boost Friday when Judge Bruce Schroeder decided that they might allege Rittenhouse initiated the original contact with Rosenbaum by lifting his firearm just before Rosenbaum began chasing him. Prosecutors have relied on video evidence obtained by a drone about a block distant from the event, in which Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum can be seen in the distance, to demonstrate this.
"The defendant's right to self-defense is forfeited if he causes the event. You cannot claim self-defense in the face of a threat that you have created "Binger said.
Richards spoke more plainly, constantly urging the jury to adopt "common sense" in assessing Rittenhouse's self-defense claim.
According to Richards, Huber pummelling him to the ground with a skateboard. He confirmed Rittenhouse's suspicion that Grosskreutz was aiming a gun at him. Rosenbaum described himself as "irrational and insane."
"Kyle shot Joseph Rosenbaum to protect himself from a danger. And I'm relieved he shot him "According to Richards. "Because I don't think for a second that if Joseph Rosenbaum had gotten that pistol, he wouldn't have used it against someone else."
The jury's assignment
Rittenhouse is charged with five felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree attempted intentional homicide, and two charges of first-degree willfully endangering another's safety.
He has entered a not guilty plea on all charges.
Jurors may potentially examine reduced versions of the accusations stemming from the Huber and Grosskreutz shootings.
Schroeder dropped a sixth charge, a misdemeanour involving the possession of a dangerous weapon by a child, on Monday morning.
Prosecutors sought the case based on Rittenhouse's age at the time of the incident, but his defence attorneys successfully claimed that a loophole in Wisconsin law permits juveniles to own firearms with barrels 16 inches or longer.
other article from new 24 hour
Is it appropriate to greet veterans with “Happy Veterans Day” or “Thank you for your service”? Here’s what veterans had to say:
”Robert Downey Jr’ He hails a “true maverick” movie-maker father’
source : apnews - timesherald#instagram #happy #nature #photography #fashion #instadaily #beauty #instalike #fun #friends #me #summer #tbt #cute #beautiful #likeforlike #smile #music #ootd #family #model #follow4follow #lifestyle #design #motivation #beach #sunset #amazing #dog #makeup
Read the full article
0 notes
Text
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Kyle Rittenhouse incited violence on the streets of Kenosha by carrying a semi-automatic weapon to a rally and threatening others, and when the shooting ended, he walked away like a "hero in a Western," a prosecutor claimed in closing arguments in Rittenhouse's murder trial on Monday.
However, Rittenhouse's attorney said that the shooting began because the young man had been accosted by a "crazy guy" that night and was afraid that his pistol would be snatched and used to murder him as a result.
The jurors were instructed to come Tuesday morning for the start of deliberations in the case, which has sparked heated discussion in the United States over weapons, vigilantism, and law and order.
Rittenhouse sparked the bloodshed in Kenosha, according to the prosecutor.
Eighteen jurors have been deliberating the case; the 12 who will decide Rittenhouse's fate and the six who will serve as alternates will be chosen using a lottery drum.
In the summer of 2020, a stormy night of rallies against racial inequality, 17-year-old Rittenhouse shot and wounded two men.
Rittenhouse claimed he travelled from Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, in the days following the fatal shooting of Jacob Blake by a white police officer. A former police cadet, Rittenhouse is white like the victims he shot.
Rittenhouse was described as a "want tobe soldier" by prosecutor Thomas Binger in closing arguments. Repeatedly showing jurors the drone video, Binger said the AR-style rifle was pointed towards the protesters.
"This is the provocation. "This is the beginning of this event," the prosecutor claimed.
"You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brings the gun, when you're the one who creates the threat, when you're the one who provokes other people," he told the jurors.
If convicted on the most serious charge against him, first-degree intentional homicide, which is Wisconsin's highest murder count, Rittenhouse, now 18, faces a mandatory life term in prison.
Binger honed down on the murder of 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, the first guy killed down that night and the triggerman for the others. The prosecutor constantly referred to it as murder, claiming that it was unjustifiable.
The prosecutor reminded the jury that Rittenhouse testified that he was aware Rosenbaum was unarmed. Binger also stated that there is no video evidence to back up the defense's assertion that Rosenbaum threatened to murder Rittenhouse.
Binger refuted Rosenbaum's claim that he was attempting to take Rittenhouse's gun. "When the first shot is fired, Mr. Rosenbaum is not even within arm's length," Binger explained. He denied that Rittenhouse had no option but to shoot, claiming that he could have fled.
more article from here : Microsoft has surprised everyone by releasing Halo Infinite multiplayer today.
And Binger contended that once Rosenbaum was injured, he was unable of removing the pistol that was strapped to Rittenhouse's body because he was falling to the ground with a shattered pelvis. Rittenhouse continued to fire, delivering what the prosecutor referred to as the "death shot" to Rosenbaum's back.
"I believe we can also agree that we shouldn't have 17-year-olds roaming around our neighbourhoods with AR-15s," Binger added.
The defence counsel, Richards, labelled Rosenbaum a "crazy guy" who was "hell-bent on provoking problems that night" and went after Rittenhouse unprovoked in his closing statement.
"Mr. Rosenbaum was shot because he was pursuing my client and planning to murder him, grab his pistol, and carry out the threats he made," Richards explained, adding that Rittenhouse never pointed his gun before being pursued: "It didn't happen."
Richards called an enlarged image of Rittenhouse aiming his rifle toward demonstrators "hocus pocus" that doesn't prove anything.
During the debates, Rittenhouse appeared mostly unconcerned, sometimes scribbling notes. Wendy Rittenhouse, his mother, sat behind him, listening carefully.
With a verdict imminent, Gov. Tony Evers stated that 500 National Guard personnel would be ready to deploy to Kenosha if local law enforcement requested them.
While attempting to push his way through the throng after shooting Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, 28. Rittenhouse testified that Huber beat him with a skateboard and that Grosskreutz attacked him with a pistol of his own, which footage and Grosskreutz himself verified.
However, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse was also responsible for the bloodshed. He said Huber, Grosskreutz, and others in the crowd were attempting to halt an active gunman.
When it was all said and done, Rittenhouse strolled away like a "hero in a Western - without a care in the world for whatever he's just done," according to Binger.
The defence, on the other hand, claimed Rittenhouse was attacked by a "mob." Prosecutors, according to Richards, chose the phrase "active shooter" for Rittenhouse because of "the strong overtones of that word."
In an apparent allusion to the police shooting of a Black man that sparked the protests, Richards stated, "Others in this community have shot individuals seven times, and it's been deemed to be OK." (There were no charges filed against the white officer.)
Some jurors appeared to divert their gaze when the prosecutor showed a photo of Rosenbaum's bleeding body on a stretcher during his autopsy, as well as another of his mutilated hand. When Binger showed a close-up of Grosskreutz's bicep, which had been entirely decimated by a bullet, some jurors flinched and moved away.
A small number of protestors yelling outside the courthouse could be heard at one time, but it was unclear what they were saying or whether the jury heard them from within the courtroom.
Supporters praise Rittenhouse as a hero who stood up to lawlessness, while detractors label him a vigilante.
Binger began his closing arguments by doubting Rittenhouse's sincerity in attempting to assist.
The prosecution stated that Rittenhouse possessed ammunition capable of traversing the length of five football fields and passing through vehicles, and he questioned the jurors, "Why do you need 30 rounds of full metal jacket (ammo) to protect a building?"
Rittenhouse, who worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha and helped clear up graffiti before the shootings, "feels for this neighbourhood," according to Richards, and "came down here wanting to assist, to witness the devastation."
The trial, according to the defence counsel, is a "political case" initiated by prosecutors who, he claims, are looking for someone to blame for the violence.
Earlier Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder dropped a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under the age of 18, a misdemeanour that seemed to be one of the most likely to result in a conviction. It is punishable by up to nine months in prison.
The defence contended that Wisconsin law makes an exemption for the length of a weapon's barrel. The court dismissed the indictment when prosecutors admitted that Rittenhouse's gun was not short-barreled.
Prosecutors may have requested the court to allow the jury examine additional lesser charges if they acquitted him on the initial counts, maybe in acknowledgement of flaws in their case. Schroeder consented to do so while delivering the jury 36 pages of legal instructions.
According to the judge's directions, the jury must conclude that Rittenhouse felt there was an illegal danger to him and that the level of force he employed was reasonable and necessary in order to accept his claim of self-defense.
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse?
Why did the court dismiss the gun accusation against Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse and his attorneys have claimed that when he shot three individuals with his AR-15-style weapon, he was acting in self-defense. Rittenhouse claimed last week in a stunning turn on the witness that he feared for his life.
Lead prosecutor Thomas Binger detailed a tumultuous night in which Rittenhouse created and worsened the danger he faced via a sequence of irresponsible behaviours that made others fear for their own lives in his closing argument.
"People are getting in people's faces. There's yelling going on. There is yelling. There's even pushing going on. Despite this, the only person who shot and killed anyone in this entire sequence of events — from the killing of Jacob Blake on Sunday, Aug. 23, 2020, all the way through all this community went through — was the defendant "Binger said.
Rittenhouse, according to the defenders, was under assault.
In response, lead defence counsel Mark Richards depicted the people shot by Rittenhouse as dangerous rioters out to cause trouble. "This part of downtown was horrible," he remarked.
Richards also took aim at the prosecution. He accused them of prosecuting Rittenhouse too soon and in a "rush to judgement." He said that a state crime lab employee tampered with video footage in order to make it more useful to prosecutors. He also informed the jurors that Binger would "lie to your faces" in order to achieve a conviction.
"It's not a game in this situation. My client's life is at stake. You don't play fast and loose with facts, do you? "According to Richards.
Rittenhouse shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, in a series of tumultuous clashes with demonstrators that night, then shot and killed Anthony Huber, 26, and injured Gaige Grosskreutz, then 26. Rosenbaum had no weapons. Huber was slamming into Rittenhouse with his skateboard. Grosskreutz was carrying a handgun.
During final statements, prosecution and defence attorneys hurled insults and charges that the other side had lied. The two sides presented virtually similar images and videos to the jury, claiming that the evidence revealed opposing results: Grosskreutz was pointing the pistol; Grosskreutz wasn't. Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, although he didn't actually threaten Rittenhouse. An unnamed guy swatted Rittenhouse's hat, claiming he was attempting to "rip his head off."
A critical question in the case: Did Rittenhouse incite violence?
Prosecutors received a boost Friday when Judge Bruce Schroeder decided that they might allege Rittenhouse initiated the original contact with Rosenbaum by lifting his firearm just before Rosenbaum began chasing him. Prosecutors have relied on video evidence obtained by a drone about a block distant from the event, in which Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum can be seen in the distance, to demonstrate this.
"The defendant's right to self-defense is forfeited if he causes the event. You cannot claim self-defense in the face of a threat that you have created "Binger said.
Richards spoke more plainly, constantly urging the jury to adopt "common sense" in assessing Rittenhouse's self-defense claim.
According to Richards, Huber pummelling him to the ground with a skateboard. He confirmed Rittenhouse's suspicion that Grosskreutz was aiming a gun at him. Rosenbaum described himself as "irrational and insane."
"Kyle shot Joseph Rosenbaum to protect himself from a danger. And I'm relieved he shot him "According to Richards. "Because I don't think for a second that if Joseph Rosenbaum had gotten that pistol, he wouldn't have used it against someone else."
The jury's assignment
Rittenhouse is charged with five felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree attempted intentional homicide, and two charges of first-degree willfully endangering another's safety.
He has entered a not guilty plea on all charges.
Jurors may potentially examine reduced versions of the accusations stemming from the Huber and Grosskreutz shootings.
Schroeder dropped a sixth charge, a misdemeanour involving the possession of a dangerous weapon by a child, on Monday morning.
Prosecutors sought the case based on Rittenhouse's age at the time of the incident, but his defence attorneys successfully claimed that a loophole in Wisconsin law permits juveniles to own firearms with barrels 16 inches or longer.
other article from new 24 hour
Is it appropriate to greet veterans with “Happy Veterans Day” or “Thank you for your service”? Here’s what veterans had to say:
”Robert Downey Jr’ He hails a “true maverick” movie-maker father’
source : apnews - timesherald#instagram #happy #nature #photography #fashion #instadaily #beauty #instalike #fun #friends #me #summer #tbt #cute #beautiful #likeforlike #smile #music #ootd #family #model #follow4follow #lifestyle #design #motivation #beach #sunset #amazing #dog #makeup
Read the full article
0 notes
Text
arabchamber
Do You Have A Legal Problem? Get An Attorney To Help You
Have you found yourself with a court case and not sure how to find the right attorney. Maybe you're friends don't have experience with this specific type of case, and they don't know where to point. Or maybe you're looking for a lawyer that you can establish a long-term business relationship with. Keep reading to learn more. american arab chamber of commerce
When looking for a good lawyer, make sure to obtain personal references. Talking to the local community that have experienced issues similar to you. For instance, if you're a victim of sexual harassment, speak with a women's group. Ask them about the lawyers they had and what their experiences were like.
Ask your lawyer questions. Your lawyer should explain everything they do and keep you up-to-date on a regular basis. If your lawyer keeps you in the dark and won't explain how your case is going, it might be time to drop him like a bad habit.
Do not make the mistake of believing that an older lawyer automatically knows more than a lawyer that is a bit younger. Someone may have been in practice longer, but that does not mean that they automatically have experience in the area of law that pertains to your case.
A good tip to remember if you're going to be working with a lawyer in a criminal case is to be completely honest. By law, anything that you say to your lawyer has to remain confidential. Telling the truth will also give your lawyer the best shot at winning your case.
Know any fees and costs before signing anything. Remember, it's your job to ask questions in regard to the costs. Ask every question you can think of, and look through every document you are given. Your lawyer is not responsible for you being quick on the draw when it comes to signing official paperwork.
Once you have decided to hire a particular lawyer, make sure you receive a written retainer letter that specifically defines the scope of representation, the details of the services you are to receive and the applicable fee structure. By doing this, you will stand a much better chance of getting precisely what you bargained for and you will have useful documentation of the intended relationship should you need to pursue the lawyer in a malpractice action at some point. arab american chamber of commerce
When you hire a lawyer, make sure they're easy to communicate with. You need to be sure you can get in touch when you need them the most. I had a lawyer once who disappeared for a month! Checking reviews can help you find a lawyer, who is a good communicator.
You should set up a face-to-face meeting with an attorney before you hire them to help you with your case. It is nice to talk to someone that is personable and sociable, but you really need to ask questions if you want to find out whether or not your lawyer knows what they are doing.
Remember that lawyers are not miracle workers. Any lawyer who promises success is a liar. Nothing is ever set in stone, so don't be mislead by outrageous claims.
You should never hire a lawyer from an advertisement that you have seen on television, seen in the phone book or heard on the radio. This is really no indication of how good of lawyer they are. Research the lawyer's legal background and read reviews from their peers to determine if they are right for you.
You should make sure you have a solid case before attacking someone in court. Keep in mind that some lawyers only have their own interest in mind and will advise you to go to court regardless of how solid your case is. Present your case to different professionals and do some research on your own before you go to court.
You may want to ask your regular lawyer to refer you to another lawyer that specializes in what you need. Every lawyer has a field of specialty, and your lawyer is a great resource for finding a great lawyer that can help you with your specific case. If you are a current client, your lawyer will want your continued business and give you a good referral.
If you cannot afford a lawyer, consider representing yourself. Find a lawyer who is willing to help you prepare a good defense and give use some useful advice. Some lawyers will help you build a solid defense and bill you for a the few hours they spent working with you. arab chamber of commerce
When you need a lawyer consider using a lawyer referral service to find a lawyer that specializes in the area that you need. An experienced lawyer that is familiar with all aspects of your type of case will get you the best results. A lawyer referral service is worth paying for to find a good lawyer.
0 notes
Text
DUI Lawyers Ogden UT
DUI Lawyers Ogden UT
Zachary C. Holbrook, P.C. - DUI Lawyer
4590 Harrison Blvd 200 C Ogden, UT 84403
(801) 624-6204
What is the benefit you offer for those accused of of a drunk driving offense?
DUI Lawyer Holbrook: A great deal of clients involve me and say, "I got charged with a DUI", and they automatically think they are guilty. That might not be the case as law enforcement officers need to adhere to a rigorous method, and I have actually had a lot of training on that particular procedure. So, points like the field soberness test and the eye examination belong to those treatments. It's incredible the amount of police officers who administer those tests inadequately.
All DUI lawyers are criminal defense lawyers, but not all criminal defense lawyers are DUI lawyers. They do not look in-depth at the body cam or dashcam video clips for the field sobriety examinations. Then there's chain of custody concerns that come with blood examination results and a multitude of proof to poke holes in the Intoxilyzer test. A lot of criminal defense attorneys are not familiar with that.
What are the penalties for a drunk driving first?
DUI Lawyer Holbrook: It's an optimum penalty of 6 months behind bars. In Utah, it's a class B misdemeanor, and the fines are up to $1,500, with a required two days in jail. As opposed to the two days in jail, the majority of courts let you do forty-eight hours of community service. With a DUI sentence in Utah, you need to obtain an interlock tool and pay for it. That is just one of the concealed costs that accumulate in a DUI.
When you get cited for drunk driving, you have 10 days to appeal the driver's license suspension. And after that you have ten days to alert the Utah Driver's License Division that you want to establish your right to have a hearing. However the police tell you that you have 5-14 days to alert the local court where the charges are pending. A lot of individuals mix up that 10-day DLD hearing with the 5-14-day criminal charges. So, sometimes I get a DUI case when the ten days have passed. What's even more, I believe the DLD hearing is important, despite the fact that many criminal defense attorneys say it has no value.
I want to construct a record, so the DLD hearing has value. They record the hearings, so if a cop says something in a Driver's License Division hearing and flip flops his account later on, I can further develop a case. Some police officers do not call into those DLD hearings, so the Utah Driver License Division will not act.
In Utah, can you reject the roadside breath examination?
Utah has an implied consent law. When you get a driver's license, you consented to provide blood, breath, or urine samples if requested by the police. You can decline, however the penalty is usually an 18-month suspension on your vehicle driver's license. If you had submitted and were over the legal limit, your driver's license would certainly be cancelled for 120 days.
Besides the breath examination, are there points the police are observing?
DUI Lawyer Holbrook: There are 24 clues they search for like abrupt motions, hard braking, and acceleration, or slow to pull over. Another clue is not if you struck an item, but if you nearly struck an item, which I think is strange. I've had cops testify that they have actually pulled somebody over, and they went to the wrong side of the roadway or bumped the curb. After that they're trying to find clues from the second they come up to your vehicle. Once you roll down the window, they smell for alcohol.
Additionally, there are the field sobriety examinations. Points like the nine-step walk and turn and the one-leg stand test. They call them attention divided tests. When they ask for your license, registration and insurance, that's an attention divided examination since they're seeking to see just how you handle this circumstance. Various other factors consist of; did you forget to release your safety belt when you attempted to leave the car, or did you utilize it to get out or prop yourself? There are all kinds of clues for the officers.
0 notes
Text
Resignation Accepted
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted an attorney's resignation in the face of bar proceedings.
IndyStar reported in June 2015
A former small claims court judge was caught on camera attempting to solicit sex acts from an inmate he was representing, court documents say.
Clark G. Rehme, an attorney in Indianapolis, has been charged with three counts of sexual misconduct and one count of official misconduct on allegations he had two female inmates expose themselves and perform sexual acts on him in an interview room at the Shelby County Jail, a probable cause affidavit states.
Shelby County Sheriff's Department officials began investigating Rehme after an inmate told a jail officer that she did not want to be in a room with her court-appointed attorney. The inmate said the attorney, identified as Rehme, had her show him her breasts and perform sex acts on him while he exposed himself to her, court documents state
Investigators interviewed the inmate, who said Rehme had made her do these things on two occasions. Court documents state the inmate went along with the behavior because she believed she would get help on her case.
After one of the meetings with Rehme, the inmate provided an unwashed shirt to detectives. Shelby County officials examined the shirt, which showed a positive indication of bodily fluid, court documents state. The shirt was sent for further DNA testing.
The inmate also told detectives that she wasn't the only female prisoner with whom Rehme had inappropriate sexual discussions, according to the documents.
Detectives interviewed the second inmate with whom Rehme allegedly had sexual conversations. The second inmate said Rehme had asked for her bra size and discussed sex acts he had done with other women, including his wife. Documents also state that Rehme told the inmate that he craved sex much the same way the inmate craved drugs.
In an attempt to observe Rehme on camera acting inappropriately, both women agreed to meet with him again, according to the probable cause affidavit.
When Rehme met with the second inmate, investigators watched as he asked the woman to pull up her shirt. Rehme told her he wanted to see it all, then exposed himself and asked the woman to move closer, court documents say. Detectives asked jail officers to intervene when they saw Rehme start to touch the woman, documents state.
Rehme is listed as an attorney with the association of lawyers Brown Tompkins Lory and Mastrian, but one of the group's attorney's, Patrick Mastrian, tells The Indianapolis Star that Rehme has not been a part of the association since the end of last year.
"We haven't had any contact with Mr. Rehme since he left here," Mastrian said in an email.
According to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys, Mr. Rehme is with the firm of Mark Sullivan and Associates. The Star contacted the firm and a spokeswoman said Mr. Rehme is no longer an associate, but could not confirm when he had been let go. Further inquiry has been sent to the firm for confirmation on Rehme's termination.
Rehme was appointed a small claims court judge in Lawrence Township in November 2011 but was not elected in 2014 and vacated his seat in December.
No contact orders have been issued for both of Rehme's clients.
Attorney John Tompkins, who represents Mr. Rehme, said he hopes people "put it in context and wait to hear the whole story once the whole story has had a chance to develop."
Tompkins said an automatic plea of "not guilty" has been entered on behalf of Rehme, and "that is the absolute state of the defense at this point and we will be proceeding with our own investigation."
(Mike Frisch)
http://ift.tt/2v55GfC
http://ift.tt/2v55GfC
0 notes
Text
Criminal Defense Attorney Rahul Balaram Answers, What is the Difference Between Detention and Arrest?
Originally published on sourcefed.com
It can be frightening enough if you are walking down the street when a police officer decides to stop you and asks you a series of questions. Generally, one may stop and ask themselves, “Am I required to stand here and comply with what enforcement is asking of me? Or am I allowed to walk away?” The challenge in those moments is understanding if the situation is simply a detainment or an actual arrest. Many people may be concerned with what their rights are and what they can and cannot do in those instances. Here, criminal defense attorney Rahul Balaram explains the difference between detention and arrest.
Detention
The simplest definition of a detention would be the act of a police officer stopping someone to ask a series of questions. For example, a police officer may stop someone on the street if they are acting unusual or may pull someone over on the road if they have violated a traffic order or there is an issue with their vehicle. The individual in question is not free to leave the scene until they have answered the officer’s questions and determined there is no further probable cause to pursue.
Arrest
An arrest goes further than a detainment as at that point the individual is not free to leave and is taken into custody by enforcement for further questioning. Generally speaking, an arrest will involve restricting movement of the suspect through handcuffs or some sort of restraint. Law enforcement will also inform the suspect that they are under arrest. An arrest may result in being transported from the scene of questioning to a local precinct.
There are several other definitions to differentiate between a detention and an arrest. Detentions are meant to be informative or investigative and are generally considered to be brief in nature. The detainment must be short and not longer than appropriate to determine if there is further probable cause to proceed with an arrest. Some legal opinions suggest that brief in nature can be defined as approximately 20 minutes. An individual in question must feel comfortable and able to leave after they are finished complying and answering the questions of enforcement. If they don’t feel as if they are free to leave the scene, then it may be an arrest instead. Questions within a detention usually are to determine the purpose of why an individual is present in the location they are currently at and to identify who they are.
Other ways to determine if a situation has progressed from a detainment to an arrest is if law enforcement deems it appropriate to use force against the individual in questioning. If the situation warrants for use of force to contain or restrain an individual, or more than one officer needs to be involved, the situation may lead to an arrest. If officers believe the suspect is armed in any capacity, it may automatically lead to an arrest. Another difference is that arrest implies that the suspect has been charged with a crime, whereas a detention does not mean that a formal charge has been formed.
About Rahul Balaram:
Rahul Balaram has led an impressive career as a defense attorney. Before opening his own firm, Mr. Balaram worked as a Deputy Public Defender, representing indigent citizens accused of criminal conduct.
Rahul has recently opened the Balaram Law Office in Santa Rosa. His excellent communication with his clients relieves their anxiety about the court system and lessens their confusion and frustration about court cases they may be facing. He is available for consultation by phone and text 24/7. He ensures that his clients are represented with dignity, compassion, and competence to the court and juries.
#rahul balaram#Balaram Law#rahulbalaram#Balaram Law Santa Rosa#rahul balaram attorney#criminal defense#criminal defense attorney#Criminal Defense Santa Rosa CA#detention#arrest
0 notes
Text
Is Spanking Considered Child Abuse in Utah – Divorce Attorney Casey Hoyer – Criminal Defense Lawyer
IS SPANKING CONSIDERED CHILD ABUSE IN UTAH?
youtube
It seems like every parent has a strong opinion about spanking (also called “corporal punishment” in the parenting literature). King Solomon believed that parents who “spare[] [the] rod” will spoil the child. (Proverbs 13:24.) Other parents believe children should, instead, be reared with a fishing rod. (The Tall Pine Tree: The Life and Work of George H. Brimhall, Raymond & Esther Holbrook, 1988, p. 62.) For our purposes here, I won’t be doing a deep dive into good parenting practices. My focus will be on whether the parental discipline of spanking or, in the alternative, using an object, such as a belt, crosses the line to child abuse, or is “reasonable discipline.”
Spanking that causes physical harm or injury is considered child abuse in Utah
The court recently held that there was insufficient evidence in that record that the parents had committed abuse when they spanked their children with, e.g., a rhinestone belt, because there was no evidence of physical harm or injury resulting from the discipline. (In re State ex rel. K.T.), 424 P.3d 91 (Utah 2017). In that case, the lower Juvenile Court found that it “cannot envision a scenario where striking or hitting a child, of any age, would be appropriate or reasonable discipline.” The Juvenile Court further found that “[a]s a society we’ve progressed to the point where it’s not acceptable to strike a child and certainly strike a child, of any age, with an object, a belt, a strap, or a paddle or anything of that nature.” The appellate court disagreed, reasoning that a “per se” or automatic rule that says that, e.g., spanking a child with a belt is in and of itself abuse without any evidence of physical injury is overbroad. Nevertheless, the Court cautioned parents that in that case the State “would not have needed to forward much additional evidence” to allow the court to infer harm, such as evidence of the effects of the spanking (e.g., injury), evidence of how hard the parent used the belt, etc.
Any physical harm or injury, not just serious physical injury, resulting from spanking will constitute child abuse, even when the parent has tried every disciplinary method in their repertoire, the child has been warned, the parent is in control and not angry when they spank, e.g., a 4-year old boy’s bottom with an open hand three times, and the injury does not require medical attention. Bountiful City v. Baize, 438 P.3d 1041(Utah App. 2019). In that case, there was evidence of a yellowish bruise in the shape of finger or handprint on the child’s bottom.
What is considered reasonable spanking discipline vs. child abuse?
Whether discipline is “reasonable is a fact-dependent analysis that must take into account the various circumstances of the particular case.” K.Y. v. DCFS, 244 P.3d 399 (Utah App. 2010). The court has listed various factors that may indicate whether discipline was “reasonable,” which may include, but are not limited to: (1) whether the person spanking the child was a parent or guardian; (2) evidence of any bruising, contusions, or abrasions on the child; (3) the extent of injury inflicted; (4) evidence of unreasonably cruel punishment such as beatings with a belt, paddle, hose or other object; (5) the need for spanking; (6) the relationship between the need for spanking and the amount of spanking administered; (7) whether the spanking was administered in a good faith effort to maintain discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm; (8) evidence of verbal threats or verbal abuse; (9) whether the incident was isolated or rather a step in an apparent progression of mistreatment. State ex rel. L.P., 981 P.2d 848 (Utah App. 1999). None of the guiding factors listed is necessarily enough on its own to establish a child was abused.
In a divorce setting, when the issue of spanking is raised, family courts usually issue an order that parents not use corporal punishment. And while the courts can find that spanking, even with a belt, is reasonable discipline if there’s no evidence of physical injury or harm, best practice to avoid legal entanglement is to avoid spanking, particularly with a, e.g., belt.
We can help defend against a protective order for spanking or in divorce and custody matters
Hoyer Law continues to handle and advice clients to help them defend themselves from Child Protective Orders brought on by spanking, or in cases in which spanking is being used as a weapon against our clients to limit their parent time with their children such as during a divorce, paternity action or custody modification action. We are here to help! Don’t hesitate to reach out to us and let us review your case. We can be reached at (801) 901-0797 or via web message here.
from Utah Divorce Attorney | DUI & Criminal Defense Lawyer in Lehi, Utah County https://ift.tt/3jtYsfK
0 notes
Text
SEO Needs to Be Part of Your PR Strategy
No, PR and SEO Company are not the same thing. But for best results, they belong together.
March 31, 2020 6 min read
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
Interestingly, although I lead a PR company, we don’t do SEO Company. However, I strongly consider SEO Company know-how one of the most essential advantages a PR business can have. The guiding rule of PR, in my estimation, is to provide relevant and value-add information for the people who want to receive it.
The job of SEO Company, then, is to direct that content to ensure it is seen. So in that respect, PR and SEO Company are best friends. As my friend Dan Posner, business development lead for Big Leap, likes to put it: “PR and SEO Company are like diet and exercise. Why would you attend to one without the other?” I agree.
Since Google updated its core algorithm in September, SEO Company practices have shifted yet again. And as usual, SEO Company experts are pivoting to adjust. The Google game is getting more sophisticated and abstract, with forces like BERT and ‘Entities’ making the algorithm ever more intelligent.
Too often, companies are still approaching SEO Company from a utilitarian perspective, treating it simply as a way to harvest clicks. But forward-thinking CEOs are supporting and empowering their Chiefs of SEO Company, because that link on Google is often prospects’ very first point of brand contact.
Considering that search engine results pages (SERPs) will provide your introduction to many of your future customers, clients and partners, it’s time to start thinking of SEO Company as an integral part of your PR strategy. Put on your best public face, first by ranking, and then by providing a clickable link that converts. Here’s why this crucial point of contact is good for more than inbound sales.
Related: 10 Fundamentals to Understanding SEO
Stop chasing clicks and build a more authoritative presence
Google has been putting more effort into keeping people on the SERP instead of just clicking through. If you can earn a snippet or an answer box, you’ll be the one who answers many users’ questions. You may not get the clickthrough, but you’ve still won, by positioning yourself as an authoritative source in the conversation. This can be true even for a high ranking link without a snippet or an answer box.
“A high SERP ranking establishes you as a trusted authority,” says Guy Sheetrit, CEO of Over the Top SEO Company. “It’s like being quoted in the Times (or the Post. Or even the Journal). Users will automatically associate higher ranked companies with being ‘top of their class.’”
Sheetrit says smart SEO Company now means putting less emphasis on clickthroughs, and more on brand presence. Of course, this makes it trickier to measure ROI. But the long term payoffs of being an established authority are worth it, according to him.
Google doesn’t want to rank you for free
The SEO Company game was different when Google pages were comprised of the classic “10 blue links,” meaning the top 10 organic search results, with ads peppered off to the side. But there’s no use pining for the good ol’ days.
According to Moz Data Scientist Pete Meyers, only 3 percent of Google SERPs now feature 10 blue links. Google pages du jour are dominated by ads, answer boxes, snippets, PAA question boxes and other flotsam. “This is not the exception,” he says. “It’s our new reality.”
Most people focus a majority of their effort on the high-volume terms that face heavy competition and are plastered with paid ads in the search results. But the people searching for the topics at this end of the spectrum tend to be further along in the buying process, which means they’ve probably already interacted with many of your competitors.
Jeremy Knauff, founder of Spartan Media and contributor to Search Engine Journal, believes there’s a better approach.
“When you create and optimize your content to reach people earlier in the buying process, you’ll have a better chance of forming a relationship with them before your competitors do,” he says. “An added benefit is that it’s generally a lot faster and easier to rank for these types of long-tail terms.”
That’s not all bad. It just means there’s a price for ranking consistently. If you want to be front and center on the SERP, above the fold and ready to make a good impression, you can buy the privilege. Whether it’s worth the price is a question for your marketing agency team. So make sure marketing agency and PR are collaborating closely with your SEO Company experts on shared goals and strategies.
Related: 7 Reasons You Should Stop Managing Your SEO and Hire a Pro
Shore up your reputation with best practices
According to Google, three out of four smartphone users go to search engines first to address their immediate needs. There are 3.5 billion smartphone users worldwide, so that makes for roughly 2.625 billion people who search mobile first. The importance of optimizing for mobile cannot be overstated. Consider this principle as well: The best defense for a strong reputation is to proactively be sure you are “on the record” for who you really are and what you really stand for before a crisis occurs. In many kinds of crises, your attorneys or company policy may not allow you to directly respond. So the evidence that already stands may be for a period of time your best (or even your only) response.
In addition, you should follow the most current SEO Company and PR best practices:
● A secure website (https://) is now expected, not a differentiator.
● Optimize for voice search so Alexa and Siri are on your side.
● Quality text content should be longer than 2,000 words for optimal results.
● Quality video content should quickly answer users’ questions.
● As always, optimize for the best possible mobile UX!
Following these tips will get you a ranking that leads others to conclude that you’re at the top. More than clickthroughs, more even than conversions, strategic SEO Company will make you seem like an authority in your field. Don’t allow yourself to get lost in the technical end of landing SERPs and winning snippets. Allow your SEO Company team to fret over those. Just make sure the team you choose is aligned with your best PR thinking, to allow the full force of your marketing agency effort to propel you to the top of the heap.
Related: 6 SEO Marketing Trends in 2019 That Entrepreneurs Should Know …
Website Design & SEO Delray Beach by DBL07.co
Delray Beach SEO
Via http://www.scpie.org/seo-needs-to-be-part-of-your-pr-strategy/
source https://scpie.weebly.com/blog/seo-needs-to-be-part-of-your-pr-strategy
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
catdivorce
cat autism
anothersecondaccount
Just What the URL Says
sgestate123-blog
Untitled
dasanikunal
Untitled
th3shad0wman-blog
The Shadowman