Most of his tickets were for no insurance or driver’s license per the article. So it wasn’t his driving but rather his refusal/inability to get a license.
No DL in possession and insurance are secondary offenses and would never come to light without a primary offense necessitating the initial traffic stop.
@6:32 – driving is a privilege and not a right. If he is unwilling to pay for insurance, take a driver's test, and ensure he is a safe driver he shouldn't be on the road. Period. We need harsher penalties for traffic offenses. Not lighter ones. Driving around town it seems like almost 1/3 of the cars don't have license plates, are locals who refuse to switch over their license plates, or are uninsured. The rest of us bear the burden for their failure to comply with the law when bad things happen.
Also as 9:04 said, there must have been an underlying offense that got bumped down to a parking ticket or some nonsense. Allowing people to pay their way out of being accountable for their actions is classic Las Vegas.
Guest
Anonymous
November 1, 2023 6:39 pm
Alright, so let's assume it's constitutional. I would imagine this would be nearly impossible to enforce absent significant use of facial recognition technology? Or alternatively something that would be really ripe for abuse (intentional or not) of probable cause to question/stop people who an officer thinks might be subject to the potential ban? I don't know,, the spirit of it seems well intentioned but really tough to put into practice.
I would guess that the local cops are fairly familiar with who the repeat offenders are. But I agree it seems ripe for abuse and harassment – how do you get probable cause to stop someone? And it will likely be used to target homeless people (which is a separate issue/problem).
That said, Metro has cameras *everywhere* and facial recognition technology that can track you across the valley, so it doesn't seem like it would be too hard for them to implement at (to the extent they constitutionally are permitted to)
Concerned about the prospective use of facial recognition technology downtown? Too late, the car you drove to get there likely harvested the same data already.
If a defendant is given a choice of prison versus being banned from a geographic area, they'll choose the ban. And if they then violate that ban, why on earth would anyone feel bad for them being arrested? How could it be "abused" when the only basis to arrest someone is if they chose a ban as their sentence?
For example, after a recent particularly lame argument I presented, which was summarily rejected and ridiculed by the judge, I would have given just about anything if I had a brown bag handy, at that moment, to place on my head as I slinked away from counsel table and out of the courtroom.
Either that or a nice rock to hide under.
So, although wearing of a brown bag will not aid one in avoiding facial recognition requirements, some lawyers(like myself) do find occasional usage for a brown bag over their head.
Guest
Anonymous
November 1, 2023 6:48 pm
Also, the Bar's desired changes to the SCR 99-122 regarding attorney discipline took effect October 26. (ADKT 0608) With a few changes.
You'll have to go to ADKT 0608. The Order wasn't found on the court's website under unpublished orders or Rule Amendments, or on the SBN's website (after looking, there was a mention of it in the e-news on September 2). Go figure. Haven't reviewed the enacted changes vs the proposed changes line-by-line, but I did notice that Bar wanted to allow admonitions (private reprimands), but only at the screening panel stage. The bar didn't want to give formal hearing panel that scalp-less option. NSC included it in the discipline that the formal hearing could impose.
The biggest problem for attorneys re discipline process is that Bar Counsel control the screening process (anon). Very much like secret grand juries where they do what Bar Counsel "suggest." Bar Counsel absolutely plays favorites with who they push through and let slide.
Bar counsel is out of control. The last few Supreme Court rulings on bar discipline cases have made clear the justices agree and yet OBC continues on its merry, witch-hunting ways. And we pay for this insanity.
Are all the OBC haters the same person just ranting because they have hurt feelings that they need to follow some very general rules now? All this BS posting about the "bar getting killed on court rulings" and stuff is pathetic. All the cases they have presented are based on bad behavior that needed to be stopped. Grow up little boys. Maybe your small man syndrome is hurting because you cannot walk around abusing the system anymore? Find a different outlet, go for a run or something.
8:28, I completely agree with you. It is one person that got caught, reprimanded and now their huge ego is hurt that after complaining to all their colleagues and getting told to "grow up, you were wrong" they look to vent here. Maybe we should all just respond each time they post with You likely deserved the discipline you received.
Try again, 828, 835 and 839 (definitely all the same OBC Staffer).
This problem is pervasive and is typical with any bureaucracy that has any enforcement power. The "small men" are those that work at the OBC, who must justify their existence with "bodies".
It is not one person. There is no question that we need an effective OBC to regulate bad behavior. However the criticisms of OBC being largely inexperienced, erratic in the discipline that is pursued and directed at lowest hanging fruit are all valid criticisms.
9:33 has a good idea. Here's another one: OBC is interviewing for an attorney. Why don't one of you OBC haters apply for the job and shows us how it's done. Go in an fix whatever you think the problem is. Of course, they wouldn't hire you because you've got discipline.
9:51 Cases can’t be listed because most abuses are at the screening level and favoritism. This renders the recent report invalid. Those of us posting are trying to do a service by telling you. We cannot out ourselves. If you choose not to believe us ok that’s your choice. But please consider why we would post. Just to make shit up or bc we’ve been disciplined or something haha noooo. Just trying to help YOU my friend.
Theoretically, as Anon posters, we could list the cases (even assuming it was 10:02 being targeted by OBC). But, the OBC posts herein are attempting to bait us because they have nothing better to do than flood this blawg with taunting trolling comments.
I came here all ready to get hot and bothered that LVMPD failed to preserve video from day of Telles’ arrest because LVMPD purged it from police records. But then I read the story…It was a traffic stop earlier in the day for which LVMPD would not necessarily have had any reason to know that Telles would later be accused of murder.
Guest
Anonymous
November 1, 2023 9:46 pm
LAS VEGAS FEDERLIST SOCIETY ON FRIDAY…What to expect from the next legislative session,
Heard they're having a raffle. First prize is a weekend with Clarence Thomas in his free motorhome. Second prize is two weekends with Clarence Thomas in his free motor home.
It's Vegas 911 – officer dangle's police truck is stolen by a naked man running through the streets
Guest
Anonymous
November 2, 2023 7:11 pm
Okay, so it's not law related or Las Vegas related, but it's wholesome, and it seems like we could use some of that today.
The twitter accounts of Sesame Street characters are posting pictures of deceased friends to place on Rosita's ofrenda as part of Dia de Muertos. RIP Mr. Hooper, Luis, Bob, and others. Yes, I'm a grown-ass man, and yes, it made me misty-eyed remembering beloved characters from my youth.
Decriminalizing traffic offenses was such a bad move by this city.
The state legislature did that, not the City.
I'm sure the Speaker will be all over this, making sure people with 19 tickets who kill others don't have to worry about consequences.
Most of his tickets were for no insurance or driver’s license per the article. So it wasn’t his driving but rather his refusal/inability to get a license.
632 is pretty much wrong.
No DL in possession and insurance are secondary offenses and would never come to light without a primary offense necessitating the initial traffic stop.
@6:32 – driving is a privilege and not a right. If he is unwilling to pay for insurance, take a driver's test, and ensure he is a safe driver he shouldn't be on the road. Period. We need harsher penalties for traffic offenses. Not lighter ones. Driving around town it seems like almost 1/3 of the cars don't have license plates, are locals who refuse to switch over their license plates, or are uninsured. The rest of us bear the burden for their failure to comply with the law when bad things happen.
Also as 9:04 said, there must have been an underlying offense that got bumped down to a parking ticket or some nonsense. Allowing people to pay their way out of being accountable for their actions is classic Las Vegas.
Alright, so let's assume it's constitutional. I would imagine this would be nearly impossible to enforce absent significant use of facial recognition technology? Or alternatively something that would be really ripe for abuse (intentional or not) of probable cause to question/stop people who an officer thinks might be subject to the potential ban? I don't know,, the spirit of it seems well intentioned but really tough to put into practice.
I would guess that the local cops are fairly familiar with who the repeat offenders are. But I agree it seems ripe for abuse and harassment – how do you get probable cause to stop someone? And it will likely be used to target homeless people (which is a separate issue/problem).
That said, Metro has cameras *everywhere* and facial recognition technology that can track you across the valley, so it doesn't seem like it would be too hard for them to implement at (to the extent they constitutionally are permitted to)
Concerned about the prospective use of facial recognition technology downtown? Too late, the car you drove to get there likely harvested the same data already.
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/categories/cars/
This is why I've taken to wearing a brown paper bag over my head at all times.
If a defendant is given a choice of prison versus being banned from a geographic area, they'll choose the ban. And if they then violate that ban, why on earth would anyone feel bad for them being arrested? How could it be "abused" when the only basis to arrest someone is if they chose a ban as their sentence?
Exile is a punishment in some states and I'm not aware of its having ever been found unconstitutional.
@2:04 is definitely not a lawyer. No lawyer would wear a bag on their head.
7:41-I don't know. 2:04 could be a lawyer.
For example, after a recent particularly lame argument I presented, which was summarily rejected and ridiculed by the judge, I would have given just about anything if I had a brown bag handy, at that moment, to place on my head as I slinked away from counsel table and out of the courtroom.
Either that or a nice rock to hide under.
So, although wearing of a brown bag will not aid one in avoiding facial recognition requirements, some lawyers(like myself) do find occasional usage for a brown bag over their head.
Also, the Bar's desired changes to the SCR 99-122 regarding attorney discipline took effect October 26. (ADKT 0608) With a few changes.
Link? Most significant changes?
You'll have to go to ADKT 0608. The Order wasn't found on the court's website under unpublished orders or Rule Amendments, or on the SBN's website (after looking, there was a mention of it in the e-news on September 2). Go figure. Haven't reviewed the enacted changes vs the proposed changes line-by-line, but I did notice that Bar wanted to allow admonitions (private reprimands), but only at the screening panel stage. The bar didn't want to give formal hearing panel that scalp-less option. NSC included it in the discipline that the formal hearing could impose.
The biggest problem for attorneys re discipline process is that Bar Counsel control the screening process (anon). Very much like secret grand juries where they do what Bar Counsel "suggest." Bar Counsel absolutely plays favorites with who they push through and let slide.
Bar counsel is out of control. The last few Supreme Court rulings on bar discipline cases have made clear the justices agree and yet OBC continues on its merry, witch-hunting ways. And we pay for this insanity.
Are all the OBC haters the same person just ranting because they have hurt feelings that they need to follow some very general rules now? All this BS posting about the "bar getting killed on court rulings" and stuff is pathetic. All the cases they have presented are based on bad behavior that needed to be stopped. Grow up little boys. Maybe your small man syndrome is hurting because you cannot walk around abusing the system anymore? Find a different outlet, go for a run or something.
8:28, thank you. So tired of OBC haters.
8:28, I completely agree with you. It is one person that got caught, reprimanded and now their huge ego is hurt that after complaining to all their colleagues and getting told to "grow up, you were wrong" they look to vent here. Maybe we should all just respond each time they post with You likely deserved the discipline you received.
Try again, 828, 835 and 839 (definitely all the same OBC Staffer).
This problem is pervasive and is typical with any bureaucracy that has any enforcement power. The "small men" are those that work at the OBC, who must justify their existence with "bodies".
Girl, you know it true.
It is not one person. There is no question that we need an effective OBC to regulate bad behavior. However the criticisms of OBC being largely inexperienced, erratic in the discipline that is pursued and directed at lowest hanging fruit are all valid criticisms.
List 5 examples of this abuse. So we all can read the cases.
9:33 has a good idea. Here's another one: OBC is interviewing for an attorney. Why don't one of you OBC haters apply for the job and shows us how it's done. Go in an fix whatever you think the problem is. Of course, they wouldn't hire you because you've got discipline.
LMAO.
OBC is IN the house this morning. Loving the bullpen approach.
Ok team, we are going to defend ourselves on the Blawg this morning.
EVERYBODY posts. Make yourself heard.
Rah Rah OBC!!
🤣🤣
List links to these huge abusive cases or STFU and go back to whining about the weather.
He/she can't list the cases because it's his/her cases.
The multiple posts from OBC central are fkg hilarious.
STFU?
How about this. . . .No.
#OBCSucksAss
It's too bad we can't look up In Re Discipline of 10:02. It would be enlightening.
9:51 Cases can’t be listed because most abuses are at the screening level and favoritism. This renders the recent report invalid. Those of us posting are trying to do a service by telling you. We cannot out ourselves. If you choose not to believe us ok that’s your choice. But please consider why we would post. Just to make shit up or bc we’ve been disciplined or something haha noooo. Just trying to help YOU my friend.
Theoretically, as Anon posters, we could list the cases (even assuming it was 10:02 being targeted by OBC). But, the OBC posts herein are attempting to bait us because they have nothing better to do than flood this blawg with taunting trolling comments.
What if bar counsel runs the blawg?
That's Nonsense.
🤣
I came here all ready to get hot and bothered that LVMPD failed to preserve video from day of Telles’ arrest because LVMPD purged it from police records. But then I read the story…It was a traffic stop earlier in the day for which LVMPD would not necessarily have had any reason to know that Telles would later be accused of murder.
LAS VEGAS FEDERLIST SOCIETY ON FRIDAY…What to expect from the next legislative session,
https://fedsoc.org/events/a-review-of-the-2023-nevada-legislative-session-and-what-lies-ahead
These lunches are fuckin' awesome. Great food, good conversation, great presentation AND you get a CLE.
Federlist.
Heard they're having a raffle. First prize is a weekend with Clarence Thomas in his free motorhome. Second prize is two weekends with Clarence Thomas in his free motor home.
Actually, your CLE credits are docked by one hour if you attend.
Crack all the jokes you want, this is the best CLE credit available next to the annual Chemerinsky lecture.
Two in critical condition when LVMPD officer is outwitted by naked man. https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/watch-naked-suspect-fights-las-vegas-police-officer-steals-patrol-vehicle-causes-crash-now-faces-felony-charges/
The Naked Man. It works 2 out of 3 times.
It's Vegas 911 – officer dangle's police truck is stolen by a naked man running through the streets
Okay, so it's not law related or Las Vegas related, but it's wholesome, and it seems like we could use some of that today.
The twitter accounts of Sesame Street characters are posting pictures of deceased friends to place on Rosita's ofrenda as part of Dia de Muertos. RIP Mr. Hooper, Luis, Bob, and others. Yes, I'm a grown-ass man, and yes, it made me misty-eyed remembering beloved characters from my youth.
👏👏