DA Steve Wolfson wants to conduct a public review so that people understand why the grand jury did not indict an ex-Metro officer in the death of Tashii Brown. [LasVegasNow]
The Nevada Supreme Court said inmates aren’t getting a healthy diet. [Nevada Appeal]
Here’s a look at probation, parole, and the Day Reporting Center. [TNI]
Nevada is the top state for people to become victims of identity theft. [Las Vegas Sun]
The City of Las Vegas hired the Eglet firm to sue opioid makers. [RJ]
So, how do you bring these opioid suits? As a class? As coordinated suits? Separately? You figure Eglet is going to bring them in state court, while naming a few local docs or pharmacies to destroy diversity. But, I'd be interested in thoughts from folks regarding strategy…
Guest
Anonymous
August 2, 2018 9:33 pm
I know it's summer, but blog is dead. Looks like it lasted for 7 years. Not a bad run.
Guest
Anonymous
August 2, 2018 10:06 pm
@ 2:33–yes, no one really commented on anything the last few weeks.
Guest
Anonymous
August 2, 2018 10:58 pm
Off topic, but I recently started getting the blast emails from He Who Shall Not Be Named. They are lovely.
People need to stop hiring bill board lawyers. Your doctors should not be giving you referrals to attorneys.
Guest
Anonymous
August 3, 2018 6:33 pm
"D.A. Wolfson wants to conduct a public review so that people understand why the grand jury did not indict an ex-Metro officer in the death of Tashii Brown."
This just demonstrates the ivory tower condescension of those in power. I'm not saying whether or not the grand jury should have indicted him or not. But many people have very strong opinions as to whether he should have been indicted. Many of these people firmly believe that those of certain races, who live in impoverished neighborhoods,are far more likely to be shot or brutalized by law enforcement.
To now say, essentially, that had you guys been informed the way we want you to be informed, or had you known the facts as we want you to know and interpret the facts, you would not feel this way, is quite unfair and wrong-headed.
They are also saying look how fir-minded and transparent we are being by conducting the public review. Problem is the grand jury proceedings were not for public view and are long since over. So to now say we are going to explain to you why you should feel differently about a process and findings which were closed to you, does nothing to enhance anyone's confidence in the process.
And to make matters worse, it does not appear this public review will include any commentary from concerned community members. Instead, those in authority will discuss the facts they wish to discuss, ignore other facts they don't wish to discuss, and will decide what interpretation and weight should be applied to these facts.
And from this, the community members are expected to change their minds or, at least, feel better about the process because matters have been explained to them.
And I'm not specifically picking on the D.A. or anyone else. All of us, as lawyers, are often largely insulated from the pulse of the community and what people in certain areas are enduring and struggling with. If we wish to educate people and involve them in the process, it needs to be very well-planned, sensitive manner, and include involvement and input from those attending. Otherwise, no matter how well-meaning, it looks like elitist political and law enforcement leaders telling people how they should feel, and that they should feel a lot better about the process because we took the time to arrange this review or meeting..
Wolfson hired an expert to testify before the Grand Jury that has testified hundreds of times and never found excessive force. This was after the case was pulled from the JP and a preliminary hearing. Wolfson's pretense at transparency is laughable.
This is the oldest trick in the book. I was an assistant DA for 15 years (in the midwest, not here) and handled the Grand Jury presentations. So as not to tick off the police union and lose potential votes, we used this precise tactic to cover up/make go away any case involving a cop shooting a civilian, especially when it was clearly unjustified and clearly against established and approved police procedures. Wolfson's an incompetent political whore, but no dummy. But, in the overall scheme of things, this myopic stupidity gets decent, dedicated cops killed.
Guest
Anonymous
August 3, 2018 6:39 pm
No mention of Jeannie Hua on her OR of a mother who allegedly murdered her son.
Hard to have posts complaining about the Nevada Supreme Court being less than productive when they take the entire month of August off from work and become completely non-productive.
So, how do you bring these opioid suits? As a class? As coordinated suits? Separately? You figure Eglet is going to bring them in state court, while naming a few local docs or pharmacies to destroy diversity. But, I'd be interested in thoughts from folks regarding strategy…
I know it's summer, but blog is dead. Looks like it lasted for 7 years. Not a bad run.
@ 2:33–yes, no one really commented on anything the last few weeks.
Off topic, but I recently started getting the blast emails from He Who Shall Not Be Named. They are lovely.
What do they discuss?
The explanation for only a few comments on August 2.
https://for.tn/2O39s31
Plaintiff lawyers had no time for comments. All were very busy working with "runners" to capture new cases and getting new client intake sheets ready.
Sounds like another ID lawyer who hates life and the respective salary that comes with it. Like the saying goes, don't hate the player..
You forgot to mention we be stacking paper….
People need to stop hiring bill board lawyers. Your doctors should not be giving you referrals to attorneys.
"D.A. Wolfson wants to conduct a public review so that people understand why the grand jury did not indict an ex-Metro officer in the death of Tashii Brown."
This just demonstrates the ivory tower condescension of those in power. I'm not saying whether or not the grand jury should have indicted him or not. But many people have very strong opinions as to whether he should have been indicted. Many of these people firmly believe that those of certain races, who live in impoverished neighborhoods,are far more likely to be shot or brutalized by law enforcement.
To now say, essentially, that had you guys been informed the way we want you to be informed, or had you known the facts as we want you to know and interpret the facts, you would not feel this way, is quite unfair and wrong-headed.
They are also saying look how fir-minded and transparent we are being by conducting the public review. Problem is the grand jury proceedings were not for public view and are long since over. So to now say we are going to explain to you why you should feel differently about a process and findings which were closed to you, does nothing to enhance anyone's confidence in the process.
And to make matters worse, it does not appear this public review will include any commentary from concerned community members. Instead, those in authority will discuss the facts they wish to discuss, ignore other facts they don't wish to discuss, and will decide what interpretation and weight should be applied to these facts.
And from this, the community members are expected to change their minds or, at least, feel better about the process because matters have been explained to them.
And I'm not specifically picking on the D.A. or anyone else. All of us, as lawyers, are often largely insulated from the pulse of the community and what people in certain areas are enduring and struggling with. If we wish to educate people and involve them in the process, it needs to be very well-planned, sensitive manner, and include involvement and input from those attending. Otherwise, no matter how well-meaning, it looks like elitist political and law enforcement leaders telling people how they should feel, and that they should feel a lot better about the process because we took the time to arrange this review or meeting..
Wolfson hired an expert to testify before the Grand Jury that has testified hundreds of times and never found excessive force. This was after the case was pulled from the JP and a preliminary hearing. Wolfson's pretense at transparency is laughable.
This is the oldest trick in the book. I was an assistant DA for 15 years (in the midwest, not here) and handled the Grand Jury presentations. So as not to tick off the police union and lose potential votes, we used this precise tactic to cover up/make go away any case involving a cop shooting a civilian, especially when it was clearly unjustified and clearly against established and approved police procedures. Wolfson's an incompetent political whore, but no dummy. But, in the overall scheme of things, this myopic stupidity gets decent, dedicated cops killed.
No mention of Jeannie Hua on her OR of a mother who allegedly murdered her son.
Let's talk about it. I saw this on the news.
Hard to have posts complaining about the Nevada Supreme Court being less than productive when they take the entire month of August off from work and become completely non-productive.
Hey, they just released 9 opinions yesterday. That's more than they did in June and July put together.