Fatal Road Rage denied
This is the problem with our system. No question that D shot into the car or the result. Yet D atty is denying/arguing something that can’t be sustained, an entirely BS argument. Not even the possibility of SODDI here.
Yes, I understand the people’s obligation, which I approve as fundamental. But nonsense arguments just slow down justice and clog up the courts and waste everyone’s time.
There has to be a better way.
Yeah, I’m sure judges won’t get lazy and just mail it in with AI. Some judges don’t read the briefs without AI. Imagine how bad this is gonna get. Bot v. Bot with humans pretending they’re involved.
You assume judges aren’t already lazy. Many of them just delegate the bulk of their work to their law clerks and “work from home” 2-3 days out of the week.
Guest
Anonymous
March 27, 2026 1:26 pm
“Hey, CCSDPD, your officer did awful things.”
“We are investigating internally.”
“Can we see the results of the investigation?”
“No. Investigation is ongoing.”
“Was there discipline involved?”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
“it’s been almost three years. Is the investigation close to being finalized?”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
“I’d like to see proof you are investigating.”
“No. Until there is a result, the investigation can not be released.”
“But it’s been 3 years….”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
And when Internal Affairs actually finds fault, and disciplines the officer, you will just be told the investigation was concluded. LVMPD will fail to provide any additional information until you file a lawsuit.
I am surprised this decision did not generate more discussion and outrage. I guess it is the sign of the times. If you understand anything about NRS 239 and 289 and you read this opinion you can see how easy it was to reach the correct decision and how outcome driven this decision is. There is little to no attempt to engage in statutory analysis or distinguishment of the robust public records precedent. Justice Bell converted an officer right to information at a certain stage of an investigation into a prohibition on public oversight of law enforcement at all stages–in the face of overwhelming legislative instruction and precedent to do the opposite. They did it to curry favor with the police unions. If you think the teacher’s unions protect their worst, you’ve seen nothing when it comes to the police unions, and now you never will. And even among lawyers there is hardly a sound.
Big Brother is upon us yalls:
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever.’
He paused as though he expected Winston to speak. Winston had tried to shrink back into the surface of the bed again. He could not say anything. His heart seemed to be frozen. O’Brien went on:
‘And remember that it is forever. The face will always be there to be stamped upon. The heretic, the enemy of society, will always be there, so that he can be defeated and humiliated over again. Everything that you have undergone since you have been in our hands — all that will continue, and worse. The espionage, the betrayals, the arrests, the tortures, the executions, the disappearances will never cease. It will be a world of terror as much as a world of triumph. The more the Party is powerful, the less it will be tolerant: the weaker the opposition, the tighter the despotism.
Guest
Anonymous
March 27, 2026 2:13 pm
I swear I thought the title of this post was an unpublished Seuss book. “I’ve never seen a camel in the park. I’ve never met a mole rat after dark.”
I thought it was the name of the Lana Del Rey album.
Guest
Anonymous
March 27, 2026 7:08 pm
Can a single reporter in Nevada ask the follow up question of “why do you think this is constitutional?,” when government attorneys declare it to be so. Im not arguing that they are necessarily wrong, but I am left in the dark about the reasoning on a contentious matter.
When Sisolak decided to close the entire state, we didn’t have a single reporter who bothered to ask Sisolak, who sued the county and recovered $30M based on a theory of eminent domain for a property that wasn’t actually taken from him, a simple question like “are Nevadans who are denied the full use of their property entitled to compensation?”
Those are.. lots of ridiculous assertions. Are you even trained in legal analysis?
Sisolak sued the county because the airport seized the airspace above his building. He had the right to build higher, and then he didn’t. That was a taking. You can disagree with the appropriate valuation of that airspace, but it was a taking.
Guest
Anonymous
March 28, 2026 4:04 pm
Erika Ballou has opted to remain suspended and go without pay through the end of her term.
Fatal Road Rage denied
This is the problem with our system. No question that D shot into the car or the result. Yet D atty is denying/arguing something that can’t be sustained, an entirely BS argument. Not even the possibility of SODDI here.
Yes, I understand the people’s obligation, which I approve as fundamental. But nonsense arguments just slow down justice and clog up the courts and waste everyone’s time.
There has to be a better way.
I think he is on body camera video saying he did it too.
he is
The article is referring to the courtroom behavior that was alleged the other day, not the underlying case.
Yeah but who reads these days.
The discussion was whether Defendant was laughing at and mocking the victim’s family.
https://decrypt.co/361852/ai-enters-courtroom-los-angeles-pilot-program
Yeah, I’m sure judges won’t get lazy and just mail it in with AI. Some judges don’t read the briefs without AI. Imagine how bad this is gonna get. Bot v. Bot with humans pretending they’re involved.
You assume judges aren’t already lazy. Many of them just delegate the bulk of their work to their law clerks and “work from home” 2-3 days out of the week.
“Hey, CCSDPD, your officer did awful things.”
“We are investigating internally.”
“Can we see the results of the investigation?”
“No. Investigation is ongoing.”
“Was there discipline involved?”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
“it’s been almost three years. Is the investigation close to being finalized?”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
“I’d like to see proof you are investigating.”
“No. Until there is a result, the investigation can not be released.”
“But it’s been 3 years….”
“Investigation is ongoing.”
And when Internal Affairs actually finds fault, and disciplines the officer, you will just be told the investigation was concluded. LVMPD will fail to provide any additional information until you file a lawsuit.
Well this is CCSD Police so very unlikely LVMPD will provide any additional information
the Tupac investigation apparently lasted almost 3 decades, so….
I am surprised this decision did not generate more discussion and outrage. I guess it is the sign of the times. If you understand anything about NRS 239 and 289 and you read this opinion you can see how easy it was to reach the correct decision and how outcome driven this decision is. There is little to no attempt to engage in statutory analysis or distinguishment of the robust public records precedent. Justice Bell converted an officer right to information at a certain stage of an investigation into a prohibition on public oversight of law enforcement at all stages–in the face of overwhelming legislative instruction and precedent to do the opposite. They did it to curry favor with the police unions. If you think the teacher’s unions protect their worst, you’ve seen nothing when it comes to the police unions, and now you never will. And even among lawyers there is hardly a sound.
Big Brother is upon us yalls:
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever.’
He paused as though he expected Winston to speak. Winston had tried to shrink back into the surface of the bed again. He could not say anything. His heart seemed to be frozen. O’Brien went on:
‘And remember that it is forever. The face will always be there to be stamped upon. The heretic, the enemy of society, will always be there, so that he can be defeated and humiliated over again. Everything that you have undergone since you have been in our hands — all that will continue, and worse. The espionage, the betrayals, the arrests, the tortures, the executions, the disappearances will never cease. It will be a world of terror as much as a world of triumph. The more the Party is powerful, the less it will be tolerant: the weaker the opposition, the tighter the despotism.
I swear I thought the title of this post was an unpublished Seuss book. “I’ve never seen a camel in the park. I’ve never met a mole rat after dark.”
I thought it was the name of the Lana Del Rey album.
Can a single reporter in Nevada ask the follow up question of “why do you think this is constitutional?,” when government attorneys declare it to be so. Im not arguing that they are necessarily wrong, but I am left in the dark about the reasoning on a contentious matter.
When Sisolak decided to close the entire state, we didn’t have a single reporter who bothered to ask Sisolak, who sued the county and recovered $30M based on a theory of eminent domain for a property that wasn’t actually taken from him, a simple question like “are Nevadans who are denied the full use of their property entitled to compensation?”
Lots of people sued over this and they lost because it wasn’t a taking.
You seem to be missing the point entirely but that seems to be a theme with certain people.
Those are.. lots of ridiculous assertions. Are you even trained in legal analysis?
Sisolak sued the county because the airport seized the airspace above his building. He had the right to build higher, and then he didn’t. That was a taking. You can disagree with the appropriate valuation of that airspace, but it was a taking.
Erika Ballou has opted to remain suspended and go without pay through the end of her term.
https://www.8newsnow.com/investigators/las-vegas-judge-ballou-to-finish-term-on-suspension-without-pay/
Despite some pretty wild discrepancies with the Hsieh Will, Red Cross says give us money.
https://www.8newsnow.com/investigators/red-cross-unicef-back-tony-hsiehs-alleged-will-involving-hefty-donations/
looking for a reccomendation for counsel in the LV area to contest denial of coverage on an attorney malpractice claim. Thanks