- Quickdraw McLaw
- 24 Comments
- 162 Views
- A panel made 25 suggestions that could save $640 million on prison costs over the next decade. [TNI]
- Bail was not revoked for Alexis Plunkett last week despite text messages calling for a hit. [Fox5Vegas]
- Did you know Henderson claims exclusive nationwide use of the term “Water Street District?” [Las Vegas Sun]
Now that Judge Bailus was voted out and replaced with a new judge, what other judge would you like most to be voted out or removed from the bench. Why?
That list is long and distinguished my friend.
@8:52 just long
EJDC, I would keep Denton and maybe Crockett. The rest all are getting voted out.
I've heard good things about how Tierra Jones is doing.
8:52, did you really just quote Goose from Top Gun? Well done.
One District Court judge in particular whose zany personal life has, for the past 10 or so years, made it impossible to take her seriously. There are other reasons to not take her seriously; but at a baseline, we should not have judges throwing down at youth soccer games and smacking their kids around.
She will not get re-elected.
One judge I would like to see booted off the bench is Villani.
1:14 She got re-elected last time after the soccer brawl and after the dog choking incident. With our electorate, I can see her getting elected again. And with her complete lack of shame, I can see her running again. I mean, what else is she going to do? Get a job in a law firm where she'd have to do actual legal work? She can't do that; that's why she became a judge.
I think we may now have an idea how Hardesty is going to propose paying for judicial pay increases and more judgeships. "Adopt our reforms and you'll still save money, even after raising judicial pay and adding judges."
Where is the Hardesty quote from? Does anyone ever really tell him no? The man is impervious to the word.
10:29 here. Not an actual quote. I was surmising how the argument will go before the legislature.
Speaking of the legislature, is there a link to the BDRs for the upcoming session?
Bill Draft Requests are available at https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/80th2019/Bdrs/List
Bills are available at https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/80th2019/Bills/List
There are a number of prefiled bills. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/80th2019/Reports/Prefiled.cfm
Thanks!
Find a Lawyer directory on SBN website is "temporarily unavailable." Maybe they are updating some of the info that is six months out of date.
I think there was more than a sufficient basis to revoke bail if the judge was so inclined. I also agree that the judge, and the detective, were understandably puzzled with the argument that this was mere "venting" by the attorney. They are both correct that such is hardly a sufficient explanation.
But the judge is a practical person and sometimes a gut player(and usually correct with it). Sure, the objective evidence would be sufficient to revoke bail, and "venting" is by no means a sufficient explanation for the threat. However, the judge probably correctly concluded that she got this absurdity out of her system, and that she really does not pose much of a real-life risk to have this inmate bumped off.
At least that's how I see it, but I assume other posters have better inside info. and/or a better explanations for the rationale behind the ruling.
At least that's how it looks to me. Anyone else have an explanation?
To: 11:05. Could be as you say that he thought it is ludicrous to believe that allowing this young attorney to remain free truly imperils the life of inmates. But, as you also allude to, is not the safer route to judge such issue merely by the objective evidence, rather than digging deeper into one's motivations? And even if he wants to go beyond the objective evidence, and examine true motivations, the detective did not provide him cover and protection on such issue as the detective could not see how the motivation was merely to vent, and not follow through.
At any rate, I consider this a tough judgment call, made by a real good judge. But I'm merely suggesting that perhaps there is more objective support for an order to revoke.
That all said, I like the decision(even if it is a little difficult to agree with based on the evidence) as I personally think no one is served if she's incarcerated, and I do believe it was mere venting. I do believe, however, she dodged a bullet and needs to take this as a real learning experience or next time she will not be so fortunate.
Little impulse control can go a long way. I learned never to send an angry communication until I wait for a number of hours. Invariably, I either ultimately decide not to send it, or I really tone it down.
And my communications have never involved anything as remotely concerning as what occurred in this case. So, I really, really, hope she reflects.
You can go to her facebook page right now and read for yourself that she has not learned anything or toned down anything.
Just because she is jumping out of French fries and does not understand how bizarre it is to be threatening hits on gang members, why would you assume that she is a still the same old Alexis?
Anyone want to be a judge? https://nvcourts.gov/AOC/Committees_and_Commissions/Judicial_Selection/News/Judicial_Openings_in_Las_Vegas_Call_for_Interested_Attorneys/ You have to apply for just one department and you don't know who else is applying and you can't change departments once you apply. Sounds rigged.
You don't know but Letizia and Thomas know who is where.
Nothing to see here….judicial discipline all over this in 12431, to us 1234.