The Legislature wrapped up its 2017 session with a few last minute surprises including a cost of living raise for state employees and a new confidentiality provision for gaming regulators and licensees. [TNI]
Alexis Plunkett asked for a month to find new counsel after indicating she paid Robert Langford more for one week than she paid herself in the whole last month. [RJ]
Judge Elissa Cadish sentenced War Machine to 36 years to life. [RJ]
Manslaughter charges for a Metro officer involved in chokehold death. [Fox5Vegas]
You could be hit over the head with a wrench and strangled by a bailiff, and no one down at the RJC would give a shit. The bailiffs in family court strangled a woman. But if you are missing one penny from your IOLTA, you will be disciplined. I need to become a bailiff.
I would not allow Grierson be in charge of the gas and sip, let alone the court house.
Guest
Anonymous
June 6, 2017 4:17 pm
Alexis and the non functioning toilet…I fail to see why the RJ is in love with this story of this trashy attorney representing scumbags and has her own legal drama herself. This troll needs to go away.
Flush…flush…flush…be a sweetie and wipe the seatie…flush…flush..no napkins or legal briefs of any kind….flush…flush…we have no good plumbing system….flush…flush…down at the RJC.
Maybe this would be an appropriate question for Bryan Ure, Esq., Alexis' ex-husband. From the date of their marriage/divorce, it seems that Alexis was getting her boobs fondled at NDOC shortly after the wedding and shortly before the divorce.
Pretty sure the point of 12:31's post was to show how shitty Ms. Plunkett is. She not only threw away her career, but her marriage too. This isn't about her ex, he was just another casualty. And the post was no more shitty than calling her a man
What exactly was the point of identifying AP's ex in 12:31's post beyond "AP's ex" unless there was some thought to embarrass Bryan? The comment should be removed. Bryan doesn't deserve to be called out on this, particularly by "Anonymous". Really poor judgment all the way around.
It was once every three years. However, ADKT 0478 (filed May 5, 2017) now requires effective 2018 that we have to do one substance abuse CLE credit each year.
It was every three years. It is required this year as well. However, ADKT 0478, signed on 5/5/17, now requires 13 credit hours annually, including 2 ethics and 1 substance abuse every year, beginning January 1, 2018.
Right. So this year, you need 12 credits: 9 general, 2 ethics, 1 substance abuse). Next year, you'll need 13: 10 general, 2 ethics, 1 substance abuse. The year after? probably 14, to include gambling addiction. Then come CLE requirements for Sexual Addiction, proper mental health, Nutrition and the Law, and Civility. Finally, after years of lobbying by the clerks at the Nevada Supreme Court, the Court will impose CLE obligations on Promptness in Filing, How to Write Worth a Damn, and the Oxford Comma.
Protip: The serial comma is just another name for the Oxford comma, which is an optional comma before the coordinating conjunction in the series of three or more items. 10:50 a.m. gave a perfect example of the Oxford comma in his/her last sentence. According to The Redbook, "[t]he serial comma is never incorrect, but omitting it is sometimes quite incorrect," which is one reason I give a fuck about the Oxford comma.
2:57, I wouldn't call it "listening to" VW, but I'm familiar with the song. Just couldn't think of a witty retort involving another line from the song, since it has some pretty weird lyrics.
12:50 p.m. here. I'm more than a little embarrassed that I completely missed the Vampire Weekend reference at 11:32 a.m. — haven't heard that song in a while!
Guest
Anonymous
June 6, 2017 7:14 pm
Poor Metro cop. I find it appalling that he has to defend himself against manslaughter charges.
Cops encounter violent nut cases every day, often all day. If the violent nutcase starts hitting, the cop has to use whatever means are at his disposal. A choke hold can be an excellent means of subduing a thug.
The problem, I think, is that they are not taught to cadets any more. In the old days, cops had time tested and proven escalation methods available, from verbal commands, to popping the thug in the nose, to beating him with a baton, to a choke hold, and if necessary, shooting him. Now it's all a hot mess. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 (or whatever the saying is.) It's Metro Command and the politicians who should be on trial.
Cops have the worst jobs. They are refuse workers with targets on their backs. Did the accused over react? Maybe. Should he have tried something else besides a choke hold? Probably. Should he be prosecuted? Hells no. This isn't a Rodney king type event.
Concur, except that we all know now that Rodney King was a thug who kept attacking officers even after the other thugs in the car surrendered. The media only broadcast the beating part, not what preceded it.
We didn't have an alternative media back then, so LA burned for the LA Times and network news profits, and that POS King got a payout for being a thug. Screw California. Unfortunately, this state now has so many of them that we are about to go all Cali, too.
For those of you who can't believe that the cop was charged–did you miss the part where the undersheriff himself said the cop used excessive force and conducted himself contrary to his use of force training? He tasted the guy 7 times while he was already on the ground for crying out loud. I believe even Taser itself says no more than 3 should be used.
Right, but why did the cop do it? Was it because Mr. Meth-head was violently resisting arrest? A threat to all those around him? Hang around some cops and hear their stories.
I realize that cops have to deal with all kinds of garbage, but excessive force is excessive force, and if you can't control yourself go find another line of work. Unless he had a weapon or someone's life was in immediate danger, he should not be dead as a result of the force that was used. Making an arrest of a guy like this is just not all that important.
It's a very tragic situation for all involved. Did Mr. Tashii Farmer (A/K/A Tashii Brown) deserve to pay the ultimate price, absolutely not! Did Officer Kenneth Lopera intend to hurt or harm Mr. Farmer? I seriously doubt that to be true.
Fast forward to the present… Mr. Farmer is deceased; his family has lost a loved one because of the acts of another; Officer Lopera's life as he knew it is over, has lost his career and may be facing a felony record and possible prison time; Officer Lopera's family has lost the life that they knew it, as well as, the resultant damage from his current situation.
Granted the price paid by Mr. Farmer and his family outweighs the price paid and to be paid by Officer Lopera, but everyone involved suffered and will suffer as a result of this incident.
Not to minimize the harm that a bad decision by a police officer can cause, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the officer has to make upwards of a thousand split second decisions a day, each of which if wrong can have tragic outcomes (including the loss of life to others or themselves). Police officers are human and not machines so errors, despite their best efforts to avoid them will occur. The best we can hope for, through selection and ongoing training processes, is minimize the frequency in which they occur and reduce the impact those errors have on the innocent when they do occur. I sometimes wonder why anyone would ever want to be a police officer when you consider all the risks and consequences they voluntarily accept with the position.
I am saddened every time one of these cases occurs as there can never be a good outcome.
I have been in and witnessed my fair share of street fights. The fact is that once the fighting starts, NO ONE can predict whether the next blow might be fatal or at least incapacitating. I recall some man dying at a gas station because he was pushed and fell and hit his head just right.
Poor cop made a split second decision that we can all criticize in hindsight, but does that manslaughter make?
Criticizing in hindsight is how we prevent citizens from summary execution by police officers. Ignoring the fact that the officer involved violated protocols involving use of the Taser and the type of chokehold that ultimately ended the suspects life would be stupid. We are not animals incapable of learning from the past or criticising what his own superior officers fired him for and charged him criminally for.
Your examples are pathetically self-serving and ultimately pointless. There are plenty of predictable events in a streetfight, and plenty of random unpredictable events.
Poor citizen made a split second decision – did he deserve to be choked to death in the street?
That is exactly why this must be reviewed in hindsight – because asshats like you think the police are never wrong and above any criticism.
I prefer assclown to asshat. No doubt accountability is important. From the recitation of facts in the linked article, I leaned heavily towards the cop's side. If it had been, for example, a no knock drug bust warrant that resulted in the thug's death, I would be leaning heavily against the cop, no matter what the thug did or didn't do.
12;19, that is a straw man argument. This wasn't a split-second decision, taken in good-faith, that turned out to be incorrect. That would be "It was dark, things were chaotic, he pulled something from his pocket that looked like a gun, I reacted instantaneously because I thought my life was in imminent danger." No, Tasering someone multiple times and placing them in a chokehold sufficient to result in death is not a "split second" reaction. It was a deliberative process for which the officer should be held fully accountable.
Officer made the conscious decision to incapacitate Mr. Farmer no matter what that took– decision was made that Mr. Farmer was going out and he was going to go out through force.
If the thug keeps getting up after getting tasered numerous times then it's time for a choke hold. Tasers are terrible. Nothing can replace a baton and a good choke hold.
Think about it, if the cop had bad intentions, wouldn't he just let the thug throw a punch or two and then drop him with his firearm? Even today the "he lunged" defense works relatively well for cops. I may be wrong, but I think this cop had good intentions. He is unlucky to live in a world where the good are bad; and the bad are good.
We live in an age where the sheep relentlessly persecute the Shepard and his dogs with the aid of helpful wolves. The outcome is certain.
Guest
Anonymous
June 7, 2017 4:34 pm
After looking through the bills that were passed, I think I lost count of the number of bills that were completely gutted in order to be amended to something totally different. SB 368 went from providing folks who were subjected to illegal seizure with a means of getting their property back to an 11th hour and 56 minutes surprise raise for public employees. A bunch more in the criminal defense arena.
OBC sucks. About as bad as the RJC crew sucks.
RJC is a cess pool. Everybody down there should be treated with respect, and they aren't. I hope somebody new runs, you have my vote.
I am waiting on an order from a hearing that is over 2 months old. The order is growing whiskers.
I can tell you who doesn't care, Betsey.
I like Gonzales, but she doesn't give a shit.
Betsy, you are breaking my heart!
The broken toilet, Alexis P., analogy is appropriate for courthouse.
You could be hit over the head with a wrench and strangled by a bailiff, and no one down at the RJC would give a shit. The bailiffs in family court strangled a woman. But if you are missing one penny from your IOLTA, you will be disciplined. I need to become a bailiff.
You better have your bar card if you make the RJC's floor dirty after you are battered by RJC's finest.
I keep by bar card in a belt buckle, Ammon.
I would not allow Grierson be in charge of the gas and sip, let alone the court house.
Alexis and the non functioning toilet…I fail to see why the RJ is in love with this story of this trashy attorney representing scumbags and has her own legal drama herself. This troll needs to go away.
I think you're using "troll" improperly. You and I, we're the trolls. We're posting snarky stuff anonymously on a message board. You're welcome.
Flush…flush…flush…be a sweetie and wipe the seatie…flush…flush..no napkins or legal briefs of any kind….flush…flush…we have no good plumbing system….flush…flush…down at the RJC.
You will catch the clap or the crabs on the toilet at the Justice Center.
Laughing.
Alexis Plunkett is savage and I love her. You go AP!
-Not Alexis Plunkett
She's a MAN baby!!!!
She does look like a dude though with a bad haircut.
I am over Alexis Plunkett, next.
Maybe this would be an appropriate question for Bryan Ure, Esq., Alexis' ex-husband. From the date of their marriage/divorce, it seems that Alexis was getting her boobs fondled at NDOC shortly after the wedding and shortly before the divorce.
Why the hell would anyone post that and drag her ex into it?
That is a shitty post.
It is fair to point out that the ex was a victim. How sad.
12:31's point was not to present the ex as a victim.
12:31, work on your comb over. Baby Bell is about to get on the bench.
12:31's point was to demonstrate he/she is a piece of shit.
4:31– I will be the first to admit that I have no idea what combover and Baby Bell have to do with one another.
I think it is a joke.
Pretty sure the point of 12:31's post was to show how shitty Ms. Plunkett is. She not only threw away her career, but her marriage too. This isn't about her ex, he was just another casualty. And the post was no more shitty than calling her a man
What exactly was the point of identifying AP's ex in 12:31's post beyond "AP's ex" unless there was some thought to embarrass Bryan? The comment should be removed. Bryan doesn't deserve to be called out on this, particularly by "Anonymous". Really poor judgment all the way around.
12:31 – you really took time out of your life to dig up that info?
I'm fairly certain that being called out in an anonymous blog post is not what is embarrassing him at this point.
On an unrelated matter, what was the first year that we needed the substance abuse and alcohol cle? We are required to do it every three years, right?
It was once every three years. However, ADKT 0478 (filed May 5, 2017) now requires effective 2018 that we have to do one substance abuse CLE credit each year.
It was every three years. It is required this year as well. However, ADKT 0478, signed on 5/5/17, now requires 13 credit hours annually, including 2 ethics and 1 substance abuse every year, beginning January 1, 2018.
Right. So this year, you need 12 credits: 9 general, 2 ethics, 1 substance abuse). Next year, you'll need 13: 10 general, 2 ethics, 1 substance abuse. The year after? probably 14, to include gambling addiction. Then come CLE requirements for Sexual Addiction, proper mental health, Nutrition and the Law, and Civility. Finally, after years of lobbying by the clerks at the Nevada Supreme Court, the Court will impose CLE obligations on Promptness in Filing, How to Write Worth a Damn, and the Oxford Comma.
Clearly you have already mastered the use of the Oxford comma. Well done!
Who gives a fuck about an oxford comma?
Is there a different kind of, non-Oxford comma? If yes, what does it look like and what is it for?
yes, there is also, something known as the serial comma.
your an idiot, clearly he is talking about the semi-comma.
Says the idiot who doesn't know which "you're/your" to use!
Protip: The serial comma is just another name for the Oxford comma, which is an optional comma before the coordinating conjunction in the series of three or more items. 10:50 a.m. gave a perfect example of the Oxford comma in his/her last sentence. According to The Redbook, "[t]he serial comma is never incorrect, but omitting it is sometimes quite incorrect," which is one reason I give a fuck about the Oxford comma.
Use the Oxford comma. http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2017/03/15/oxford-comma-maine-labor-dispute/?platform=hootsuite
It appears that not many here listen to Vampire Weekend.
12:00 PM FTW. Some fine trolling there.
2:57, I wouldn't call it "listening to" VW, but I'm familiar with the song. Just couldn't think of a witty retort involving another line from the song, since it has some pretty weird lyrics.
12:50 p.m. here. I'm more than a little embarrassed that I completely missed the Vampire Weekend reference at 11:32 a.m. — haven't heard that song in a while!
Poor Metro cop. I find it appalling that he has to defend himself against manslaughter charges.
You're kidding, right?
Cops encounter violent nut cases every day, often all day. If the violent nutcase starts hitting, the cop has to use whatever means are at his disposal. A choke hold can be an excellent means of subduing a thug.
The problem, I think, is that they are not taught to cadets any more. In the old days, cops had time tested and proven escalation methods available, from verbal commands, to popping the thug in the nose, to beating him with a baton, to a choke hold, and if necessary, shooting him. Now it's all a hot mess. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 (or whatever the saying is.) It's Metro Command and the politicians who should be on trial.
Choose me for this jury pool!
You are an idiot.
Cops have the worst jobs. They are refuse workers with targets on their backs. Did the accused over react? Maybe. Should he have tried something else besides a choke hold? Probably. Should he be prosecuted? Hells no. This isn't a Rodney king type event.
Concur, except that we all know now that Rodney King was a thug who kept attacking officers even after the other thugs in the car surrendered. The media only broadcast the beating part, not what preceded it.
We didn't have an alternative media back then, so LA burned for the LA Times and network news profits, and that POS King got a payout for being a thug. Screw California. Unfortunately, this state now has so many of them that we are about to go all Cali, too.
Hey, 2:16, you are a poo poo pants. I win!
You are correct this is not a Rodney King event. Those officers left Rodney King alive. This officer killed the guy.
For those of you who can't believe that the cop was charged–did you miss the part where the undersheriff himself said the cop used excessive force and conducted himself contrary to his use of force training? He tasted the guy 7 times while he was already on the ground for crying out loud. I believe even Taser itself says no more than 3 should be used.
Right, but why did the cop do it? Was it because Mr. Meth-head was violently resisting arrest? A threat to all those around him? Hang around some cops and hear their stories.
I realize that cops have to deal with all kinds of garbage, but excessive force is excessive force, and if you can't control yourself go find another line of work. Unless he had a weapon or someone's life was in immediate danger, he should not be dead as a result of the force that was used. Making an arrest of a guy like this is just not all that important.
It's a very tragic situation for all involved. Did Mr. Tashii Farmer (A/K/A Tashii Brown) deserve to pay the ultimate price, absolutely not! Did Officer Kenneth Lopera intend to hurt or harm Mr. Farmer? I seriously doubt that to be true.
Fast forward to the present… Mr. Farmer is deceased; his family has lost a loved one because of the acts of another; Officer Lopera's life as he knew it is over, has lost his career and may be facing a felony record and possible prison time; Officer Lopera's family has lost the life that they knew it, as well as, the resultant damage from his current situation.
Granted the price paid by Mr. Farmer and his family outweighs the price paid and to be paid by Officer Lopera, but everyone involved suffered and will suffer as a result of this incident.
Not to minimize the harm that a bad decision by a police officer can cause, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the officer has to make upwards of a thousand split second decisions a day, each of which if wrong can have tragic outcomes (including the loss of life to others or themselves). Police officers are human and not machines so errors, despite their best efforts to avoid them will occur. The best we can hope for, through selection and ongoing training processes, is minimize the frequency in which they occur and reduce the impact those errors have on the innocent when they do occur. I sometimes wonder why anyone would ever want to be a police officer when you consider all the risks and consequences they voluntarily accept with the position.
I am saddened every time one of these cases occurs as there can never be a good outcome.
I have been in and witnessed my fair share of street fights. The fact is that once the fighting starts, NO ONE can predict whether the next blow might be fatal or at least incapacitating. I recall some man dying at a gas station because he was pushed and fell and hit his head just right.
Poor cop made a split second decision that we can all criticize in hindsight, but does that manslaughter make?
Criticizing in hindsight is how we prevent citizens from summary execution by police officers. Ignoring the fact that the officer involved violated protocols involving use of the Taser and the type of chokehold that ultimately ended the suspects life would be stupid. We are not animals incapable of learning from the past or criticising what his own superior officers fired him for and charged him criminally for.
Your examples are pathetically self-serving and ultimately pointless. There are plenty of predictable events in a streetfight, and plenty of random unpredictable events.
Poor citizen made a split second decision – did he deserve to be choked to death in the street?
That is exactly why this must be reviewed in hindsight – because asshats like you think the police are never wrong and above any criticism.
I prefer assclown to asshat. No doubt accountability is important. From the recitation of facts in the linked article, I leaned heavily towards the cop's side. If it had been, for example, a no knock drug bust warrant that resulted in the thug's death, I would be leaning heavily against the cop, no matter what the thug did or didn't do.
This comment has been removed by the author.
12;19, that is a straw man argument. This wasn't a split-second decision, taken in good-faith, that turned out to be incorrect. That would be "It was dark, things were chaotic, he pulled something from his pocket that looked like a gun, I reacted instantaneously because I thought my life was in imminent danger." No, Tasering someone multiple times and placing them in a chokehold sufficient to result in death is not a "split second" reaction. It was a deliberative process for which the officer should be held fully accountable.
Officer made the conscious decision to incapacitate Mr. Farmer no matter what that took– decision was made that Mr. Farmer was going out and he was going to go out through force.
If the thug keeps getting up after getting tasered numerous times then it's time for a choke hold. Tasers are terrible. Nothing can replace a baton and a good choke hold.
Think about it, if the cop had bad intentions, wouldn't he just let the thug throw a punch or two and then drop him with his firearm? Even today the "he lunged" defense works relatively well for cops. I may be wrong, but I think this cop had good intentions. He is unlucky to live in a world where the good are bad; and the bad are good.
We live in an age where the sheep relentlessly persecute the Shepard and his dogs with the aid of helpful wolves. The outcome is certain.
After looking through the bills that were passed, I think I lost count of the number of bills that were completely gutted in order to be amended to something totally different. SB 368 went from providing folks who were subjected to illegal seizure with a means of getting their property back to an 11th hour and 56 minutes surprise raise for public employees. A bunch more in the criminal defense arena.