- Quickdraw McLaw
- 24 Comments
- 672 Views
- A civil bench bar with a virtual ugly sweater photo contest will be held on December 14. [eightjdcourt blog]
- The Eighth Judicial District Court is accepting application for probate commissioner until December 21. [eightjdcourt blog]
- The Nevada Athletic Commission in investigating the fatal fraternity charity boxing match. [8NewsNow]
- Metro solved a 42-year old cold case. [8NewsNow]
https://www.foxnews.com/us/caught-on-cam-custody-argument-prior-to-texas-man-being-shot-to-death
Not a crim lawyer – looks to me like barely legal as dead guy was trying to take gun – but looks morally wrong to me as lawyer knew guy was upset and no need to introduce a gun into situation – dead guy stepped back several times – I hate to see these things as I do fam law and have really seen some people lose tempers and hate to see it end this way
More than once have I had an opposing party (3x, all pro per)show up at my office after judges hammers them. It can be scary. Never once did I pull out my concealed handgun which I have carried since 2002.
I've done crim law for fifteen-sixteen years now. Represented some pretty hard core people including convicted multiple murderers. Never felt the need to have a gun, let alone use one. I did one divorce when I started on my own back in 2010. That was the only time I felt I needed a gun and thats also why it was the only divorce I did. People are fucking crazy when it comes to family law. I also feel that some of you family law folks stoke the fire so that you can keep billing but maybe that's just me. Dude didn't need to die but I understand why the attorney boyfriend grabbed the gun. Fucking thing looked like a howitzer, dude doesn't own a glock? Lot harder to grad a handgun, just sayin.
All of this in Nevada being known now as "pulling a Pengilly."
3:16–when I read your post I immediately wondered if they were Family law cases. Even though we hear occasional news reports of a criminal defendant threatening the judge or prosecutor, the dynamic you explain occurs far more often in Family Law cases.
And then I read the post of 4:01, a career criminal defense attorney, and it confirmed by view point. He apparently almost exclusively(or at least primarily) practices criminal law, yet the only time he felt he might need a gun was on the one domestic case he accepted.
For these reasons some attorneys, after accepting a few domestic cases, vow to never again go down that road.
OP again – why was the lawyer there with the ex? In a relationship?
My guess is he was supervising the custody exchange. Seems like self defense to me. When someone has a gun, you don't lunge toward it.
The guy's lawyer said it was self-defense so nothing to see. But many people with any common sense might find offense that his first action after killing someone is to yell "I told you!" Also the wife/gf seems distraught but the shooter's next move is to continue his rant, not check on her. So seems like a great catch no matter what.
When little lawyer guy (whose probably banging the ex) went inside the residence, retrieved the gun and came outside with it, he had plenty of time to calmly reflect on what he was about to do.
…reflected on what it was going to take to defend himself. Don't bring a big, fat mouth to a gun fight on someone else's property.
Per the news reports, lawyer Kyle Carruth was living with the ex-wife/mom Christine Read. I did not see anything suggesting that lawyer Kyle was representing ex-wife/mom Christine in the divorce.
It did not look like legitimate self-defense to me, even in a "stand-your-ground" state.
OP again – it just gets under my skin that when someone is in the state of mind it is easy to provoke them and then use "self-defense" – back when I used to box (many years ago) I had some very, very ignorant acquaintances (that I am now very ashamed of) – who would go out and just with looks at a guys girlfriend or whatever get someone to be a little aggressive so they could throw punches – for those old-timers it was almost a weekly occurrence by PTs across from UNLV back in the 1980s
Maybe the guy who was shot should know better than to lunge at the gun. Maybe back away? There's a better option.
Lawyer for the terrorist Darrell Brooks withdraws from representing him – citing being close to families of the diseased.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10258685/Lawyer-Waukesha-parade-killer-Darrell-Brooks-moves-withdraw-case.html
Classy move! Hope he fries.
Or a chickenshit move, depending on your perspective.
Maybe. The man is certainly entitled to an attorney and one should be appointed to him. But jeez, I would have a hard time defending him after what he did… somebody will be a better person then I.
Chickenshit, really? You can't foresee the defendant and his family would have a basis to argue ineffective counsel after the guy gets convicted of murder? Or are you not an attorney?
If you actually read the article, the attorney withdrew from an unrelated case in which Brooks is alleged to have shot at his nephew and ran over his kid's mom. He has a PD appointed for him for the parade cases.
Hope you meant the deceased and not the diseased.
So who is applying to be Probate Commissioner? I presume Sean Tanko who is a pro tem. Anyone else?
Hopefully someone who can strongly advocate for their position (once appointed) and convince Judge Sturman she should do a better job of acting like the probate supervisory Judge, which she is, but frequently bags off from frequently when hard or responsible decisions about probate need to actually be made.
If so, stop re-electing her. Work for a qualified candidate. Throwing shade is a fun sport, but things won't change at the RJC unless you become active.
I appear in front of Judge Sturman as much as anyone, 7:51 AM. I respectfully disagree. She has become better and better over time. We were just commenting in our office that we were sad to see Commissioner Yamashita and all his years of experience go when someone noted that eventually Judge Sturman will go too and it will be a loss. And they were right. I don't believe she practiced in this area prior to taking the bench, but she has mastered probate and trust law. I like the way she handles trials. I have never felt like she didn't read and understand the briefs. Her staff is organized, helpful, friendly and responsive. There's not much more to ask of her.
10:26 how so? Can you be more specific?