An apparently anonymous defense attorney argued that his client’s mental illness and side effects from Zoloft were to blame for his client killing his client’s ex-girlfriend. Can anyone identify the defense attorney featured in the video? [Fox5Vegas]
Post election interview with Robert Langford. [Nevada Current]
Today is Richard Bryan day at the City of Las Vegas. [KNPR]
A reader wrote in saying that the number of construction defect judges is being reduced to two: Judge Susan Johnson and Judge Joanna Kishner. Sometime in July (we have yet to see an order confirming any of this), Johnson’s criminal cases will be reassigned and the defect cases being handled by Judges Timothy Williams (who will be taking on business court duties), Richard Scotti, and Jerry Wiese will be redistributed. No word on what other changes will coincide with this. Anyone have more details?
Email went out from Chief Judge that the changes to the Judges would be effective July 2nd. Dept. 1's criminal cases are going to Dept. 28, Dept. 4's will be going to Dept. 30 and Dept. 22's criminal cases are being reassigned to Dept. 30. Dept. 18's criminal cases will be going to Dept. 15. The 'death' cases handled by Dept. 20 are going to Dept. 12. Overflow will go to Dept. 10. Eight of the Judges will also be moving offices.
"Cracked egg" theory. He's been doing too much PI.
Guest
Anonymous
June 15, 2018 9:52 pm
A couple weeks ago, a judge hit up people at my table at a charity-type event for money, for another judge’s campaign. Maybe I took it wrong. It was another law firm’s table and I heard from my friend later, they donated big time. Never happen where I came from.
I know who you are talking about. Do your research on these candidates. You have one candidate who is advertising as a Dem when she is not.
Guest
Anonymous
June 15, 2018 10:33 pm
2:52:It's not supposed to happen here either, and any such violation would be enforced a lot more aggressively than it was a couple decades ago. A judge can't publicly campaign for another judge and this certainly includes that the judge cannot seek to raise money for the other judge's campaign.
Specifically,Judges have been in hot water for situations wherein a judge collected campaign contributions for their own campaign(under the old rules wherein a judge could raise money before they learned whether they would have an opponent or not), and the judge, by virtue of eventually being unopposed, had not used up all the campaign money, and therefore donated it to other judges who had a contested election(and, of course, the contributors were never asked whether they agreed to have the money transferred to a different campaign and to now "donate" the money to the contested judges, or whether they wanted the money returned to them, or whatever).
This was viewed as a public endorsement of another judge, and a violation on other levels as well, and discipline ensued.
Now, in the situation you reference, it sounds like third-hand information. Could it be that the judge, rather than blatantly asking for money for another judge's campaign(which would constitute the ultimate in very public arrogant flaunting of the rules), will simply claim he was asking for donations to the charity?
Within certain limits, I believe a judge can get involved with, and even serve on the panel, of certain non profits, and perhaps even get involved in some level of fund raising–providing that the judge does not benefit financially by even one dime, and providing it is a true charitable undertaking. But I would have to check the rules on this because, for all I know, that might have changed, and perhaps none of that is allowed these days either.
Guest
Anonymous
June 15, 2018 10:56 pm
Judges get away with dinner theater murder in this town. Needs to end.
Email went out from Chief Judge that the changes to the Judges would be effective July 2nd. Dept. 1's criminal cases are going to Dept. 28, Dept. 4's will be going to Dept. 30 and Dept. 22's criminal cases are being reassigned to Dept. 30. Dept. 18's criminal cases will be going to Dept. 15. The 'death' cases handled by Dept. 20 are going to Dept. 12. Overflow will go to Dept. 10. Eight of the Judges will also be moving offices.
While an email did go out, the reassignments you listed are not correct.
FIRST. Bc the actual first was all nerdy and helpful.
As to item one, on information and belief, the featured defense attorney is (Kirk) Ryan Helmick:
https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/89101-nv-ryan-helmick-4288887.html
Looks like Helmick.
Also, the blog entry above is confusing. It reads like the defense attorney was the killer.
Thats definitely Ryan. Interesting defense theory. lets see how it pans out..
"Cracked egg" theory. He's been doing too much PI.
A couple weeks ago, a judge hit up people at my table at a charity-type event for money, for another judge’s campaign. Maybe I took it wrong. It was another law firm’s table and I heard from my friend later, they donated big time. Never happen where I came from.
Why do I have a feeling I know who you are talking about?
At the ADL lunch? Just guessing. The good justice was squireing around the justice-in-waiting.
Turn them in. That is not appropriate. That is why I am voting non-partisan, the only way to vote on a judicial race.
I know who you are talking about. Do your research on these candidates. You have one candidate who is advertising as a Dem when she is not.
2:52:It's not supposed to happen here either, and any such violation would be enforced a lot more aggressively than it was a couple decades ago. A judge can't publicly campaign for another judge and this certainly includes that the judge cannot seek to raise money for the other judge's campaign.
Specifically,Judges have been in hot water for situations wherein a judge collected campaign contributions for their own campaign(under the old rules wherein a judge could raise money before they learned whether they would have an opponent or not), and the judge, by virtue of eventually being unopposed, had not used up all the campaign money, and therefore donated it to other judges who had a contested election(and, of course, the contributors were never asked whether they agreed to have the money transferred to a different campaign and to now "donate" the money to the contested judges, or whether they wanted the money returned to them, or whatever).
This was viewed as a public endorsement of another judge, and a violation on other levels as well, and discipline ensued.
Now, in the situation you reference, it sounds like third-hand information. Could it be that the judge, rather than blatantly asking for money for another judge's campaign(which would constitute the ultimate in very public arrogant flaunting of the rules), will simply claim he was asking for donations to the charity?
Within certain limits, I believe a judge can get involved with, and even serve on the panel, of certain non profits, and perhaps even get involved in some level of fund raising–providing that the judge does not benefit financially by even one dime, and providing it is a true charitable undertaking. But I would have to check the rules on this because, for all I know, that might have changed, and perhaps none of that is allowed these days either.
Judges get away with dinner theater murder in this town. Needs to end.
Cute, I will borrow that.