|
|
|
PETA's call in wake of Vick plea plan has merit
Attorney Blogs |
2007/08/23 08:24
|
No matter how you feel about Michael Vick or the folks at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), only a drooling, spiral-eyed sadist would insist that drowning, hanging or electrocuting innocent dogs should be an unpunishable offense, let alone allowing them to rip each other to shreds for fun and profit. Guilty dogs should be included in that statement, too. Now that Vick will cop a guilty plea in a federal dogfighting case loaded with allegations of such hideous, heartless behavior, PETA is calling for the public's assistance in demanding that the NFL add cruelty to animals "in all its forms" to the list of offenses in the league's code of personal conduct. The organization's Web site cites three prior cases -- Falcon tackle Jonathan Babineaux accused in February of beating his girlfriend's pit bull, which later died; ex-Packers/Cardinals/Giants running back LeShon Johnson found guilty in 2004 of involvement in a dogfighting ring; and former Eagles running back Thomas Hamner charged in 2001 with beating his dog. If there's any cosmic justice for all of those poor pooches, Commissioner Roger Goodell will listen to PETA's minions. Of course, if he acts according to PETA's standards, he'll have to suspend a big chunk of the league. PETA is steadfastly against using animals for food, clothing, experimentation, entertainment or "any other purpose" and the NFL is home to more than a few players who avidly "enjoy" hunting. Yep, hunting. Don't think that widely-accepted recreational activity is cruel? That deer or rabbit that just had a shell or arrow put into it and crawled off to bleed to death in the brush will beg to differ, as will the buffalo, boar, elk and more that are sitting ducks in enclosed areas on so-called "canned hunt" farms. And if you go by PETA's standards, fishing is a no-go, too. Think that bass enjoys that hook in the roof of its mouth while it's hauled gasping out of the drink? I know. Get a grip, Rolfe. Personally, I've never understood what's so enjoyable about killing things. The chance to spend time in the great outdoors? Take a hike, son. For food and clothing? Unless you live in the wild, God invented supermarkets, falafel stands and fabrics just for you, Jack. Before we go any further, I plead guilty to sitting at the groaning board each night, belching contentedly as I toss bones over my shoulder. I know that the animals I consume are raised and killed in hellish conditions. It's amazing what a little barbecue sauce can do to a man's conscience. I pass a sheep farm every day and when I think about chasing one of those cute, wooly critters around with a big ol' fork, I realize I'm just a goldplated candy ass who would be slaughtering and butchering fruits and vegetables -- exclusively -- if I had to slaughter and butcher my own meat. I've heard the arguments that hunting helps control certain populations, such as deer, that would otherwise take a big nasty hit from disease and starvation. But whether it comes at the hands of Mother Nature or mankind, cruelty is cruelty. Is cruelty merely defined by the manner and circumstance in which pain and death are inflicted on animals? You bet. So, the NFL's avid hunters and fishers can rest easy, not that the league would ever bow to PETA's standards. After all, this is the ultimate meat-eater league in a sport where tales of coaches strangling a bulldog (Harvard's Percy Haughton in 1908) or having a bull castrated in front of players (Mississippi State's Jackie Sherrill in 1992) to inspire their ferocity are legendary if not always true, as in the case of Haughton. But, in the wake of the Vick case, PETA's plea deserves a sincere nod in the form of stern warnings and penalties from the NFL. The general legal definition of cruelty used by the Humane Society and state chapters of the Society For Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is a reasonable place to start: "Any act of violence or neglect against an animal, causing unnecessary and extreme pain or suffering and death." At the very least, exactly what those acts are should be food for thought. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law firm retained despite 'illegal' meeting
Headline News |
2007/08/22 15:27
|
Although its actions were called illegal and one of its members walked out in agreement with that charge, the Common Council voted Tuesday night to retain a law firm to represent the council in arbitration over the police contracts. The council also voted to recommend to the mayor that Vincent Leffredo and Gerald Daley, members of the council, serve as witnesses during the arbitration.
The language of both resolutions was softened from the original after questions of legality under collective bargaining laws and the city charter were raised. Instead of "appointing" council members as witnesses for the arbitration, they were "recommended" to the mayor. And instead of representing the city, the lawyer approved to be retained by the council will simply advise the council members that were recommended to serve as witnesses.
As soon as the night's special council meeting was called to order, it was declared illegal by Deputy Mayor Joseph Bibisi. Bibisi was acting as chairman of the meeting because Mayor Sebastian N. Giuliano was absent in protest.
On Monday, Giuliano declared that everything on the agenda of the meeting was improper. The council does not have the power to appoint witnesses to the arbitration or retain a lawyer, Giuliano said.
Bibisi tried to block the meeting from going forward, citing that the mayor was not properly given notice, or served, making the meeting illegal.
If the meeting was illegal, anything decided in the meeting could be challenged by any member or the public or the police union, said Corporation Counsel William Howard.
Majority Leader Thomas Serra vehemently objected to this assertion and said the mayor had full knowledge of the meeting - that he, in fact, had told Giuliano of the meeting in person. Serra also cited an e-mail from the mayor's office to members of the council, about the meeting, sent on Aug. 10.
That Giuliano knew about that meeting wasn't enough to make it legal, Howard said.
"Notice has to be proper to make the meeting legal," Howard said. "This notice does not conform. The first thing anyone attacks is if the meeting was held legally."
Declaring the meeting illegal was called "pure and utter nonsense to circumvent the political process" by Councilman Vincent Loffredo. Thomas Serra called the actions of Giuliano and Bibisi attempts to shut the council out from negotiations and take away their fiduciary powers.
Despite Republican's protests, the meeting was declared legal by a vote and proceeded, although Councilman David Bauer, agreeing the meeting was illegal, walked out.
The proposed police contracts were voted down by the council in June in a 9-3 vote. The council called this meeting because its members wanted to have the voice of the nine that voted it down heard at the arbitration table, Serra said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-Gov. Ryan will remain free during second appeal
Legal Career News |
2007/08/22 15:22
|
Former Gov. George Ryan will remain free while he pursues a second appeal of his sweeping fraud and corruption convictions, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled late this afternoon. In a crushing legal blow to the former governor earlier today, a three-judge panel from the appeals court denied Ryan's initial appeal 2-1. The judges found that Ryan received a fair trial last year despite a series of juror controversies.
Though Ryan had been allowed to remain free pending that appeal, the court had warned that Ryan and co-defendant Lawrence Warner would have to report to prison within 72 hours if they lost it. Ryan faces a 6 1/2 -year prison sentence.
This afternoon, however, the court stayed that order, finding that Ryan could remain free while a second appeal plays out. Under this afternoon's ruling, Ryan will remain free until the full 7th Circuit—a group of 11 judges—refuses to hear his case or until the full court hears his case and makes a ruling.
A decision on whether the full court would hear Ryan's case could take about six to eight weeks, and a ruling on the case could take until December or January, according to Joel Bertocchi, an attorney who specializes in appellate law.
In pledging to appeal the three-judge panel's decision, Former Gov. James Thompson, a Ryan attorney, noted this afternoon that Judge Michael Kanne issued "a powerful dissent" in which he concluded that the convictions should be overturned and a new trial held.
"No court anywhere has ever deprived a defendant of his life and liberty under these circumstances," Thompson said, alleging that the verdict was unfair because two jurors were replaced during deliberations.
"We believe they reached the wrong result," Thompson said. Ryan, he said, would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
In its decision this morning, the three-judge panel found that U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer acted within her authority when she replaced the jurors after the Tribune revealed they had failed to disclose information about their criminal backgrounds.
"We conclude that the district court handled most problems that arose in an acceptable manner, and that whatever error remained was harmless," Judge Diane Wood wrote for the panel. "We therefore affirm the convictions."
Ryan was convicted in April 2006 on charges that as secretary of state and governor, he doled out sweetheart deals to co-defendant Warner and other friends and used state resources and employees for political gain.
Warner's conviction also was affirmed today. He was sentenced to almost 3 1/2 years in prison.
Thompson said Ryan was disappointed by the three-judge panel's decision but said he is a "strong guy."
"He's been through a lot," Thompson said. "I worry about him and Mrs. Ryan. But he has faith in the judicial system. He's always had that. He has a very supportive family. . . . He'll take it as it comes day by day."
At the Kankakee home of Ryan and his wife, Lura Lynn, their son Homer Ryan answered the door only to say that the family would not discuss the day's events.
Marie Spalding, 69, who has been Ryan's neighbor for 37 years, said the former governor has "always been there for anybody who ever needed help."
"It's the saddest thing that ever could have happened," she said of the appellate court's decision. "He's a wonderful, wonderful man. He's helped out people in this whole neighborhood."
Another neighbor, Denyell Finch, 27, who lives just a few blocks north of Ryan, said she didn't think he should go to jail. "I don't think it's all his fault," she said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ga. Sheriff Pleads Guilty to Coverup
Court Feed News |
2007/08/22 15:20
|
| A sheriff accused of lying to investigators and hiding evidence to protect two deputies charged with a drive-by shooting pleaded guilty Tuesday to four criminal charges and resigned. "I knew what happened ... and I didn't tell them what happened," Towns County Sheriff Rudy Eller said. "I made a serious mistake, there's no doubt about it." Eller, 63, pleaded guilty to making false statements in a matter within a political subdivision, tampering with evidence, hindering apprehension or punishment of a criminal and violation of oath by a public official or officer. The two deputies, Jessie Gibson, 56, and Chief Deputy Eddie Osborn, 41, faced aggravated assault and obstruction charges in connection with a July 9 shooting at the home of Gary Dean of Hiawassee. Dean, who was not injured, was "involved in an ongoing intimate relationship" with Osborn's wife, according to a Georgia Bureau of Investigation affidavit. Gibson was found dead on Aug. 8 of a self-inflicted gunshot in what authorities called an apparent suicide. Outside the courthouse Tuesday, Eller apologized to the residents of Towns County. He wore an oxygen tube in his nose as he walked from the courtroom. Mike Weaver, his attorney, said Eller was suffering from diabetes and other health problems and could not answer other questions. He said Eller's sentencing is pending. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawsuit Filed Over California Teachers Qualifications
Lawyer Blog News |
2007/08/22 14:31
|
 A number of parents in Los Angeles are also taking part of this lawsuit and what we have seen in California is that many serving African-Americans and Latinos have a disproportionate number of under qualified teachers. We are not saying that they are bad, just that they are inexpirienced. And California has gotten away with it. Like most parents, Maribel Heredia of Hayward wants highly qualified teachers for her kids. She says many Hayward schools are not delivering. "My son came home and said his teacher went to college today and I was kind surprised by that," said Maribel Heredia from Hayward. Surprised because she thought her son's teacher was already fully credentialed and not a teacher-in-training. So when the teacher would to leave to go to college, a substitute would fill in. Heredia is suing the U.S. Department of Education. "It's very important for the parents to have this information. Who is teaching your child at school," said Heredia. While schools report the number of fully credentialed teachers, they don't specify which teacher is or is not. Under the "No Child Left Behind" Act, Congress said all teachers must be fully credentialed; only then are they considered highly qualified. But the U.S. Department of Education allows some states including California to also count their teachers in training as highly qualified. Why? Because California has a teacher shortage. "You know we have those big districts that are going begging. They are not being filled," said Merrill Vargo from Springboard schools. Fully credentialed teachers have taken more tests, and have had more on-the-job training. The suit also argues that quite often these teachers-in-training are more concentrated at low-income and high-minority schools. The State Superintendent of Schools, Jack O'Connell said today: "this is a factor in why we have an achievement gap in our state between students who are African American or Latino and their peers who are white or Asian." "Does it mean that all the teachers in Walnut Creek are better than all the teachers in Oakland? Of course not. But on average, you are going to see more highly qualified, more top-notch, experienced teachers in a suburban district that in an urban district," said Derecka Mehrens, from the Association of Community Organizations For Reform Now. The activist group acorn has also put its name on the lawsuit. "This lawsuit is being made in hopes that we can raise for what the Department of Education right now considers highly qualified," said Mehrens. The law firm Public Advocates is another plaintiff in this case. They say more than 10,000 teachers-in-training are labeled as highly qualified by the state. The case will be heard at the U.S. District Court in San Francisco. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vick football future in doubt after dog-fighting plea
Lawyer Blog News |
2007/08/22 14:27
|
| Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick may never play in the National Football League again after agreeing on Monday to plead guilty in a dog-fighting case. Vick, 27, faces up to five years jail if convicted on the initial charges related to the dog-fighting ring he was accused of operating at his Virginia property.
"Michael Vick typically does his best work when it appears he has nowhere to go," wrote Dan Pompei in Tuesday's Chicago Tribune.
"But the Atlanta Falcons' embattled quarterback is not going to scramble out of this one. He can't juke to his right to find a lane, or sprint to his left and outrun his pursuers.
"Throwing up a prayer isn't even an option -- though saying one is." Beyond any jail time Vick may serve, the strong-armed, fleet-footed Atlanta Falcons quarterback is likely to face further punishment from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who has cracked down on players in trouble with the law.
Vick told Goodell in a face-to-face meeting in the spring he had nothing to do with the dog-fighting allegations, which included gambling and executions of dogs that underperformed.
His decision to plead guilty came after his three co-defendants made their own plea deals with the understanding they would testify against the quarterback.
"Michael Vick destroyed dogs, according to his partners in the despicable and inhumane crime, and as partial punishment, he has destroyed his NFL career," wrote Gary Myers of the New York Daily News.
Myers speculated that Vick could end up losing at least two to three NFL seasons with an expected league suspension following any jail time.
"Depending what the NFL uncovers in the illegal gambling aspect of the case, Goodell has the power to suspend him for life," Myers wrote about the six-year veteran and three-times Pro-Bowl selection.
"Three years away from the game should just about rob Vick of his greatest gifts -- his incredible athleticism and electrifying speed. Working out in the prison courtyard is not quite the same as training camp."
Many columnists wrote that if Vick should try a comeback after seasons away from the gridiron, teams would shy away from a player who could be a public-relations nightmare.
"For one of the league's most celebrated and marketable players, it's a staggering plunge from NFL penthouse to possible federal penitentiary," said USA Today's Jon Saraceno.
Vick signed a 10-year, $130 million contract with the Falcons in 2004. He has had his ups and downs on the field, making dazzling touchdown runs with his breakaway speed while at times misfiring for costly interceptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
