It doesn't mean a thing if you ain't got that bling doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah………

NOPD composite sketch. (H/T The Times Picayune)

From the stupid burglar files someone (composite sketch on left) robbed Judge Vance’s place uptown last week stealing $100K worth of bling. It is rumored that stealing from a federal judge brings 10 years bad luck.

We have lots of uptowners in the Slabbed Nation. You folks be careful out there.

sop

15 thoughts on “It doesn't mean a thing if you ain't got that bling doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah, doo-ah………”

  1. Something’s not adding up right here…and the pisser is that because of who she is, the Insurer has already cut that check …

  2. Wonder if it was the real family jewels or paste? Get the insurance$ and sell the real stuff on the side or keep it and pretend you replaced the lost items? So many scenarios , so little investigation. Because ya know our Federal judges are above reproach. NOT.

  3. I wonder if Berrigan told her “that poor mis-guided soul. I hope he returns your jewelry so law enforcement will go easy on him; may be he won’t be prosecuted at all since he definitely was a victim of society.”

  4. Was anybody aware of the Eastern District of Louisiana’s lawsuit against Congress over Congress’s failure to implement cost of living pay raises? Just read the Supremes remanded the case to the 4th Circuit with a request that the 4th Circuit look a little closer at its original ruling dismissing the action.

    Anybody who litigated Katrina cases knows the Eastern District for the most part robbed good people of money they were entitled to by issuing legally incorrect rulings on a myriad topics. Now, depsite making $175,000 per year for what until Katrina was a ridiculously low case load when compared to state judges, the Eastern District judges are complaining about their pay.

    Unbelievable!

  5. He actually looks like somebody I’ve seen on Rosa Park Street in the past. Is that considered “Uptown”?

  6. I hold Sarah Vance in utter CONTEMPT, because when she ordered me DISBARED on the recommendation of that “blue gum ‘slave’ (to borrow a phrase from the ‘revised’ Huckleberry Flynn) bastard” Lemelle (who is where he is today SOLELY by virtue of his skin color), she “parrotted” Lemelle, who also is a DAMNABLE LIAR, without checking the record. Vance said, and Lemelle “the liar” said, “Indeed, O’Dwyer acknowledged to Judge Lemelle that he could not think of a fairer Judge to hear the complaint against him.” THE TRUTH is that I sought to have Lemelle (indeed the entire Eastern district Bench) RECUSED and DISQUALIFIED, meaning that Lemelle and Vance are GODDAMNED LIARS, and INCOMPETENT ONES AT THAT. So let’s ask Sarah and Patrick a few questions: Please produce the invoives for the stolen jewelry. Is there any “difference” between the invoice “value” and the alleged “appraised value”? Was the stolen jewelry declared to the insurer and, if so, was it declared on the basis of invoice value or “appraised value”? If there is any difference between invoice value and appraised value, please explain and justify the difference. Ashton O’Dwyer.

  7. I’m going to be the contrarian here, and hopefully the voice of reason. Sometimes certain threads like this one can turn into unjustified feeding frenzies with zero evidence or support for theories. That’s when some of the commenters on this blog start to look like kooks. Then, people new to slabbed might understandably have the impression that things on this blog are not grounded in fact.

    I seriously doubt Judge Vance had anything to with this break-in and the inferred insurance fraud. Although I do agree with the proposition that her insurance claim might be a whole lot smoother because she is a federal judge.

  8. To SOCK: I certainly made no such allegations, and to be entirely “fair”. and technically correct, The SLABBED Nation really has not information about the type of insurance, if any, Patrick and Sarah Vance carried. Typically, a Homeowner’s Policy severely limits what the Company will pay in the event of a covered loss of jewelry. Owners protect themselves in the event of such losses by scheduling jewelry on the policy and paying additional, sometimes “hefty”, premiums. Or jewelry can also be insured via a separate “Personal Articles Floater”, which might be written by a company different from the homeowner’s insurer. But all jewelry must be “scheduled” or “declared”, with the value supported by some pieces of paper acceptable to the insurer. It also would not be beyond the pale for the Vances to have insured Sarah’s jewelry for “replacement value” rather than “fair market value” or “declared value”, which was probably what the jewelry was worth when it was first purchased. We don’t know any of these things. And personally, I hope Sarah gets her property back

  9. Sock…what’s really ‘kooky’ is the picture of the police composite…

    Just for an exercise, read this story without any reference to Judge Vance…the fact is that it reads ‘classic’ insurance fraud…

    Given the coincidence that crime in New Orleans is rampant, Judge Vance will be given the benefit of the doubt…however it is this very same crime factor that can readily facilitate insurance fraud…

  10. Gate:

    You’re right, and I was not referring to your earlier comment in my last one. But let’s take the Vances’ state of morality out of the equation for a second. Even if one detests Pat and Sarah Vance (and admittedly I do not detest them; I really don’t know them that well), one must concede that Sarah Vance is brilliant. Do any commenters here really think that she would risk her career by setting up a fake break-in so that she could get insurance proceeds? That’s just preposterous.

    My point was that if you start reading these comments from the beginning, you get the unmistakable notion that commenters here are suggesting that this was an inside job, and I just think that is absurd and wrong. Recently, I heard one of the talking heads on the news make the statement: “The internet NEVER forgets.” I think it sucks that one day Judge Vance’s grandchildren might google her name and find these comments. That’s all.

  11. Whitmergate brings up a good point. I think a joe schmo would have his or her claim wrongfully denied based on their failure to set the alarm.

    As far as Judge Vance’s brilliance, her Katrina opinions, aside from Chauvin which was wrong and poorly reasoned, were pretty good relative to Englehardt, Berrigan and Lemelle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *