By rights I shouldn’t know this given my previous cyber assault on Sandpaper Mike Fawer, lawyer for Renee Gill Pratt but his people have been talking to our people and this is what I can say for sure.
I can readily think of three bigger SOBs than your truly, Mike Fawer being one of them. He honestly doesn’t give a shit what I post or think. That is probably a good trait for someone in his line of work.
Like IMA said, Fawer isn’t scared to take a case into the courtroom, where the Times Picayune recently acknowledged his style as “feisty”. That pays benefits when an incompetent judge is involved in the proceedings such as Judge Lemelle.
The bottom line here is Team Fawer will take one which ever way they get one.
Renee Gill Pratt is a filthy cunt who deserves a long stretch in the pen. If we’re lucky the jury will deadlock and Team Letten will get a second crack.
Speaking of Team Letten, their recent performance in court is leaving the legal observers who speak with us more than a bit disappointed.
Finally our own Ashton O’Dwyer keeps insisting Judge Lemelle is a “blue gum nigger bastard” and in fact I won an internal Slabbed editorial board pool after I correctly predicted we would receive email from Ashton about Lemelle earlier this week which used that term to describe the man, who is a 7th ward creole according to our other legal observers. For me black, white, yellow, brown doesn’t make much difference as we’re all pink on the inside. Luckily for us, one of our readers sent us a picture of Judge Lemelle and my own opinion is he looks like a dumb version of Winston Churchill albeit with slightly darker skin.
Since we’re critiquing looks, I’ll add that it is a certainty that Mose Jefferson took Jimmy Soul’s advice, at least partially, when he hooked up in a long term relationship with Miss Gill-Pratt.
Slabbed reports you decide.
sop
IMHO Gill-Pratt picked the right man for the job. Like the old saying goes, “if you have the facts, pound the facts—if you don’t have the facts, pound the table.” Fawer, despite his many shortcomings, is pretty damn good at “pounding the table.” Lets hope the jury can see through his bullshit and nail this bitch.
fawer does what he is paid to do. everyone deserves representation……….i served on a jury pool in lemelles court once. i cant speak to his legal knowledge as i was not seated but the guy seemed dense. i was trying to explain to him that i had a connection to someone on the defense team. he could not wrap his mind around what a business partnership entailed and what an LLC was. as for 7th ward creole i thought he was from acadiana for some reason.
The negative press about Lemelle is unusual. I think everyone knows where the blame goes for the now very confused jury.
Lemelle was already successfully appealed by Team Letten once in this case. If he slipped in that bogus jury instruction like the USA alleges he should be kicked off the bench.
No denying Fawer was the right man for this job. He’s proven it.
sop
SOP, I thought I won the AROD pool. I think I predicted less than 5 minutes – pay up!
Also, thanks for the props, but I ain’t counting my chickens just yet. Fawer made mincemeat of the AUSA’s. They had no case against her, as evidenced by her late add to the party. While I agree that Gill-Pratt is a typical, worthless pol, they simply had their asses handed to them on this one.
Lemelle is horrible and in much the same way as Berrigan. A bird told me the following story: The bird bench tried a herniated disc case in front of him. Liability was not at issue, only quantum. The guy awarded the bird’s client $25,000.00 inclusive of medical specials. He kept citing 1980 quantums and could not understand that the issue of whether or not the disc may have pre-existed (it wasn’t and there was no evidence that it was) was immaterial because the bird’s client’s pain and suffering was triggered by the accident.
Anyway, the bird was in the middle of my closing argument the U.S. Marshalls brought Mose Jefferson into his court. Jefferson was shackled at the feet and hands like any other prisoner. Lemelle stops me and directs the marshalls to “unlock him (Jefferson)” and states “that level of detainment is not necessary.” The marshalls politely rejected the judge’s advice and stated “its standard protocol for all prisoners.” Lemelle didn’t respond.
Lemelle, like Berrigan, loves murderers, rapists, money launderers and pilfers of the public treasure, but heaven forbid a tax paying citizen get injures or ripped off by an insurer or corporation and the sympathy spigot gets turned off.
Like I I have said before, outside of Barbier, Clinton’s appointments to the EDLA bench were fairly bad.
My “love” for Lemelle started when he recommended my suspension from the pracice of law for 5 years, in a “Kangaroo Court” proceeding in which no evidence was adduced, and which made a mockery of the constitutional term “due process of law”. He also LIED multiple times “on-the-record”. And when I confronted him with his actual bias, prejudice and moral turpitude, he refused to recuse himself. My “love” for Lemelle grew when he recommended my disbarment, This time, Lemelle didn’t even pay lip service to “due process”, and I was disbared WITH NO TYPE OF HEARING AT ALL. The same LIES were repeated, and compounded by Lemelle. My love for him grew even more, when he struck my Answer and Defenses in a case in which I had been sued by a so-called “expert witness” for fees (he never issued an expert report, he never testified at a deposition, he was never a witness at trial, and his opinions were soudly rejected 100% in the recent Barge Case decision). Lemelle then proceeded to enter a Default Judgement against me in favor of this expert for almost $200,000 which drove me into bankruptcy. So, to summarize, Lemelle has ruined me professionally and financially. What would The SLABBED Nation have me do? Turn the other cheek?. I have publically characterized Lemelle as “lazy, stupid and corrupt”. My charges against Lemelle, his character, his intellect and his morals are (I respectfully submit) supported by the following: The Fifth Circuit opinion in “In Re High Sulphur Content Gasoline Products Liability Litigation” case, reported at 517 F.3d 220 (5th Cir. 2008), and in the Briefs (mine) in Fifth Circuit Case Numbers 08-46 consolidated with 09-12, and No. 09-30829. Now let’s address the “Gill-Pratt” case: Although the jury is still “out”, it would appear from news accounts to date that Lemelle intentionall attempted to SABOTAGE justice in the case by “changing”, in a significant way, a key sentence in the jury charge, and failing to notify the prosecutors of the change. Where this may be going is anybody’s guess. But it most definitely should not have happened. The news accounts also reported a “typical” Lemelle tactic: When the prosecutors on Tuesday moved for him to modify the jury charge and to re-instruct the jury Lemelle’s response was: “Well you should have discovered what I did in secret, and withou telling you, sooner.” This man acquired his moral compass (he has none) from his mentor Robert Collins who, after assuming the Federal Bench, was found GUILTY of bribery and resigned rather than face impeachment while serving “hard time”. And now to the “BGNB” reference. I have NEVER made that reference “PUBLIC”. It was written in a handwritten note which I had the Court Security Personnel at Federal Court (I am precluded from entering the building without permission) deliver to Lemelle a few days after he had entered the Default Judgment against me for almost $200,000. It was Lemelle who decided to “go public” with the note, presumably to make me look bad and to clothe himself with some sort of “victim” status. I believe it is significant that the note also contained an invitation to Lemelle to come see me if he wanted “to do anything” about the contents of the note. He hasn’t taken me up on my offer, which makes him a COWARD, as well as being lazy stupid and corrupt. I can also add this: While I was the guest of the Federal Government at “The Windsor Court St. Bernard” for 34 days, I heard the “n” word uttered there more times than I have ever heard the word uttered in my entire life. All of the speakers were Negro, like Lemelle. I NEVER heard any of the speakers chastised, or accused of uttering “a racial slur” (it is also my recollection that the “n” word was often additionally associated with the use of “mf” by the Negro jailbirds in St. Bernard). In short, what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and I surgically directed a specific appellation to Lemelle, in private, which he, not I, made public. And what I told Lemelle was directed at HIM, not at an entire race of people. I may have “more” to say depending on what the Gill-Pratt jury does. Ashton O’Dwyer a/k/a “The WHITE Henry Glover”
Nope, we wouldn’t (nor couldn’t) change your ways Ashton no siree. So we just take it as it comes and fit it in the narrative when we can.
sop
Jury deadlocked again in Renee Gill Pratt racketeering trial; loud shouting heard from jury room.
Lemelle sure has made a mess of things.
sop
What a shame on Lemelle (boy I hate to say it but it sure looks like he did everything possible to throw this one) and what a blow to the city of New Orleans, to the citizens’ pride, to their attitude about progress, government and the future, to the perspective of outsiders towards us, to prospects for future prosecutions, and on and on, it’s a shame.
I hope she gets retried but damage has been done.
Ahhh…good old fashioned New Orleans blue-blood racism. I had my suspicions. Now they are just confirmed. Now remind me why we care what happens to this loony toon?
Suspicions? AROD is very straight up concerning his racial views. No guesswork no siree, everyone knows where he stands that way.
We’re believers in justice for all which is why we care.
Been a while since you stopped in with us to comment Matzerath, welcome back.
sop
I sure hope no one is shouting the ‘n’ word in jury room about Lemelle. If they are white jurists they could go to prison in place of GP considering what Lemelle did to AROD. Course if black they would be ignored.
If Lemelle declares hung jury or GP is acquitted the prosecutors must appeal to 5th so Lemelle can be sanctioned for his self declared ‘secret’ words to the jury.
‘Secret’ and misleading words should also form basis for a mistrial motion if GP is acquitted. And Lemelle needs to be recused from future trials. Better yet removed from the bench.
cool. I believe in justice for all to:)
I lurk, therefore I am.
Public & attorneys can rate federal judges on this website.
http://www.therobingroom.com/Default.aspx
Why does the word “lurk” rear its pretty head again? I think we went through this once before. Lurking get such a bad rap.
http://www.zazzle.com/lurker_dude_its_totally_a_word_cat_tshirt-235252523220973494
RULE 3.6. TRIAL PUBLICITY
(a) A lawyer who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation
of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or
reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication
and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative
proceeding in the matter.
(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a lawyer may state:
(1) the claim, offense or defense involved and, except when prohibited by
law, the identity of the persons involved;
(2) information contained in a public record;
(3) that an investigation of a matter is in progress;
(4) the scheduling or result of any step in litigation;
(5) a request for assistance in obtaining evidence and information necessary
thereto;
(6) a warning of danger concerning the behavior of a person involved, when
there is reason to believe that there exists the likelihood of substantial
harm to an individual or to the public interest; and
Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct
[35]
(7) in a criminal case, in addition to subparagraphs (1) through (6):
(i) the identity, residence, occupation and family status of the
accused;
(ii) if the accused has not been apprehended, information necessary to
aid in apprehension of that person;
(iii) the fact, time and place of arrest; and
(iv) the identity of investigating and arresting officers or agencies and
the length of the investigation.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a lawyer may make a statement that a reasonable
lawyer would believe is required to protect a client from the substantial undue
prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the lawyer or the lawyer