This afternoon, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit remanded the appeal of Ali Al-Timimi, the accused head of the so-called “Virginia Jihad” or “Virginia Paintball” case. The remand was based on evidence that was discovered by the defense after the appeal was filed. I am lead defense counsel for Dr. Al-Timimi and serve with co-counsel Thomas Huff and Allison Wood. We have long argued that the government has withheld evidence in the case.
Despite the determination of investigators at the State Department and intelligence agencies that Hillary Clinton did use her personal email system to handle confirmed classified information (and potentially compromised “hundreds of classified emails”), Clinton dismissed such allegations and assured the public that it is “pretty clear” that there was no classified information on her personal email system — a system that she used rather than the secure State Department system.
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
A hero cat gained international acclaim and interest for saving a six year old boy from a vicious attack by a marauding dog. She was thus awarded The Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ National Hero Dog prize.
Madeleine Bernstein, president of the local ASPCA chapter, stated: “We were so impressed by Tara’s bravery and fast action that the selection committee decided that a cat this spectacular should be the National Hero Dog.”
The cat, Tara, who lives in Bakersfield, CA received the 33rd annual award—presented to her family in a ceremony in Los Angeles.
This week I will be blogging from London, England. Today will be the first day, though I arrive around 10 pm in London. I will be speaking at the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta. I will be participating on a program organized by Hon. Delissa A. Ridgway, Judge of the United States Court of International Trade entitled “What if . . . there had been no Magna Carta?”
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Weekend Contibutor
It has happened again. Several big banks have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar and are paying billions in fines for their admitted transgressions.
“On Wednesday, four large global banks — Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland — pleaded guilty to a series of federal crimes over a scheme to manipulate the value of the world’s currencies. The Justice Department accused the banks of collusion in one of the largest and yet least regulated markets, noting that at one bank one trader remarked “the less competition the better.”
That lack of oversight, coupled with the pressure to squeeze profits from a relatively middling business, set the stage for this scandal, one that unfolded nearly every day for five years. The crimes described on Wednesday also painted the portrait of something more systemic: a Wall Street culture that enabled many big banks to break the law even after years of regulatory black marks after the crisis.” New York Times Continue reading
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
Our host wrote earlier of the row over a WTC hotdog vendor accused of fleecing unsuspecting tourists by charging up to thirty dollars per hot dog. Now, the vendor has been terminated by his employer.
It is believed he took advantage of foreign tourists unfamiliar with the exchange rates of U.S. currency by failing to post actual prices then naming a price that was up to ten times the actual market rate.
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Weekend Contributor
The answer to the question posed in the title, in the state of Wisconsin, is $8 Million dollars. For those of us who think Judges are not and should not be politicians, the situation in Wisconsin is especially disturbing. However, Wisconsin is not alone in this dilemma. Thirty nine states elect their judges and the money flowing into those campaigns is increasing the concerns of special interests “purchasing” justice. Professor Turley has also commented in the past about the alarming amounts of money flowing into judicial elections.
In a recent United States Supreme Court decision, Chief Justice Roberts weighed in on money and politics in judicial elections. “Last week, the United States Supreme Court upheld a Florida judicial rule that prohibits candidates for election to state judgeships from personally soliciting money for their campaigns. ‘ “Judges are not politicians,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote in the majority opinion in the 5-4 decision, “even when they come to the bench by way of the ballot.” He went on, “Simply put, Florida and most other States have concluded that the public may lack confidence in a judge’s ability to administer justice without fear or favor if he comes to office by asking for favors.” ‘ New Yorker Continue reading