Comments for Due Process

Comment on Tracking Domestic Violence: GPS or Big Brother? by Michael

Michael — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:06:34 +0000

The problem with putting these taccking devices on “offenders” is this state will be sure to classify as many men as they can as “offenders”. Regardless of what people think DV IS NOT an epidemic. Most DV cases are of 2 intimate people having an argument and being blowm out of proportion by first, the police, and next, Connecticut courts. This is done not to protect the “victim”, but to get federal funding. The more money coming into the state, the better is the way Connecticut Justice thinks. The do not care how many mens lives they ruin, as long as they are getting that funding.

Comment on Online Gambling May Be Coming by Paul G. Littlefield

Paul G. Littlefield — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 00:50:15 +0000

Rich, you call CT government’s role “paternalistic” when it puts prohibitions on human behavior. Many of us refer to them as part of the “nanny-state” approach to government.

So, I am combining the two in what will now be called the “Nanny-Pater” conflict or the mommas vs poppas in the wars on government controls.

I am against governments, such as NYC, banning salt and smoking in restaurants, while they encourage, with impunity, the slaughter of unborn tiny humans, resulting in immediate death, 99.99%.

Comment on How Would You Pick A Lawyer? by Frank

Frank — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:51:20 +0000

The fact is that in today’s world attorneys need to be adept at advertising or they need to hire someone who is. I happen to work for a company that helps law firms build their websites, and I’ve personally worked with nearly 500 law firms in the last three years on ways they can improve their websites. There are some attorneys who are very aware of the power of Google and the internet, and others who still (for whatever reason) pooh-pooh it. Even if the attorneys who scoff at the importance of a strong web presence are extremely competent in their legal area of expertise, the levity with which they treat their internet presence will cost them; web studies show that a poorly-done website conveys the impression of a poorly-run or less-than-credible business. Fair? Probably not, but that’s how the buying public thinks.

The fact is, you could be the best attorney in the country, but if you don’t advertise there’s a great chance that people will never find you.

Comment on Bob Costas’ Sandusky Interview: was it a legal blunder? by Paul G. Littlefield

Paul G. Littlefield — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:41:54 +0000

Mr. Meehan, thank you for sharing your thinking on this irksome case. I follow your reasoning and agree that such action by defense counsel was certainly questionable and wouldn’t go over at all with me. It is possible, isn’t it, that Sandusky’s enlarged ego contributed to his attorney’s “edgy” gamble? But, still, an attorney is the one to control his impulses.

Comment on Bob Costas’ Sandusky Interview: was it a legal blunder? by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 12:08:53 +0000

Brandon, One doesn’t have to be a lawyer or law student to see the folly in this action. Good luck with the law, it’s a demanding but rewarding career

Comment on Bob Costas’ Sandusky Interview: was it a legal blunder? by Brandon

Brandon — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 04:34:16 +0000

As someone who just took the MPRE a few weeks ago, and thus is very familiar with the rules of professional responsibility, my first thought was that this had to be malpractice…

The question is, what is to be gained by having Sandusky speak in this fashion, in an unedited interview? Almost nothing.. and whatever gained, could have been established by the lawyer himself. This was a huge blunder…

Comment on GPS Tracking: Is Big Brother Violating the 4th Amendment? by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:02:18 +0000

Matt I think you meant “public” not “pubic”. It certainly would change the privacy analysis if you didn’t.

Comment on GPS Tracking: Is Big Brother Violating the 4th Amendment? by Matthew Nederlanden

Matthew Nederlanden — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 21:34:04 +0000

I think the distinction is easy to make. If you are observing a pubic area than it should be legal (just like placing a cop car at a location is legal), but if you are tracking a specific individual it should take a warrant.

Comment on Miranda Warnings Given More Teeth by Gina Ronci

Gina Ronci — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:02:02 +0000

Great job Rich you hit the nail right on the head.

Comment on Domestic Violence; Can the Courts Prevent More Harm? by Domestic Violence Conviction: No guns! No exceptions for police officers.

Domestic Violence Conviction: No guns! No exceptions for police officers. — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:59:19 +0000

[...] Right to Have a FirearmResident Alien Avoids Deportation Based on Conviction for Domestic ViolenceDomestic Violence; Can the Courts Prevent More Harm? – Due Process – Connecticut News.jcarousel-skin-default .jcarousel-clip-horizontal {padding:0px 0px 0px [...]

Comment on Retrying the Rocket, Roger Clemens by rpc

rpc — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:55:07 +0000

The US govt has better things to do than chase steroid using pitchers. What about all the overtime cheating state workers who really cost me money as a taxpayer?
Blumey never thought to go after them, he was too busy chasing private jobs out of CT

Comment on Retrying the Rocket, Roger Clemens by rpc

rpc — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:09:04 +0000

Who cares if he used steroid and why are we spending so much money on this witch hunt when dozens of Stamford low lifes are stalking our streets hung out on who knows what

Comment on Casey Anthony Verdict by Bruce Aefauver

Bruce Aefauver — Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:37:15 +0000

Every single place there is a conflict going on is scary for the people who reside in those regions because of the fact that they have to be very carfull when leaving their homes.There is a very good chance that you will get shot even killed.This can happen here in the states to.Something has got to get better before we start fighting amongst ourselves.There are people looking for an excuse to start a war so they can shoot people.I don’t even own a gun and don’t want one.I also don’t want to get shot leaving the house either and the news media is going to make everything go the wrong way.

Comment on Amnesty for Marijuana Convicts by Bruce Aefauver

Bruce Aefauver — Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:13:47 +0000

This law about having a little bit of cannabis on your person is a good thing to hear about.I stopped smoking pot about 15 years ago.I think everybody that can smoke it ought to once in awhile when they don’t have to drive a vehicle.There is a cancer research center in Washington DC that found a cure for cancer in 1972.The marijuana has to be processed into a thick grease and then taken 3 times a day and it will cure even the worst cancers.The only side affect is being hungry alot.I guess you have seen people sitting in their cars outside of the hospitals smoking pot and waiting to get their chemotherapy treatments.If they only knew that all they had to do was ingest the oil that comes from the pot they would be cured.Look on the internet at cannabis news

Comment on Casey Anthony Verdict by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:11:22 +0000

Linda
I could not agree more. While the press plays an important role as public watchdogs the fringe members of the media created such hysteria and such a demand for a conviction that it has led to a lynch mob atmosphere in Orlando. So many of the people interviewed on HLN are enraged not because they dispassionately listened to the evidence the jury saw but because they accept the soundbites and invectives from some of these highly opinionated “journalists” and so-called “legal experts.”

Comment on Casey Anthony Verdict by Linda

Linda — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 15:44:33 +0000

I seriously wish someone would slap Nancy Grace back into 1999. The woman is completely deranged. She screamed for Casey Anthony’s conviction so loudly and so hysterically that I thought she was going to begin foaming at the mouth like a mad dog. I have no idea whether Casey is guilty or not – and not being on the jury it’s not my place to determine guilt to begin with – but Nancy Grace’s overzealousness has been disgusting to see. And that’s going all the way back several years ago to her haranguing that other poor woman to suicide by publicly browbeating and accusing her of murdering her missing son. You can pretty much bet that Nancy Grace will be nipping at Casey Anthony’s heels like a Chihuahua for the rest of Anthony’s natural life, never giving Anthony a moment’s peace to come to grips with herself or to make any sort of amends if she chooses to attempt to do so. Completely disgusting behavior on the part of Nancy Grace.

Comment on The Knock on the Jury Room Door by tellok

tellok — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 21:57:09 +0000

Their hearts must pound even harder when they return a guilty verdict when they have very serious doubts about. Prosecutorial misconduct puts a lie to the “innocent until proven guilty”. Many ‘proven guilty’ simply are not.

Comment on On the Passing of a Dear Friend: Ray Gabriele by Bill Carroll

Bill Carroll — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:53:27 +0000

Richie: What awonderful column about such a fantastic person and doctor. I had the priviledge of having him as both my doctor and my friend. Sharon and I live most of the time in Florida now but we will never forget Ray. I treasure the few times I was able to get him on the golf course these last few years as that terrible disease wracked his body but NEVER his mind or soul.Thanks so much for your writing about Ray. It meant a great deal. Billy Carroll

Comment on On the Passing of a Dear Friend: Ray Gabriele by Tom Mayo

Tom Mayo — Sun, 13 Mar 2011 18:12:05 +0000

As another member of Notre Dame’s class of 1966, I can certainly echo Rich’s sentiments and memories of Raymond Gabriele. His SAT’s were in fact terrible, but these tests do not measure courage, passion, integrity and love. If they did Raymond would have been admitted to any college or medical school in the country.

As one of his college roommates, I had the wonderful chance to get to know Ray even better than I did in high school. My wife and I visited him in Rome in 1974 while I was a Navy Supply Officer. He and other American students asked us to buy them some Dial soap, M&M’s and American hot dogs from the military commissary. We earned their eternal praise for this small act.

Although I have lived in Virginia Beach since 1971, Raymond treated my father (who lived in Newtown, CT) for cancer and offered end of life guidance when it became necessary. His long distance phone consultations for Susan and me were as good as any doctor could have done in person.

Last September, Ray, Linda, Susan and I joined two other couples on Bailey Island, Maine to celebrate our 40th anniversary of graduating from King’s College. We rented a home for the week and at one lobster dinner I offered a toast that went something like this: “May our children experience the same kind of love and friendship we have known for these many years!”

Ray was a wonderful husband, father, doctor and friend. He will live in our hearts forever.

Comment on United States v. Jared Loughner by United States v. Jared Loughner – Due Process – Connecticut News | The Daily Conservative

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 06:01:39 +0000

[...] here: United States v. Jared Loughner – Due Process – Connecticut News Share and [...]

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by JTHM

JTHM — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:12:00 +0000

“7.Erin, this is not a liberal vs. conservative debate. Extolling violence because of anyone’s politics is way out of line. Why does “hate” have to be part of the fabric of political debate?”

With all due respect Mr. Meehan, your opinion piece neither reflects nor address’s that statement. Instead you chose to find reasons to blame (1) One Political Party and Sarah Plain in particular. Why you would back track from your personal and partisan rehtoric? It defies someone who beleives in there own princples. It appears that you realize that everyone can see through your motives, to seize the moment, to strike while the poker is hot,to attack, to attempt destroy those who you disagree.

You see Mr. Meehan had you mentioned the Democrat Party “Battle Map” that used Bullseye instead of Crosshairs or maybe had you Mentioned Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa on GOP Gov. Rick Scott: ‘They ought to put him against a wall and shoot him.’.

What about the largest and most widley read Leftwing Blog Daily Kos and the ” She’s Dead to Me” that was convienetly sent down the memory hole as soon as Markos had to appear on TV decrying “Hate Speech”.

You never mentioned once Justice John Roll, a Republican appointed Jurist who happened to have died that day. Did Palin insite this wack-job to murder Conseratives?. You must have known that Gifford was far more rightwing than just about any Northeast Republican. Stand up and say what Democrats are already starting to say, you just gained another Obama appointment to the federal bench. It’s obvious to the left that there really was a silver lining that day.

Perhaps Mr Meehan, just perhaps if you really beleived that a mentally deranged murderer was to blame instead of finding reasons to blame Sarah Palin your piece would have been taken slightly more to heart. Regrettably you merely chose a hit piece.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Donna

Donna — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 11:13:48 +0000

“do more than just appeal to the Joe-the-plumber types?”
Hmmm, What “type” is Joe-the-plumber? What, does Meehan look down at the hard working blue collar worker? or just the hard working blue collar republican? News for you Mr. Meehan, you’re hardy better, even though that comment sure seems like you may think you are above.

Has anyone noticed that Mr Meehan and the other lefties like to mention “Palin” quite often….I find it sad, yet laughable that they seem to fear her growing popularity.

Oh and one more thing, Jared was a lefty who was planning to the death of Gabby well before Palin or Beck was known, Sadly, it appears as if Jared may have heeded Obama’s advice and bought a gun instead of a knife to the fight. Where’s that article? Nah, it wouldn’t fit the plan to try and bring Palin down.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by John R. McCommas

John R. McCommas — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 15:54:15 +0000

Since you the author brought up Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, lets read a little bit what it says. Justice Murphy wrote in 1942:

“There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or “fighting” words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.”End Quote

Now that sounds pretty bad depending how it is applied. Add to that that there was another version on what happened that day.
UCLA professor Gary Blasi’s article on the topic describes the events thus: While preaching, Chaplinsky was surrounded by men who mocked the opposition of Jehovah’s Witnesses to saluting the flag. One man attempted to hit Chaplinsky in full view of the town marshal, who warned Chaplinsky that he was in danger but did not arrest his assailant. After the marshal left, another man produced a flagpole and attempted to impale Chaplinsky; while Chaplinsky was pinned against a car by the pole, other members of the crowd struck him. A police officer arrived and, rather than dispersing the crowd, took Chaplinsky into custody.

En route to the station, the officer, as well as members of the crowd, insulted Chaplinsky and his religion. Chaplinsky responded by calling the town marshal, who had returned to assist the officer, a “damn fascist and a racketeer” and was arrested for the use of offensive language in public.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by MS

MS — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:23:10 +0000

Here is a good example, start from the top first.The president has set the tone of this nation, maybe some one should censor him.

obama quotes:

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,”— Obama in July 2008

“I want you to argue with them and get in their face!”— Barack Obama, September 2008

“We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.”— Obama to Latinos, October 2010

“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!” Obama on ACORN Mobs, March 2010 “We talk to these folks… so I know whose *** to kick.“ — Obama on the private sector, June 2010

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” – President Barack Obama”

“Argue with neighbors, Get in their face!,” – President Barack Obama”

“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” – President Barack Obama”

“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry.” – President Barack Obama”

“Punish your enemies”- President Barack Obama”

“We talk to these folks… so I know whose *** to kick.“ – President Barack Obama”

“I’m itching for a fight.” – President Barack Obama”

“Hand-to-hand combat” – President Barack Obama”

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Erin

Erin — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:05:38 +0000

I never thought I would see the day when liberals and lefties supported censoring free speech. Doubleplusungood, Rich.

You know what? No one else is to blame for the actions of Jared Lee Loughner. He is an adult. He believes the government is trying to control him with grammar selection. He cannot form a sentence with logical and grammatically correct word formation – he talks in “crazy salad” schizophrenic speech and writings.

It appears as Loughner’s generalized paranoia about the government as a sinister entity became focused on Gabby Giffords after he tried to communicate his views to her and he felt rebuffed and decided she was too stupid to understand him. His paranoid views developed a specific face in her.

By the way, the shooter is remembered and identified without hesitation by all who actually know him as liberal and left wing. That doesn’t make Jane Fonda or YOU responsible for his actions, either.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:50:22 +0000

Erin, this is not a liberal vs. conservative debate. Extolling violence because of anyone’s politics is way out of line. Why does “hate” have to be part of the fabric of political debate? The real SCARY part is that no matter your politics there is some whack job with a Glock out there listening!

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Erin

Erin — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:45:57 +0000

Anyone remember the guy who hung Sarah Palin in effigy off his house for Halloween?

How many “Kill Bush” signs or comments were there from liberals?

The funny part, which is also the SCARY part, is the liberals probably BELIEVE they never use nasty, violent imagery or suggesting to express how much they hate Palin or Bush or Cheney or Limbaugh or Beck, etc. They are so smugly certain they are above it and only those “bigot” right wingers do it.

Selective amnesia, I guess.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by evil libertarian

evil libertarian — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 05:31:19 +0000

no screen shots of the daily kos and dnc websites with their bulls eyes maps targeting republicans? how about films depicting the assassination of george w bush? how about the the palin effigy being hung and burned? how about the gabby giffords is dead to me post on daily kos with the dozens of commenter’s hoping she died…in part because she didn’t vote for pelosi for minority speaker.just 2 days before the shooting? blood for oil, murder, war criminals, tea baggers, racists, nazi, fascists, and on and on…have you forgotten the last 10 years?? bill ayers saying he regrets not bombing more? jeremiah wright?frances fox piven calling for violent revolution? and by the way the marks on that map are indeed survey marks look it up. this moron throwing out a peace sign probably has a che shirt in her closet. liberals so open minded and tolerant…as long as you agree with them, remember communism killed over 100 million people so we know exactly how peaceful your ideology is.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by AlFromBlackRock

AlFromBlackRock — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:35:45 +0000

Lock and load Sarah,Rush Limbaugh,John Gamblings, Glenn Beck and the Tea Baggers, guilty of hate speech that just kill 6 people.
Run for cover you SOBs.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:09:53 +0000

Here is a prime example of impassioned rhetoric with a dose of vitriol for good measure. Apparently, it isn’t enough for this person to disagree without personal character assaults. Thanks for helping make the point.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Liberty First

Liberty First — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:40:33 +0000

Further, the author of this article seems to cite only Sarah Palin and conservatives as guilty of hate speech. Nothing is more from the truth. doesn’t the author remember former comptroller of New York, a liberal democrat, when he said in a speech introducing Senator Schumer of New York something to the effect that Schumer would love to put a bullit between the eyes of George W. Bush. That isn’t hate speech. What about President Obama just recently referring to oponents of Obamacare as “enemies”. So, only when the left dissents against an administration of conservatives is “dissent patriotic”. If a majority of citizens think ObamaCare is too much loss of liberty for the citizen and dissents it is hate speech? Or the time comedienne Wanda Sykes said to a gathering of journalists somethng to the effedt of wanting to see Rush Limbaugh die a painful death and President Obama who was at the gathering smirked and gave implicit approval of what she said. I think it would have been just as uproarious if a journalist got up and wished to see Sykes die of ovarian cancer. Leftists like the author of this editorial are just so hypocritcal. To quote a passage from the scripture…”Why do you see the splinter in my eye but not the plank in your own”. And John Kerry has on more than one occasion used terms that would imply he would like to see George Bush dead.

Before you accuse Sarzah Palin, or Rush Limbaugh of inciting hate, clean up the nastiness and discourse within your own liberal leftist ranks.

Comment on Inciting Violence and the First Amendment by Liberty First

Liberty First — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:26:02 +0000

Ain’t it time for the hippy in the picture and all those on the left to smarten up and realize that vitriolic speech is not the cause of the shooting nor is it a recent development in politics. When Lincoln wrote the Emancipation Proclimation in 1862/3 newspapers carried editorial cartoons depicting Lincoln as an ape and the freed slaves in a vulgar stereotypical insult. Since Lincoln was a Republican, you might say the left began it all.

But they didn’t in 1863. When Andrew Jackson was President, many newspapers that were pro liberty and hated the “imperial president” disparaged his wife as being a bigamist.

So, none of this is new, vitriolic speech is part of the fabric of American discourse and it likely won’t ever go away. So to the PC crowd out there, grow a thicker skin, stop whining and most of all, grow up!

Comment on Christmas Remembered by Debbie

Debbie — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:06:09 +0000

Hi Rich,
What a great story!
Memories are something to cherish.
Thanks for sharing,
luv ya,
Deb

Comment on Christmas Remembered by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 23:33:13 +0000

Thank you for the kind comment and I appreciate your readership

Comment on Christmas Remembered by Deane Owen Kennedy

Deane Owen Kennedy — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 21:47:06 +0000

Rich,
That was a beautiful article. Memories are a source of love to share with those in your life. Job well done!
Best,
Deane

Comment on Christmas Remembered by Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 13:46:17 +0000

Amen to that…..

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Marie Luczkowski

Marie Luczkowski — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 22:43:38 +0000

What a poignant story. I am so happy that everything turned out so well. Connor has been so strong and upbeat all through his ordeals. He always has a smile for everyone.
What a generous and courageous person Kerry is to have donated part of her liver. God bless her. What a wonderful Christmas present for Connor and his family. The support they received from family and friends has been phenomenal.
My best wishes to Connor and his family for a Blessed Christmas and a Happy and HEALTHY New Year.

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Suzanne Falaro

Suzanne Falaro — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 17:07:28 +0000

Saga, a story of heroic deeds. Connor, meaning much wanted and strong willed. Connor, so perfectly named, is a true hero. His saga has opened our hearts and minds to a pure want, a deep need to persevere and not give up. Connor is strong willed, proven by his continued presence. Connor, proven by an amazing outpouring from a devoted, loving family, along with an entourage of an incredible medical team, a blessed donor, friends, pals, and many others, is VERY much wanted! Carpe diem! Thank you. With our love, prayers, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year wishes, The Tony Falaro’s (CA).

Comment on Cheshire case: next the appeal by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:47:43 +0000

Sorry Connie but I do not give legal advice through this blog. You should discuss your concerns with your lawyer or obtain a second opinion. Good Luck

Comment on Cheshire case: next the appeal by connie

connie — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:44:52 +0000

I want to know what happens when a judge is clearly biased against
the plaintiffs and does not allow enough time for our case to be
presented. At the pretrial hearing he made comments about his own personal beliefs and how he had a family member who died and was lucid until the end…..etc. This is a case where we were trying to prove incompetency for a contract for someone who is dying of cancer and loaded with drugs. How can this be a fair trial when all the facts have not
been presented? We had a 2 day bench trial which only allowed for 5 hours of testimony because a huge case and 15 lawyers were waiting in
the hall. Even as I was testifying ..the impatient layers outside
kept coming in the courtroom and and looking at their watches…..
as if the judge better hurry up because their case was so much more
important. I know he didnt read the depos…he didnt want to deal with a complicated case. Had to leave for 3 hours our first day for
health reasons. Should clearly not be on the bench. What do we do?

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Candy Perusi

Candy Perusi — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 18:54:06 +0000

I have never felt so moved by real life. That there could possibly be someone so selfless and generous as Kerry truly restores my faith in humanity. She could have only seen that Connor is an angel sent to us and knew that she had to protect that angel. Connor’s positive attitude is itself miraculous with all that he has had to face in his young life. The support I have witnessed for him from his family is profoundly incredible,from uncles,aunts,cousins,siblings, grandmother, and of course a father and a mother who never left his side. Christmas is about the miracle of new life. It truly is Connor’s Christmas!

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Jabe Ryan 5th Grade Teachers

Jabe Ryan 5th Grade Teachers — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:30:26 +0000

We read this beautiful aricle and cried. Miracles really do exist, as well as the angels among us. God Bless all of the Alywards and the donor.

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:24:16 +0000

I tell you that this is Trumbull’s own version of “It’s a Wonderful Life”! There is no greater story of courage than Connor’s and Kerry’s – how blessed we all are that they found each other!

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Judy Falaro

Judy Falaro — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 16:09:26 +0000

This beautiful and moving story reminds us of the true meaning of Christmas, that one would come forth without fanfare to give and sacrifice for others in need. It is a story of faith, redemption and prayers answered. In this season of lights, Kerry became Connor’s light and Connor’s strength and courage were rewarded. Rich Meehan has eloquently documented a true Christmas miracle in this piece. My hope is that it gets the greater media coverage that it deserves.

Comment on The Gift of Life, Part 2: A Real Christmas Story by Marty Falaro

Marty Falaro — Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:50:23 +0000

This captures the story of a young boy who faced a grim future but has never given up saved by a young woman who risked her own health to save his life. This is only supposed to happen in Hollywood! What a Christmas Story.

Comment on Is Uncle Sam really reading my emails? Not anymore! by Ray

Ray — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 12:58:02 +0000

Thanks now Nelson Demille have a nice Christmas.

Comment on Is Uncle Sam really reading my emails? Not anymore! by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Sat, 18 Dec 2010 14:53:29 +0000

Ray you are reading too many Robert Ludlum novels!

Comment on Is Uncle Sam really reading my emails? Not anymore! by Ray

Ray — Sat, 18 Dec 2010 13:45:47 +0000

He is reading everything and listening to your cell phones, knows where everyone is instantly and if you are unfortunate enough to have a pacemaker or other device he can activate it or turn it off.

Comment on Organ donors: the gift of Life by Organ donors: the gift of Life – Due Process – Connecticut News » Lawyer Health Talk

Thu, 09 Dec 2010 14:27:57 +0000

[...] Go here to see the original: Organ donors: the gift of Life – Due Process – Connecticut News [...]

Comment on Organ donors: the gift of Life by Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 12:19:51 +0000

I agree – giving such a gift to another person is greater than any other one could give. Those who do so are truly unsung, quiet heroes.

Comment on Cheshire case: next the appeal by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 00:58:16 +0000

Tony, I appreciate your concerns and agree with much of it. Where you are off the mark is blaming the lawyers. These are public defenders. They are grossly underpaid and will never get rich trying criminal cases. Your anger at Hayes is justified but not the shots you are taking at his lawyers. These men don’t condone his actions.

Comment on Cheshire case: next the appeal by Tony Petros

Tony Petros — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:06:44 +0000

I suppose that “Due Process” is a requirement in cases where the guilt or innocense is in question. In the Hayes case there is no question that he is guilty.

The defense is only arguing against the death penalty, looking for a life sentence instead. That would be justified if the victims could be given back their lives, but that is not possible.

There should be a short cut to this process, when there is admission of guilt. The only due process in this case would be to execute Hayes in the same manner that he murdered his victims. Tie him to a mattress, soak him gasoline and then set it on fire. That would be justice . . . all the rest of this a show in which the lawyers get rich.

Tony Petros
Norwich, CT

Comment on The First Amendment at Ground Zero: Does it live or die there? by Alex Meyerovich

Alex Meyerovich — Sat, 30 Oct 2010 01:28:46 +0000

It appears from the outside that we are not in Mecca, hence the argument whether Muslims would allow a church in Mecca is not relevant to this discussion. I did survive 9/11 attack and I know firsthand how horrible it was to be there and witness the attack and the death and destruction that followed. I don’t hold any grudge against Muslims or Islam. Despite the fact that African-Americans represent large chunk of prison population, somehow I doubt that either commentator would claim that African-Americans are inherently criminal. Neither are Muslims. If you don’t like Muslim just say it and don’t pretend that 2 blocks or 50 blocks make difference or create extra sensitivity. Maybe you should demonstrate Christian values and take it a step further: instead of banning their mosque just build camps, intern people, maybe even deport them. Maybe that is the extend of your tolerance? Or does it only work when you are a victim of some sort of discrimination? Fortunately, the First Amendment was not written for Christians only and that what makes this country unique.

Comment on The Constitution: Is it still the will of “We the People?” by Jose Mercado

Jose Mercado — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 12:43:03 +0000

I for one hope these two perpetrators get what they deserve under the law, under the United State’s Constitution and the Connecticut Constitution. Is the protection of one man’s rights to liberty and just due justice and the protection of that one man’s liberties under the law is what’s about? The protection of another man from the Angry politicians and mobs that guide the so called “natural law” which changes each and every time a person commits such horrible crime and before the “presumption of innocence” can be guaranteed to the innocent and afforded a fair and just trial “We the people” read about the innocent behind bars 18 years later? 25? what do they get from “the people”? Laws are in place with these “safeguards” to protect the occasional innocent from the anger we naturally feel even if the guilty benefit from these rights! it is not about the guilty…it’s about what’s just and proper and set forth by the people we elect whom by the way, we hold responsible, to be “sensible and be guided” by the United State’s Constitution and of course,the Connecticut Constitution, otherwise, we’d be like the British and apply the same punishment whether you are innocent,guilty and what was legal yesterday illegal today and “all the people” would be guilty and punished… The Bill of Rights was set in place because they saw the innocent and yes the guilty! They also recognized that all crimes are not created equal but that indeed we are equal as human beings on this earth! In their vision they saw this “monster” as he was proven guilty but they also saw the other “still presumed innocent” until proven guilty” “yes” “Innocent”? We must have just punishment and defend “all” people as well as prosecute and try all cases and defend from unjust punishment to suit the Angry mobs and angry politicians and inflict full force of the law “naturally”. “We the people”? Equal under the law? where the innocent is concerned,to quote a United States Supreme court justice, “Makes the speed of a snail seem spectacular by comparison.”

Comment on The Constitution: Is it still the will of “We the People?” by Tom Scanlon

Tom Scanlon — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 14:52:08 +0000

Great thought provoking commentary. It would be a great dicussion piece in any high school or college government/law course. Keep them coming my friend.

Comment on Gruesome Pictures in Criminal Trials by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 20:36:54 +0000

Due process requires a lawyer to insure that a defendant’s rights are protected. The lawyers defending Hayes never claimed he was innocent. Their only claim was that his involvement was limited and his co-defendant was more culpable. The jury rejected that.

Comment on Gruesome Pictures in Criminal Trials by Mad Mac

Mad Mac — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 17:17:50 +0000

The truth seems to often be painful. To try and surpress it because it offends or alarms or disgusts those who must view it cannot ever be reason enough to limit let alone stop it from being shown. We try to change the wordings of things to make them less impactful, like pro choice instead of pro murder. We are so careful to protect the criminals while many victims are put on trial. We let people who rape and murder children in their own home live on death row for decades while the public pays for their upkeep. I am weary of a society that cannot evenly see injustice and actively pursue retribution on a level that matches that of the criminal. Many say that bible says, ” Do not kill” when in fact the bible says ,”Do not murder.” Ending the life of a rabid human being because it is the prescribed punishment by law is not murder. It is righteous punishment. I often wonder at how low a person has to stoop or how greedy they must be for money when I see anyone willing to defend scums like these. And please dont insult us by saying that the lawyer in question thinks they are innocent.

Comment on Gruesome Pictures in Criminal Trials by Paul G. Littlefield

Paul G. Littlefield — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 01:06:39 +0000

Thank you Mr. Meehan that was very interesting and informative and I better understand the “balancing test.” I participate with a group that publicly displays some pretty gruesome pictures of what an abortionist does to a living human being who can not defend itself. The explicit photographic evidence of what takes place often evokes strong emotions. The purpose of showing the graphic evidence is not to stir up passions towards the doctor, but to inform and educate the public.

Comment on Car Searches and the Fourth Amendment: Let the Driver Beware by fortek vemont

fortek vemont — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:10:18 +0000

Yo, Richie. I liked you better when you had the perm!

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Stacy Adams

Stacy Adams — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:02:11 +0000

The tragedy is that this even happened at all. There are sickening mistakes through the entire system from releasing these animals to the Cheshire police who are too scared to do their job properly. It’s become a situation that their job is only and I mean only to close the Barn Door after the Horse Escapes. Police would never act in such a manner 50 years ago.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Gene T

Gene T — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:18:35 +0000

Forget blaming he cops. first of all, what were these two criminals doing there in the first place. Cops can’t be everywhere. Criminals if caught should be punished.

second, I am sure this is not their first offenses. I understand that these two thugs met in a halfway house. I’d like to know what judge let hem out in the first place.

Criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens. If we or cops get hurt defending their rights, then we’re just collateral damage. This will change.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Bonnie

Bonnie — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:48:52 +0000

I totally agree that there was absolutely nothing to be gained by questioning the father, husband, and survivor of this most horrific crime. A defense attorney has to be especially careful not to alienate or inflame the jury with questions that could seem like this man and his family have somehow brought this on themselves.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:23:58 +0000

Gideon I have represented numerous victims and understand the pain and frustration they feel, as do most of
my colleagues.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Gideon Fountain

Gideon Fountain — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:09:37 +0000

Rich:
“The system” is shown to fail miserably over and over again, usually in the form of multiple-conviction felons being let loose to rape and/or kill additional innocent people. If the public is angry, it is not surprising that the first object of this anger would be a defense attorney doing “everything in his power” to gain some viscous predator’s release.

Fair? No. But while I’m grateful for the United States’ system of justice that grants even the most hideous monsters their day in court, we, as a country, long ago went too far in the direction of expanded criminal rights.
Well-known-lunatic attorney Ron Kuby loves to recite ad nauseam “It is better to let one hundred guilty men free than to imprison a single innocent one”. Doesn’t that sound noble! The problem is, those 100 guilty men (who often do indeed go free) go on to victimize thousands of INNOCENT PEOPLE. But victims of crimes aren’t Ron Kuby’s concern, are they yours?

-Gideon Fountain

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Tom A.

Tom A. — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:15:29 +0000

Actually I get the point of what your trying to say but when your reference is wrong and misleading how can anyone trust or believe anything else you say. Happily you can correct this. Can the same be said in court, in every case? Yes my point is not about the treatment of this lawyer and I will join you to defend the right and the need of a defense attorney but it is the miss-trust of the system that brings out the worst of individuals. A system that many feel is misleading and not trustworthy. Until the system is healed good lawyers will be unjustly vilified as the innocent will be convicted and the guilty go free.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:51:27 +0000

Actually you are missing the point. This isn’t a discourse on American literature and the criminal justice system. The real point is the venom that pervades criticisms of a lawyer trying to honor his his pledge to support a system rooted in the concept of due process not
vigilante justice!

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Tom A.

Tom A. — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:44:54 +0000

You still missed the point. Most people in America see those working in the justice system not caring about the truth but winning their case and calling it justice.
How is justice served when lawyers/judges present only what they want and hiding/deleting information. Your deletions of valid comments is a perfect example of that and your re-write is a neat cover-up.
You still missed the theme behind the book, Atticus Finch put his reputation on trial not because of the violent nature of the charge but because of the racial nature of the case.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by al ferraro

al ferraro — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:30:26 +0000

Yes it’s a shame that people are going after Mr.Petit,but the fact remains that Hayes and his partner should be put to death for their cold blooded acts,what they did to that family is dispicable,and the punishment should fit the crime,so burn them.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Justiceview

Justiceview — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:26:23 +0000

Wow! Chris Fountain is a leftie conservative!
The horrible injustice is that the Petit family has o go through this nightmare three years later. Why wasn’t this trial done in a year?

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by chris

chris — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:22:18 +0000

“Let the system do its job”

ya ok…….. don’t you people get it? The system is broke and it is getting worse by the second! The lawyers are painfully killing this country.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Phil Parlock

Phil Parlock — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:00:10 +0000

One could suggest the state’s insistence on putting on a death penalty trial is a major reason for the delay here, not the defense effort. Published reports indicated the defendants were willing to plead to life without parole. The appropriateness of the death penalty is a separate argument, but the state’s efforts to apply it are why the defendant is on trial instead of serving time in Somers.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Anthony O.

Anthony O. — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:53:03 +0000

In theory, the blog is well written by obviously a very education man. But I’m just not comforted to hear that another attorney, Tom Ullman, will be able to sleep at night. I’m sure Mr. Petit hasn’t been afforded the same luxury. The Framers wanted a fair and “Speedy” trail, not two years of legal mumbo-jumbo that Mr. Petit has had to suffer through. Is that the system doing it’s job?

The officers responding to the scene of the crime and sat outside for thirty minutes. What were they waiting for? I guess they were also allowing the “system to work”. Meanwhile, the monsters raped, pillaged and murdered a family.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:48:08 +0000

I agree with your second point, but vile, insulting comments reflect more on the anonymous blogger than on the subject

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Frank Quinn

Frank Quinn — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:19:52 +0000

Agreed. The culture of anonymity in online forums allows bloggers to avoid scrutiny. It does, however, also encourage those with useful information to come forward where they otherwise wouldn’t. This was the case in the matter of the people vs. Michael Skakel, where new sources of information were uncovered through web discussions that otherwise included extreme flaming by anonymous posters.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by chris fountain

chris fountain — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:10:17 +0000

Too funny – my best friends are all liberals!

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:01:47 +0000

Chris, some of my good friends are nut cake Libertarian conservatives. Thanks for your kind comments

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by chris fountain

chris fountain — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:52:55 +0000

Attorney Meehan, I’m a blogger (and an ex-lawyer) and I think your comments are spot-on and have said so on my blog! My only regret is that you don’t write more frequently. This from a nutcake, Libertarian-conservative. Keep it up.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Rich Meehan on the Petit trial « For What It’s Worth

Rich Meehan on the Petit trial « For What It’s Worth — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:48:32 +0000

[...] Meehan on the Petit trial Jump to Comments Greenwich Time runs this attorney’s column every once in awhile; I wish he’d write more often because, while I’m certain we disagree on politics, his [...]

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by Leigh Ann

Leigh Ann — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:41:44 +0000

Thank you, Rich. Very well said.

Comment on Hayes Trial Pits Bloggers Against the Defenders by BGCT

BGCT — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:12:30 +0000

Well put, Mr. Meehan. As difficult as it may be to endure the process, something positive may come from it. If a closer look at our parole system, police procedures or even the prison system itself results from this trial we all may realize some good coming from this absolute act of eveil.

Comment on The First Amendment at Ground Zero: Does it live or die there? by Paul G. Littlefield

Paul G. Littlefield — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:29:09 +0000

Mr. Meehan, good to see your legal mind at work. Amazing how you can just brush off the tensions that are generated by what I believe to be a provacative act by the Mosque’s sponsor. After all there are 30 some Mosques nearby, but not abbuting the 9/11 site. What the sponsor says is a mosque, you lable a “study center.” That was clever of you wasn’t it?

You say that Muslims “were no less devastated by the terror of 9/11.” When around the world Muslims were dancing in the streets with joy. Can you, Mr Meehan, name one Inmam in America who expressed sympathy to those injured, or the relatives of those who died? To this date, I have not read of one. You are well aware I am sure of the tenants of the Islam faith which stipulate the death of infidels. Which of the other religions you mention pledge harm to nonbelivers?

Mr. Meehan, I don’t know if you have practiced before land use boards. However, you should know that there are other issues land use boards face when dealing with the appropriateness of a proposal coming before it. You did not address them in your piece, limiting your arguments to religious freedom and tolerance and coming to the conclusion that there is no just basis for opposition.

I do not follow Newt Gingrich closely, but I am of “his ilk.” You characterized him as “dictating” where religion can or can’t be practiced and that he faces dire consequences “when he is in the minority.” My conclusion, then, is that you have an underlying agenda in your mind which colored how you see this issue. If that is true, then you issued a polemic, rather than sharing your legal thoughts.

Again, I thank you for sharing. May God richly bless you.

Comment on The First Amendment at Ground Zero: Does it live or die there? by Tony Petros

Tony Petros — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 12:43:04 +0000

Dear Richard:

I read your article in the Norwich Bulletin and found it very interesting. I don’t know if you are writting this as a member of the Democratic Power machine or as an individual. When you try to stick this criticism on the GOP, I assume you have got this from the Democratic Talking Points in that corrupt city in Washington.

You see I know that both Democrats and Republicans are repulsed by the thought that the Islamists Terrorists who control the Muslim religion are trying to build their temple near ground zero. You see, that would be an affront to both Republican and Democratic Firefighters, policeman, office workers and business men who were cowardly attacked by Muslims. Or do you think that all those people killed and wounded were Republicans.

Your spin on the Constitution was also great . . . you stated that the first amendment says “Congress . . . . exercise thereof”, but gee, you left out the rest where it says “or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacebly to assemble . . . etc.

It seems that you object to American Citizens to exercise their right to freedom of speech against this evil mosque. And you are a lawyer.

When you go after conservatives and tea party types – you no longer are talking as an individual, but you are attacking, as a politician, the rights of people to speak out against what they (and I) think is something that is down right wrong.

You really go after Newt Gingrich (my hero). He must really make your shorts feel real tight. You said what happens when the majority become the minority, well that is already happening. My parents knew right well what happens when Christians live under the cruel rule of Muslims as part of their country was under Turkish muslim control until 1911. You have no idea what they will do to those who do not submit to their intolerable religion. They consider everyone else “cattle” and infidels.

You are pretty smart in law, but have no idea when you say “perhaps not” when asked if they would allow a Christian church in Mecca.

Again, you are doing a great disservice to America by trying to tag this as a Republican issue. You are dead wrong, ask the families of those who lost loved ones from the sneak attack by the Muslim terrorists.

Comment on The other side of domestic violence by George R. McCasland

George R. McCasland — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:55:38 +0000

Annette’s Story: The Other Face Of Domestic Violence
http://TheOtherFaceOfDomesticAbuse-Annettes-Story.org

Comment on The Role of the Expert Witness in Litigation by J. Keith Maxwell, Expert Witness

J. Keith Maxwell, Expert Witness — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:39:17 +0000

Thanks for the good article on expert witnesses. I have served in this capacity and take it very seriously. I believe that the education and certifications are important, but that experience in the area of practice is the most important of all.

Thanks,
Keith
http://www.pro17engineering.com

Comment on Battered Wife or Self Defense: Death of an Olympian by Craig "Christian Martialist" Mutton

Craig "Christian Martialist" Mutton — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 19:10:04 +0000

The whole topic of battered women is not only tragic, but also hard to sort out. I always tell my self defense students, “If you avoid the places where 95% of the violence takes place, you will avoid 95% of the violence.”

Easily said, but I’m also aware that a battered woman often suffers from psychological manipulation that ties her to her tormentor. So many know that if they stay, they will probably die, but do not have the inner strength to take the decisive step.

That’s where a supportive community (a church?) comes in. Loving folks who know the issues and provide a network of emotional support as well as an economic safety net (“What will I do?” “Where will I stay?” etc.).

Comment on Perlitz Dismissal was Correct by Justiceview

Justiceview — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:12:58 +0000

I must demur with this judge. The foundation for this crime was based in Fairfield, Connecticut at Fairfield University. There is enough evidence that there were alumni monetary contributors who had an understanding of the wrongs that were going on and continued to support this child predator. There were also Fairfield University religious benefactors who guided this criminal as well. As to a plane leaving out of NYC to go to Haiti, Perlitz got into a car in Connecticut that took him to the airport that provided the plane to Haiti.

Comment on Mandatory Mediation of Medical Malpractice Claims by Tweets that mention Mandatory Mediation of Medical Malpractice Claims - Due Process - Connecticut News -- Topsy.com

Sat, 03 Jul 2010 02:04:07 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by patientsrights. patientsrights said: #PatientsRights: Mandatory Mediation of Medical Malpractice Claims – Due Process … http://ow.ly/17YzEY [...]

Comment on O.J. Trying to Run for Daylight Again by Oj Simpson | Ifdny

Oj Simpson | Ifdny — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:37:00 +0000

[...] According to ESPN, which has produced a documentary about a fascinating Sunday 16 years ago, something other than OJ Simpson’s low-speed Bronco chase happened on June 17, 1994. Apparently Arnold Palmer was playing his final round… O J Trying To Run For Daylight Again – Due Process – Connecticut News [...]

Comment on O.J. Trying to Run for Daylight Again by All Around the World News

All Around the World News — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:31:27 +0000

O.J. Trying to Run for Daylight Again – Due Process – Connecticut News…

I found your entry interesting do I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog …

Comment on Judging with Technology by Tweets that mention Judging with Technology - Due Process - Connecticut News -- Topsy.com

Sat, 22 May 2010 17:41:28 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Manuel F Sousa, SousaCourtReporters. SousaCourtReporters said: Judging with Technology http://dld.bz/cXqm [...]

Comment on Equity, hot tubs and relationships! by pharmacy technician

pharmacy technician — Wed, 19 May 2010 03:38:29 +0000

Great information! I’ve been looking for something like this for a while now. Thanks!

Comment on Is that internet comment you posted really anonymous? by wow gold

wow gold — Mon, 17 May 2010 10:03:45 +0000

Such a usefule blog wow !!!!

Comment on Still Crazy after All These Years by cell phone signal blockers

cell phone signal blockers — Thu, 13 May 2010 21:54:37 +0000

What do you think about adding some more pictures? I don’t want to offend anyone, page is really great. Just according to the scientists humans acquire info much more effective when they see some helpful pics.

Steaven Tayfon

Comment on Still Crazy after All These Years by Sophie ChikenRunner

Sophie ChikenRunner — Tue, 11 May 2010 17:23:10 +0000

Indeed great story you got here. It’d be just great to read something more about this theme. Thanx for posting such data.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by islandbelle

islandbelle — Mon, 03 May 2010 18:47:50 +0000

There is only one problem with these blogs — no one vets the “facts” posted on them. Timster, you must stand corrected. Mickey Sherman’s former partner, who had nothing to do with the Skakel case, was absolutely NOT disbarred and the offense he pled guilty to had
nothing to do with the practice of law.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by MarkSpizer

MarkSpizer — Mon, 03 May 2010 12:40:16 +0000

great post as usual!

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by Retiree

Retiree — Mon, 03 May 2010 12:29:41 +0000

As a retired law enforcement officer I have to agree with Mr. Meehan and not because Skakel was found guilty; it’s because of the logic he used to further his argument. At some point, as painful as it may be, defendants and their families have to face facts as they are, not as they would wish.

I know Mickey Sherman and had my last contact with him about 10 or so years ago. I always liked him and found him to be a reasonable and yet passionate practioner. Yet, maybe all the years of high level exposure made more of an impact on him than he would have preferred had he had a crystal ball. I wonder how many of us would have come out differently if we faced the same life events. I sincerely hope he comes out of his current troubles with his name and life intact.

I also understand the comments for Our voice shrinks. It is a difficult choice lawyers make when they have what they know to be a guilty client and yet they do their best to defend them. I’m not so sure I could bring myself to do it, but my experience is that most lawyers are able to insulate their personal feelings when doing their job. That is something I also tried to do in my career when I investigated crimes that led to arrests of those very same defendants.

Still and all, it’s a pleasure to read reasonable comments from some. Timster take note.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Mon, 03 May 2010 12:11:42 +0000

While I appreciate that you have chosen another path in the law; nonetheless you do a disservice to dedicated members of our profession with an observation that as criminal lawyers we “. . .push the legal boundaries beyond reason to harm society . . .” You must have been absent when they taught the Constitution.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by Our voice shrinks

Our voice shrinks — Mon, 03 May 2010 12:08:42 +0000

When I attended law school in the 70′s, my criminal law professor prepared the class in advance of a tour of the state penitentiary. He stated plainly “You will find no guilty men there!” We were shocked, being young and foolish law students out to right the injustices of an unjust society. The professor’s explanation perfectly mirrored Attorney Meehan’s above. He went further to illustrate the seemingly senseless cases that arose of each year of attorneys who became so enraptured with their clients that they participated in attempted (and sometimes successful) escape attempts.

Yet time proved him true. After handling (and successfully defending) several pro-bono criminal cases in clinical law, I came to a personal decision that I could not reconcile the ethics of defending clients I knew to be guilty of a crime with my responsibilities as an attorney to the court and my responsibilities to society.

Yes, if I were ever charged with a crime, I would want the best criminal attorney to defend me. But I fully admit, I could not be a criminal defense attorney, I would be unable to push the legal boundaries beyond reason to harm society in defense of one I knew to be guilty.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by Timster

Timster — Sun, 02 May 2010 21:21:37 +0000

Mickey Sherman never met a microphone or TV camera he didn’t love!
Mickey thought he was going to waltz Michael in the front door of the court house and have a media circus post aquittal party on the court house steps afterwards, which didn’t happen, as we all know.
Perhaps if the Mr. Skakel had retained Hugh keefe, William Dow, Gene Riccio and few other talented lawyers…….he just might have “gotten off” shall we say?
Mr. Sherman’s partner went to prison and was disbarred.
The IRS and CT bar have had issues with Mr. Sherman, which may or may not be resolved at this point.
I am not buying the Kennedy/Skakel clan spin on this tragedy, that said, Mr. Sherman put his own personal interests before those of his client and the professional code of conduct he swore to uphold.
Mickey Sherman is not innocent in this case!
Mr. Skakel has to live with the juries judgement and his actions for all eternity.

Comment on There are no guilty clients, only lousy lawyers by Dux239

Dux239 — Sun, 02 May 2010 02:12:47 +0000

Let’s face it; if Skakel had been acquitted on these charges of murdering Martha Moxley, there would be nothing but praise for his lawyer Mickey Sherman. Skakel is as guilty as the day is long. He deserves to spend the rest of his miserable life in jail – which is more than Martha Moxley got when he knocked her off back when shew was just 16 years old! When will the Kennedy’s learn to behave ethically? Blood may be thicker than water but there is something much thicker and more sustainable than a relative, and that is INTEGRITY and the LAW – concepts that RFK Jr. seems to have overlooked in his academic pursuit of the American “dream”. Face it, the Kennedy legacy is past tense.

As for Mr. Skakel; hang your head in shame and accept your punishment as a man for once in your life. After-all, you murdered a beautiful young woman you coward!!!!

Comment on There are still Heroes in this world by limewire

limewire — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:42:15 +0000

lol amazing stuff bro.

Comment on Policing the Legal Profession by Jonathan Kantrowitz

Jonathan Kantrowitz — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:03:34 +0000

Where do you get all your illustrations? How do you position them?

Comment on Tracking Domestic Violence: GPS or Big Brother? by Petra

Petra — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 22:54:14 +0000

This was a terrific article!
As goos as it seems to have gps monitoring for the offender, what happens when the victim is not in one of her “safe zones”?
In past, the offender is equipped with an ankle bracelet, excluding him near the victims residents, place of employment, etc.
What happens the the victim whil shopping at a store, the mall, at the movies?

There is help! There is a system that equipps the offender with a bracelet. The victim is issued a cell phone that is linked to the offenders bracelet. Her safe zone/ exclusion zone travels whith the victim, regardless of location.

This way the victim has a heads up if the offenders approaches, while the offender has a tool to disproof possible false alligations.

There is help in technology for both parties.

Find out more at: http://gpsmonitoring.com/Restraining-Order-services.html

Comment on “Is That All There Is?” by citizen

citizen — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:03:58 +0000

As a passer by I’ve observed in the past two years, I believe twice, a new, huge house on Mr. Botti’s home land go up, and then be completely torn down! Seems very strange. Has that been discussed or explored?

Comment on “Is That All There Is?” by shelton resident

shelton resident — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:43:42 +0000

It is pretty clear to the majority of us that shady deals get done here all of the time. Only very few developers get the jobs. Shall I refer to the wtness Paul DiMauro saying in a previous article how he spends every christmas morning with the mayor shaing old Italian traditions, and he is a paid consultant for the town? If you aren’t the right party or know the right people it is hard to get any where here. The mayor promises low taxes well thats great meanwhile all money thats being brought into town by developing Bridgeport Ave our school system is about to go down the tubes. Sad to say I moved back to my hometown after college with opened eyes and great dissappointment.

Comment on “Is That All There Is?” by LIBERTY

LIBERTY — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:23:28 +0000

if it wasn’t for developers like botti, scinto, and blakemen shelton would’nt be what it is today. big buisness is what keeps our taxes low. these days it’s a crime to be succesfull. I FOR BOTTI, FREE JIM BOTTI

Comment on “Is That All There Is?” by Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:29:12 +0000

My Dad loved this song and all it’s symbolism….

Comment on “Is That All There Is?” by ctcowboy

ctcowboy — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:21:24 +0000

botti is a good man. lauretti should step up and take the fall for all shelton developers. he has stayed in all their homes, accepted all their gifts, and has driven shelton into a mountain of success with a huge cliff at the peak. he screwed the pd, the roads and now the schools. kept taxes low just for votes… huge money in shelton and nothing to show for it accept capitolist extortion

Comment on Is Lauretti on Trial? by Jim Taradine

Jim Taradine — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:35:08 +0000

The Mayor and the City of Shelton are being grossly mistreated in this trial. After 7 years of investigation, the Mayor has never been charged with a crime. The prosecution says the investigation is on going.
Either charge the Mayor or let this thing go.

Comment on Is Lauretti on Trial? by Jim T

Jim T — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:28:07 +0000

I feel the government is being grossly unfair to Mark Lauretti and the City of Shelton. He is being dragged through this trial and has never been, to this day, accused of a crime after 7 years of investigation. The prosecution says the investigation is still on going.
Please, either charge the Mayor or let this thing go.

Comment on Bribery 101: It Takes Two to Tango by Sam from Connecticut

Sam from Connecticut — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:47:52 +0000

Sent all the crooks to jail for a very long time.

Comment on Bribery 101: It Takes Two to Tango by Tom Kelly

Tom Kelly — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:08:15 +0000

First one to the Courthouse steps wins!

Comment on DNA: Bane or Boon? by DNA

DNA — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:31:35 +0000

“Pet owners can have identification chips implanted in the family dog or cat. Is it just a matter of time before we do the same for newborns?”

Well, I think we are still far away from this.

“George Orwell may have had a point after all”

I can agree with this claim.

Comment on DNA: Bane or Boon? by DNA And Genealogy Research Are Fun And Exciting | Public Records Blog | DNA Service Testing

Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:06:47 +0000

[...] DNA: Bane or Boon? – Due Process – Connecticut NewsDNA evidence has now become the definitive means of identification. The number of people exonerated after a wrongful conviction has reached more than 250. Was it cause for celebration or lament? Certainly the efforts of groups like … [...]

Comment on Domestic Violence; Can the Courts Prevent More Harm? by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:56:39 +0000

I wish I had answers to prevent these tragedies. The Connecticut Law Tribune reports today that the House Speaker’s Task Force on Domestic Violence is preparing to meet on January 25th to address the West Haven case and to discuss where change is needed to try to prevent these crimes from occurring. At your suggestion I have changed the title.

Comment on Domestic Violence; Can the Courts Prevent More Harm? by adeleq

adeleq — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:31:43 +0000

This is a good article about an important subject, but it seems that the title is a little misleading - the author does not discuss DV prevention, but rather lists the changes made in society's retribution of DV perpetrators. While examining the way we punish criminals is a worthwhile pursuit, I would also like to see something that actually discusses preventing domestic violence and child abuse. Something we can do before the problems even start. For instance, Marala Scott talks about the 'Indicators of an Abuser,' which is a terrific tool that empowers people to recognize patterns in others (or in themselves!) that may signal abusive tendencies in the future. Oprah salutes her as an 'Ambassador of Hope' for her work on these 'Indicators,' right on Oprah.com! So, the discussion obviously needs to be had, if Oprah is saluting someone for bringing it up. Don't get me wrong, though. Due process is also an important topic - unfortunately, I don't believe that it can actually prevent DV crime.

Comment on Experts in the Courtroom: part three by Randy Nichols

Randy Nichols — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:29:51 +0000

I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future.

Comment on The Role of the Expert Witness in Litigation by The Role of the Expert Witness in Litigation - Due Process … Litigation just to Me

Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:13:28 +0000

[...] post: The Role of the Expert Witness in Litigation – Due Process … tags: arise-beyond, beyond-the-common, common, knowledge-jurors, legal-controversies, [...]

Comment on Christmas Remembered by Jamie Allen

Jamie Allen — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:34:11 +0000

Great story!! Reminds me of memories of my grandfather. Growing up without a dad , he was my father figure. We rarely did what kids today would consider fun. It was mostly chores or things that needed to be done around the farm. All I remember is as long as I was helping granpa I was happy.

Merry Christmas Everybody!

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:09:16 +0000

Happy Thanksgiving to you and beat Stanford!! P.S. Hope you get a shot back at the guy, and come back for your senior year. Good Luck.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:33:13 +0000

Sorry I haven’t written in a few days…it has been a little hard to see recently. To answer your question…All of us Golden Domers keep up on our distinguished alumni! Happy Thanksgiving.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:20:33 +0000

UCONN got lucky at the end and you guys fought like warriors. Hang in there. Also, I’m curious how you found this post from South Bend. I’d love to know.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:29:01 +0000

Hey Dan White…who’s side are you on?

But I do agree that we should all agree to disagree.

I also think that I am really thankful (it is that time of the year you know) that UCONN did not sign that 10-year deal to play Notre Dame in football. Not only are the Huskies great in both men’s and women’s basketball, we can’t even beat them in football!

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Dan White

Dan White — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:40:59 +0000

I think we should all agree to disagree. Is this Jim Clausen, the QB1 for ND?

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:36:11 +0000

I agree that purpose is laudable, but to shield this from public scrutiny doesn’t detract from improving health care. I guess we have to agree to disagree. By the way I’m a fellow Golden Domer–ND Class of 1970. At least we aren’t debating whether Charlie Weiss stays or goes. Hope you will keep reading and keep commenting I love the dialogue, and Go Irish.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:02:57 +0000

Thanks for your response… The purpose of peer review is for all doctors to have an opportunity to review all cases of unexpected or bad outcomes. The expectation of confidentiality encourages doctors to speak freely towards the goal of improving health care. It is wrong to assume that these meetings are about discussing “mistakes”. Hopefully the review of these cases will help doctors make changes in protocols and procedures that will benefit all future patients.

A huge part of the problem is that society doesn’t seem to differentiate between bad outcomes and malpractice. Even when there are no medical mistakes, doctors are unfairly accused when bad things happen.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:33:15 +0000

Amen to that! The truth is that liability claims expose neglect and force reform. This isn’t an indictment of doctors just bad medicine when it does happen.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Mary Ellen Hass

Mary Ellen Hass — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:58:07 +0000

We need health care reform on a number of levels. This just exposes an interesting other side to the debate about liability. Unfortunately though, the patient seems to lose out in the end with soaring health care premiums and regulatory bodies shielding patients and their families from the truth.

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Rich Meehan

Rich Meehan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:04:59 +0000

Jim
The attorney client privilege protects you, the client; not the lawyer. There is nothing that insulates attorneys from scrutiny when they are reported to the Statewide Grievance Committee. It’s all about transparency, but thanks for your comment

Comment on Ripping the Veil of Secrecy from Malpractice by Jim Clausen

Jim Clausen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:56:12 +0000

Doctors will give up their “secret” peer review the minute attorneys give up their attorney-client privilege…Come on lawyers, let’s get to the real truth about your clients…

Comment on No Good Deed Goes Unpunished! by Dr Rick

Dr Rick — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:00:00 +0000

Agreed. I wonder how many of the original convictions were based solely on eyewitness testimony. My students can’t seem to get enough of that idea when writing their papers on memory failures.