Travis In Austin

Neil, just me thinking about this (over a drink or so) but would a quicker resolution to ANY sentence and having to actually serve the sentence be more of a deterrent? This is not to be thought of in relation to innocent people in prison (I know that there are some) but, if a human knew that there would be swift justice (justice as best we can manage) do you think that the general population would be less likely to commit a crime? Not.less likely. Sounds like DA already has you as "one of the team." There is no one from defense to ask questions for Grand Jury. It is pretty much if you are legally disqualified or not.

I think it would depend on the case. I think there would be some cases that I would leave you on, others no way. I would have, at a minimum, asked you more questions to educate other panel members. Things about standards of proof, why you were not upset with NG verdict, scientific testing, etc.

Because we lawyers don't want them there. We pick juries to have more than one person decide the case. Most jurors are not versed in legal jargon and are a bit intimidated by it. Lawyers are "specially" trained to know certain things about "the law" which just don't appear in those plain-vanilla jury charges. Before you know it, a well-versed attorney on a jury will be running the whole show while all the other jurors just follow his/her lead. In that case, you might as well just try the case to a single juror and flip a coin. Putting several people on a jury tends to insure less whimsical decision-making and a greater depth of "life's experience," whatever that is. I agree with this entirely. Unpicking (which is really what we do, unpick a jury) is completely different for civil and criminal cases. There isn't a one size fits all for any particular type of case. When the client is able I have always utilized a jury consultant like Robert Herschorn. If they can't afford it I do it in other ways on a shoestring. It is probably the most important single part of a trial. I have left a few attorneys on jurys with good results. When it comes down to it and I am on the fence I go with my gut. That is all I know about jury selection. Travis

Would you instead, prefer a jury of all engineers? Back when I mostly did criminal defense and DWIs, my best jurrors were EEs in breath test cases.

My brother and about 4 friends down at the courthouse. It seems like it was a couple of weeks before they could go back to work at desk jobs. Then they were in sling for quite awhile.

I wish I had seen this at the time, this guy is a Klipschorn god.

Did ot rain fish?

Well sort of. It happened because Chief Bonehead worked with Paul on it and was able to park the Jubilee bass bin in Pro Cinema. When there was some interest it was Roy who engineered it and made it available. Travis

What do you think so far?

That is very true. Os season 1 on net flox or does USA have on demand?

I've got a really good one for ya---"The Night Of" on HBO...watched the first episode and it's so good. Written by Richard Price ("Clockers", etc)...excellent cast and dialogue. Check it out, 2nd episode is on tonight at 8pm...or on Demand.... Travis

None necessary from my end, but I appreciate the sentiment just the same. It is I that owe an apology to you. In my zeal to clarify what we actually know historically, I was condescending when it was unnecessary to make my point. For that, I sincerely apologize. Travis

The vocals are very ordinary, maybe I'm spoiled. A real prodigy is so rare.

They can't own copyrights? I never thought about it before. What about: The few, the proud . . . .

Small point perhaps, today, with the selective "justice" which is/is not enforced, but, is it not also against the law to represent the American flag on articles of clothing, and other items . . . ? No, I'd be surprised if it is against the law, given that during the senior Bush's administration the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag is protected under the Constitution. A friend of mine commented "That's America at its best." I believe that justice Scalia was one of the justices who protected the right to burn the flag. dwilawyer? BRENNAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, SCALIA, and KENNEDY, JJ., j With this particular decision, the Court did not split based upon ideological lines. This is often true with freedom of speech/expression cases. What is just as telling about the decision is who was NOT in the majority. From left to right (there is fairly uniform understanding among scholars of the Court as to where particular justices sit on an ideological scale in general terms relative to one another) the dissenters were: Stevens, White, O'Connor and Rehnquist. I can't think of a case prior to this where you had Stevens and White dissenting with Rehnquist. It did occur again, two years later in U.S. v. Eichman. Eichman was a flag burning case that involved the federal flag burning statute that was passed in response to Johnson ​a state flag burning criminal statute. The result was the same in Eichman, ​with the exact same four justices in dissent. In Johnson the highest court in Texas overturned the conviction and the prosecutors were trying to get SCOTUS to reinstate the conviction. In Eichman the defendant was trying to have his federal conviction reversed. The Eichman court struck down the federal law. Eichman and Johnson were both argued by William Kunstler on behalf of the criminal defendants. Kenneth Star argued the case on behalf of the government as Solicitor General. If anyone is interested in listening to the oral arguments in either Johnson or Eichman I can post links to the Oyez.org website where you can listen to what the lawyers argued and the questions the Justices asked of them. Travis

It has been tried, but without much success. With a Department such as this they would be much better off getting Tasers first, and then looking at this way, way down the road. If you search Super Talon Net Gun you will see a review on it and photos. The effective range of a net gun is about 20 feet, but that is inside the 21' associated with the 21' rule. It would require a special situation, time, etc. In this situation the decedent was in the process of about to attack the neighbor. The officer drew his attention to him and he started approaching the officer. There simply wasn't time to get a net gun out of a trunk and deploy it. A Taser might have avoided this, but you have to have lethal cover by one officer (because you had a subject with a weapon in his hand) and then another officer attempting to deploy the Taser. I should load on the 911 call of the lady calling in frantically that someone had smashed the windows and was breaking into their house. When the police arrived he was gone and homeowners were outside. They got description and direction of travel and went looking, and then double backed and on way back saw the suspect heading back to the house with the Yo Ho in his hands held up (at first glance it was thought to be a shovel). You see in one of the videos the homeowner run in a panic and get behind the police car. As the suspect is approaching the police officer he is told by my client "drop your weapon or I will shoot you" to which the subject responds "that's ok." The suspect was released from a mental hospital a few days before the incident, and apparently when the hospital called family to see if someone could come and pick him up and no one would because of prior problems they had with him. From the time the officer gets out of his car to shots fired is less than a minute. A net gun, which I don't know of any department using, may or may not have worked. If there is time you could launch a drone that could drop a net, and we may have that technology some day, but I think it is a fair ways off. Travis

Texas Attorney General settles case today against PC Scan out of Florida. This is a company that would say it would scan your computer on line to see if there were any errors. Apparently, no matter how great or error free your system was, it would find errors and give you a number to call. From there they would try and sell you additional and unneeded tech support services that were very expensive. I am attaching a copy of the Judgement in PDF. Apparently the Federal Trade Commission has also settled with them today. If you know of anyone who may have been scammed by this outfit you may want to let them know. Typically the FTC and the AG's of the state will have all of the email addresses of folks who the offending company had communications with and contacts them, but there are some that slip through the cracks because there are so many of them. Travis 02_AFJ_071316.pdf

Ok I have to go, to a wake for a police officer. You are great guys, I don't think there is a mean or bad post on thos tjread I started a year or so ago, that is over 100 replys. I just like to post legal news from time to time so people know what the courts are doing. I don't expect everybody to agree, but thanks to you guys today for always keeping it nice on here, and in days past.

Based on your point, above, I think we are dealing with a "different story." I was ready to go back and see if there might be room for the officer to say he couldn't tell, but the weed-whacker is right in front of the officer - about 2 feet away. And the officer is shining his flashlight right on the guy. Essentially, the weed-whacker is "point blank" right in the officer's face with a spotlight on it. Look at 0:42 seconds into the video. He could clearly see the it was a Yo Ho, and that deputy grew up using them and was familiar with the damage they can cause. I bought one and brought one to press conference tp show media, I also brought a watermelon and said I would be happy to show them what kind of damage they can do out on the parking lot. I had no takers.

Weed cutter wood handle. Strictly analog. http://www.yohotoolsonline.com/YOHO-TOOLS-Weed-&-Brush-Cutters/c2766_2816/index.html

Here is one I had last month: There is no dash cam video, and Austin officers don't have body cams yet. http://www.kvue.com/mb/news/local/grand-jury-clears-apd-offficers-in-fatal-shooting/247651799 Please, do not let your kids talk you into buying them one of those hand held air guns that look exactly like a real firearm. If they have already, go paint it florescent orange.

orange.

So everybody runs away and then what? Shoot him with a tranquilizer gun? They dont have them. Taser? They don't have Tasers in that department. Police Officers are not trained to run from confrontation when they need to protect others, they are trained to head right at it.

Graham v. Conner is the Std., has been forever. It provides the most protection, local departments can adopt a stricter standard, thus you can violate local policy but not be criminally liable. Every state has a different law enforcement justification statute. The Texas one specifically states no duty of peace officer to retreat. So if it were my client he would have been prepared for that question, which could easily come from a Grand Jurror and his response would have been "Sir I backed up as far as I could safely, I was in the streat and backing up into an unlit field, even though the law says I don't have to retreat, I did back up to try and avoid having to use my firearm, unfortunately he wouldn't respond to my repeated commands and he charged me."

It was one of those hand held weed cutters that you swing back a forth, down in these parts they are called a YO YO, or a Yo Ho. There is no dispute that if hit in the head with one ot would do serious damage. That man smashed the front windows across the street and was trying to gain entry into their house. The man was going after the homeowner in the front yard of the house when the deputy, on purpose diverted the man's attention to him. So he runs away, and then what? He go back after the homeowner and crushes his scull in and you shoot him in the back off camera? There is no duty of a police officer to retreat in Texas, and yet he tried to retreat. Was it "objectively reasonable"? There is no question it is in my view. But I handle about 20 of these a year unfortunately. However, the community judges these things, i.e. the Grand Jury, so I always like to get people's input. Do you think it was a good for us to get the video as soon as possible rather then wait for the Grand Jury?