« Keavey Fell Down, And Broke His Crown, But Couldn't Recover Under Labor Law s. 240(1) | Main | No Excuse Required. »

December 31, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834516c2469e200d8346871ea53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Kleptomaniac or Overzealous Court Officers? You Decide.:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

wdegraw

I remember this incident from the tabloids, but never sought additional facts. Fascinating!

I think your bottomline conclusion - along with points 1 -5 five - is so right on. Regardless of what happened in the proximity of that file cabinet, this ADA must have done something to someone to lead to the consequences of whatever happened. As you pointed out, regardless of whether it was the ADA or a PD stealing, in a courtroom from one of their own, no less - not in a million years would I have expected a summary arrest like the one in this case. Instead, I would have expected months of deliberation among DA boss types and supervisors from all ends. Even then, I would have expected a cover all asses disposition. A Grand Jury presentation? NEVER! But, if she testified in front of the GJ, a no true bill would be expected under these facts, I'd say.

Here's my take: wasn't Hynes in the middle of a hotly contested campaign run - with lots of race related issues - when this happened? Did his office prosecute one of his opponents for a theft related crime?

Politics and prosecutorial discretion make a lousy pair.

Look forward to reading you in 2006.

slickdpdx

A wacky set of facts, unless she was a drug addict. The felony may have been related to credit cards in the wallet.

As I am sure you know, the grand jury presents a poor opportunity to cross-examine an accused and the prosecution case is typically significantly abbreviated. With a more full presentation of the case against her and a better opportunity to cross examine her, the case could very well have looked quite different to the Court of Claims!

Nicole Black

I figured as much re: the credit cards as the basis for the felony, but it's highly unusual that they chose to prosecute it to that extreme given the circumstances.

And, I'm not sure about the political race and how that factored into this, but it's a good thought.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

About This Blog

Sui Generis Partner

Other Sui Generis Sponsors





Receive Updates Via Email

disclaimer

  • This site is intended purely as a resource guide for educational and informational purposes and is not intended to provide specific legal advice. This site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a professional attorney in your state. The use and receipt of the information offered on this site is not intended to create, nor does it create, an attorney-client relationship.

    Please feel free to contact me via e-mail or otherwise. However, please be advised that an attorney-client relationship is not created through the act of sending electronic mail to me.

    The comments on this blog are solely the opinions of the individuals leaving them. In no way does Legal Antics or Nicole L. Black endorse, condone, agree with, sponsor, etc. these comments.

    Further, any information provided on this blog or in the comments should be taken at your own risk.