THE MEANING OF MEMORIAL DAY and one Gorilla

With the Memorial Day Holiday recently passed, we are recalling Jesse Watters (“Watters’ World”) asking various people what the meaning of this Memorial Day is.

Most people asked seemed to have no idea why we have this day. It is truly amazing that people in this country are so ignorant of their history. Considerable sacrifice has been made throughout our history by many people to bring about and maintain the freedom, security, opportunity and prosperity that we enjoy, and frequently take for granted. We must all remember that “freedom is not free.” It is a shame that many in this country do not appreciate the sacrifices made by others, in order to get us to this point and beyond.

With the current controversy over the death of the 450-pound Silverback Lowland Gorilla, who first protected, but then – apparently spooked by a screaming crowd of humans – began to drag a 3-year-old or 4-year-old child – come on, “Main Stream Media,” couldn’t you at least find out the actual age of the child ? …. Who climbed a fence and fell into the gorilla exhibit, one must wonder how life is valued. Recently, 69 people were killed in Chicago in one day. This may be the outbreak of gang violence. However, aren’t these lives valued? What can we do to prevent his? Are we stuck in the age old debate of how to spend governmental resources to aid people and prevent gang warfare? Gangs pay better than a menial job. The gang offers instant gratification. There is no lag time in getting an education to hopefully escape gang violence. The gorilla was shot and killed because no other option existed in terms of saving the young child. However, the ultimate question must be asked: where were the parents of this child? How did the child climb a three foot fence and then fall into the exhibit? Should the parents be forced to pay the zoo back for the cost of getting another – endangered species – Lowland Gorilla? Is this just a tragic incident and nothing more? Thankfully, the young child was not seriously hurt in the incident.

The 2016 political campaigns are NOT winding down ! There’s still talk of a “third-party candidacy,” and we now have Libertarian Party nominees. Believe it or not, people who pay close attention, and know at least some of the facts – both Republicans and Democrats – are quietly saying that it looks more and more likely that Secretary Clinton will be indicted, and may have to withdraw from the Presidential race.

The campaigns of Vice President Joe Biden and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren may just be beginning ! The stakes are high for everyone. Control of the White House and Congress will color the character of the United States Supreme Court for decades to come.

In order to make your voice heard, just do one thing, PLEASE VOTE. The California primary is June 7. If you are not registered to vote, get yourself registered for the general election and PLEASE VOTE.

What say you?

The post THE MEANING OF MEMORIAL DAY appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Who will become president Trump or Hillary ?

So, where do we stand in terms of the 2016 Presidential Election campaign ?

The Republic Party seems virtually certain to name Donald Trump as the 2016 Republican nominee in July.

The Libertarian Party has nominated its candidates for President and Vice President.

For the Democrats, believe it or not, everything is “up-in-the-air.”  Many people who pay close attention, and who are aware of at least some of the facts  –  both Republicans and Democrats  –  are quietly saying that it looks more and more likely that Secretary Clinton will be indicted, and may have to withdraw from the Presidential race.  The campaigns of Vice President Joe Biden and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren may just be beginning !

Soon enough, as in a boxing match, the Announcer (“Mainstream Media”) will be saying, “in this corner, for the Democrats, is …. Secretary Hillary Clinton … or Vice President Joe Biden …. or Senator Bernie Sanders …

And the Announcer will be saying, “in this corner for the Republicans, is …. Businessman Donald Trump.

What does Hillary bring to the table?  She has considerable political experience.  She is a former two-term first lady who purports to have been heavily involved in policy at the White House for the two Bill Clinton terms.  (But we heard that Mrs. Clinton and President Clinton weren’t talking to each other for much of that time ! …. )

She is also a former United States Senator from New York. She is also a former Secretary of State.  These are the PRO’s of a potential Hillary Clinton Presidency.   The cons of Hillary are a lack of candor and trustworthiness.  The lack of trustworthiness is still in the air and has been for a long time.  The potentiality of an indictment still looms.  The American people seemingly do not like either major party candidate from a personality standpoint.  While personality does play a part in deciding who to vote for, it cannot and should not be the major deciding factor.  That factor should be the political experience and policy experience that the candidate possesses … or should it ?

Although many people want a potential “outsider” to win an election, is this really true?  Do we want someone with no experience being the leader of the free world?  Talking on television is quite a bit different than talking to Vladimir Putin or the leader of China … or is it ?  The lives of millions are a stake in potential discussions.  As the late Senator Everett Dirksen once said, “to get along, you have to go along.”  Does anyone know who Senator Everett Dirksen was ?

Would Mr. Trump adhere to this policy ?   Is Government too big and too entrenched to change overnight ?  Each party has it’s own agenda or view of what they seek to accomplish.

What does Donald bring to the table?  He is quite entertaining.  He is a lightning rod for controversy and debate.  Apparently, either you hate him or you love him.  He says and does things that many people think but do not say.  But will Mr. Trump be able to compromise enough to “make great deals” ?   If … or perhaps, “when” … we have a dispute with China, what would Donald Trump do, as President ?  China could cause considerable economic turmoil in this country. They are our largest creditor.  (Whose fault is that ?)   If they wanted payment for all we owe them, the U.S. economy could dip into a tremendous tailspin.  Of course, if we stop buying all of those trashy, cheap plastic items, who knows … the Chinese economy could head into a tailspin …. Or perhaps the Chinese economy already has …   Mr. Trump has indicated that he would start practicing with a teleprompter to “look more presidential.”  But can a leopard change its spots?

Or, of equal importance, can Hillary Clinton speak WITHOUT a teleprompter ?

As the old, country saying about teaching a pig to dance, goes:  “you can try, but you will not succeed and the only thing that happens is the pig gets mad.”   Is this what we want?  Will Mr. Trump commit our troops to fight in various regions of the world?   Will Hillary Clinton commit our troops to fight in various regions of the world, like Libya, for example ?

The American people want to defeat ISIS.  However, do the majority want to send our troops back into the Middle East?  This may well be the only way to defeat ISIS.  Surgical airstrikes will not be sufficient.

What about the question of raising the Minimum Wage.  Does the majority of the American people want the Minimum Wage raised ?  Doesn’t everyone want to work in a job for a livable wage?  Or will we have fewer jobs ?

What say you? 

Who will become president Trump or Hillary ?

The post Who Will Be President – Hillary? Trump? PRO’s and CON’s – Your Vote Matters! appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Civil Rights Attorney / Criminal Lawyer

We have all heard the phrase “Burden of Proof” when dealing with legal issues.  But what exactly is it?  The answer is … “it depends,” because it depends on the type of case.

Criminal Cases

In a Criminal case, because the Court is dealing with life and liberty, the standard of proof is the highest possible:  Criminal guilt must be proven “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.”  Proof “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” is proof of such a convincing character that a person would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of a person’s own affairs.  However, it does not mean an absolute certainty.  The standard that must be met by the prosecution’s evidence in a criminal prosecution is that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Civil Cases

A civil trial is judged by the lower standard of proof of “Preponderance of the Evidence”  What is this?  To put in bluntly, “Preponderance of the Evidence” means that the plaintiff in a typical case has proven their case by 50% plus a little.  That is sufficient to have a verdict returned for them.  The “little” may be conceptually seen as the “weight of a feather.”  Obtaining a verdict in a case varies on a great many factors:  the venue (where the case is being tried), the defendant (infamous or famous or just an ordinary person), the allegations in the case, the quality of the lawyers, the quality of the expert witnesses, and various other factors.  It is a rare case where a substantial civil or criminal case is tried without expert testimony.  In a personal injury case, experts on both sides of the case may include accident reconstruction experts (if there is a dispute as to how the accident occurred), biomechanical engineers (who will testify regarding the forces exerted on the plaintiff and the likelihood of injury), treating physicians, defense medical examiners, economists, life care planners and a host of others depending upon the case.

The same can hold true in criminal cases.  You may have competing toxicologists in a DUI (“Driving Under the Influence”) case who can testify as to the level of impairment of the defendant at the time of the offense.  You may have police experts testify regarding proper procedures; machine experts testify regarding the charting, recording and maintenance of machines used to obtain the blood alcohol level of the defendant.  In a wrongful shooting case, the list of experts can include Police Training Officers, technical experts and a host of others.  Not surprisingly, the cost of experts is not cheap.  Experts can charge many thousands of dollars for their testimony and they demand to be paid before they even come to Court.

Possession is Nine-Tenths of the Law

Illustrating the difference between the two systems of justice is a case that is currently pending. The plaintiff in a civil case (who was a defendant in a criminal case) signed a check with someone else’s name when they were not authorized to sign on the account. The defendant took the money. when this taking was discovered, the bank conducted an investigation and  refunded the money.  The defendant was charged criminally.  She escaped liability because a dispute arose as to whose money it was.  The criminal court found that the prosecution did not sustain its burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the money was taken/stolen by the defendant.  In a companion civil case arising out of the same facts, the plaintiff (who was the criminal defendant) may lose her civil case because of the lower standard of proof that she did not have consent or permission to take the money.  The eventual resolution of this matter may hinge upon the California Commercial Code.

Depending on what system a litigant finds themselves in, whether Civil or Criminal, a contrary result may arise out of the same set of facts.   Bear in mind the differing standards of proof between the two systems.  Is this fair?  Should we have the same Burden of Proof in both systems?  Should the “Burden of Proof” in one system be raised and the other system’s burden lowered?

What say you?

The post Burden of Proof: Civil vs. Criminal (Justice is Blind, but Not Cheap) appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

GUCCIFER

This morning, Wednesday, May 25, 2016, the Romanian hacker who claimed he easily breached Hillary Clinton’s personal email server has officially finalized a plea deal with the FBI and U.S. Attorney.

Marcel Lehel Lazar, the 44-year-old hacker also known as “Guccifer,” appeared in Federal Court in Virginia this morning, and changed his plea to “Guilty,” indicating that a deal providing for cooperation with the FBI and U.S. Attorney had been reached. It is now expected that Guccifer will testify against Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in the event that Secretary Clinton is indicted.

This morning, Guccifer plead “Guilty” to the charge of “compromising Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal’s AOL account,” which is one of the nine charges against him. Guccifer will now be able to testify that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal server put sensitive information outside secure government channels and made it accessible to foreign hackers.

Guccifer first gave indications he wanted to cooperate with the U.S. government in mid-April, during an interview with American cable media. Guccifer, in a subsequent discussion, said he was working on a plea deal – he then suspended media contact earlier this month.

On Monday, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, in the Eastern District of Virginia, confirmed that a “Change of Plea” Hearing was scheduled for Lazar (Guccifer) on Wednesday morning. In fact, the “Change of Plea” Hearing took place this morning, exactly as anticipated. Guccifer originally had pled “Not Guilty” to the nine-count indictment when he was extradited to the U.S.

Guccifer has now formally pled “GUILTY” to only some of the charges.

It has not been publicly confirmed that the deal reached has a provision for cooperating with federal authorities, and whether that has anything to do with the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s exclusive use of a private email server for government business while Secretary of State, but that seems to this Blogger to be a fait accompli.

“[Secretary Clinton’s] gross negligence allowed this material to get out to an adversary,” a knowledgeable source said. “Through her communications with Blumenthal, [Secretary Clinton] contributed exposure and risk.”

The post “GUCCIFER” Finalizes Plea Bargain With U.S. Attorney’s Office appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Will Bernie be Our Next President?

Now that Hillary, with hundreds of Super Delegates in tow, appears to be the prohibitive favorite to become the Democratic Presidential nominee, should Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders stay in the race?

There are at least two (2) reasons why a “yes” response is appropriate. First of all, the candidacy of Bernie Sanders has clearly provided the Democratic Party with the proverbial wake-up call that there is serious discontent in both the Democratic and Republican Parties, and Hillary has done nothing to quiet this discontent. This discontent centers on both the extremity of the Democratic Party Platform, and the (proverbial 800-pound gorilla) question of whether Hillary will be indicted for the E-mail scandal surrounding her use of a private Server in the basement of her New York residence, in order to handle confidential State Department business, as well as the (even larger gorilla) question of whether Hillary sold State Department favors to the highest foreign bidder, by way of quid pro quo speaking fees for Bill Clinton, and well-timed “charitable” donations to the Clinton Foundation? Bernie wants to position himself well, on both of these issues. Mrs. Sanders has even gone so far as to say that she and Bernie really wish that the FBI would hurry up and complete their investigation !

Bernie seems like a very nice man. However, prior to this election, he was almost a complete political unknown. The question arises: is the job of President to much for Bernie to handle? Granted, he is a Untied States Senator from Vermont, but is this enough to allow him to make the quantum leap to the Oval Office? He is a self-avowed “Democratic Socialist.” How will this play in the general election? Will large segments of the country go along with the polices of Democratic Socialism? If government gives to one group, they generally take something away from some other group, unless they simply “print” money. There are only so many ways to apportion the Government’s revenue “pie.” For the programs that Bernie wants, where will cuts in other programs come from? Will people want to raise taxes in order to supply funding for additional programs?

Similarly, the Social Security system has been “broke” for many years. The two (2) easiest ways to fix that system would be to (a) raise the retirement age to 70, and/or (b) increase taxes. But in the general election, such proposals could be tantamount to political suicide. Will the American people embrace these two fixes? In all likelihood, no. So, where will the cuts that Bernie wants to use for education come from? Education? Scientific research? The Military? Roads and infrastructure?

While we all want a future to believe in, greater clarity needs to be provided by all candidates. Hilary has her own trustworthiness issues. No one can deny that fact. Will the Obama Administration, including the Justice Department, the FBI, and the “powers that be” sweep this issue under the rug and let the election process run its course, or will they decide to indict Hillary Clinton and/or high-level members of Hillary’s staff? Is our Government intentionally dragging its feet, in order to avoid the potential indictment issue? Is this a case of “where there is smoke, there is fire”?

What say you?

The post Will Bernie be Our Next President? appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Transgender Rights: Does Government Need to be The Restroom Police?

Our society continues to evolve in ways that social conservatives and traditionalists in this country cannot or will not comprehend.

The most recent and glaring examples are the legal actions taken by the states of Mississippi and North Carolina, in effect mandating that transgender persons do not exist. Laws in these states mandate that a person must use a public bathroom solely based on the gender that is listed on their birth certificate. This completely disregards the medical and surgical advances that have been made.

Gender changes are in all likelihood not undertaken lightly. The person who wishes to undergo this type of change has undergone tremendous psychological angst, pressure and has been the subject of ridicule or perceived mis-identification for many years.

If science can alleviate this problem, why should a person continue to be discriminated against by government? How would the Mississippi and North Carolina laws be enforced? Would there be a “checker” at bathroom requiring a person to lift their clothes to expose their “private parts” prior to using a restroom? Who would pay for this “service”? How degrading would this be people?

Doesn’t government have better things to do with resources than engage in this type of conduct? If our society is to be all inclusive, then why are we enacting laws to exclude and discriminate against people? Transgender rights has now emerged as the leading edge of the civil rights movement.

Our concept of legal rights has evolved. Sexual harassment has gone from male to female to female to female to man to man. Why stop the recognition of transgender people because of the quirk of being born of the “wrong gender” for them? The Catholic church has not yet embraced the transgender community, apparently stemming from the Biblical concept of what it means to be a man or a woman. However, the Bible was written at a time when transgender surgery did not exist.

In San Francisco a Catholic High School is not going to terminate a transgender teacher on this ground. Teachers are a profession that teaches students.

The sexual orientation of a teacher is irrelevant. If they can teach, they should have a job.

All male teachers are not ostracized if one of their number acts inappropriately with students. The same applies with female teachers. All persons should be judged on what they do, individually, and not on what others, similarly situated do.

Health insurance carriers are now beginning to recognize that transgender surgical and psychological procedures should be covered under health insurance policies. Transgender people want to carry on with their lives as everyone else does, free of governmental or societal ridicule, scorn and discrimination. Shouldn’t we now just get past this and, as Rodney King said, “why can’t we all just get along?”

What say you?

The post Transgender Rights: Does Government Need to be The Restroom Police? appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted?

When asked about Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, most people would probably agree with Bernie Sanders, who responded to a Debate Moderator’s question by saying, to both Secretary Clinton and a national television audience, “I’m sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails!”  Secretary Clinton agreed, wholeheartedly.

But there is more to this question than “meets the eye.”  Most commentators have dismissed the chances of indictment as being far-fetched and politically-motivated.  However, it is worth noting that “reliable sources” have confirmed the following facts:

1.  FBI Investigation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has had approximately one hundred and fifty (150) FBI Agents and investigative personnel working on this case, for more than six months.  Recently, more FBI Agents were added to the case.  FBI Director James Comey has been meeting dailywith Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who heads the Justice Department, in order to discuss the progress being made in the investigation.

2. Investigation Grows Bigger and Deeper As Time Goes By.  The longer the FBI Investigation continues, the worse it looks for Secretary Clinton.  If the FBI were not finding any evidence of criminal acts, the Investigation would have already been closed.

3. Extradition of “Guccifer” from Romanian Prison. Recently, the infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer” was extradited to the United States from Romania, and is now in Federal Prison in Virginia. Guccifer is the hacking “moniker” of Marcel Lehel Lazar has been imprisoned in Romania for more than a year, and that would have seemed to be a “case closed,” since he has never been accused of being part of any conspiracy or organized group of hackers, government-sponsored or otherwise.  So why go through the trouble of extraditing this low-level, convicted hacker to the United States.  There are indications that he may have been extradited specifically for the purpose of testifying against Secretary Clinton.  When contacted by American journalists, Guccifer gave a jailhouse interview, saying, “for me, it was easy … easy for me, for everybody” to hack into Clinton’s server, located in the basement of her New York home.

4.  New Concerns About Role of CLINTON FOUNDATION.New allegations have surfaced that go beyond the propriety of having a home server in her basement, which was used for high-level government business.  There is some evidence that while Secretary Clinton was serving as Secretary of State, foreign governments, organizations and corporations made substantial cash contributions to the Clinton Foundation, while the Department of State was deciding on pending applications and initiatives.  If, for example, the money trail shows a pattern of timing of key events, such that money was donated to the Clinton Foundation, and then the State Department made a favorable decision, and then more money was donated to the Clinton Foundation, and if this same pattern occurs over and over again … well, that would be considered as circumstantial evidence that Secretary Clinton sold influence over State Department decisions, which would be a serious Federal crime.

5.  Also Concerns About Speaking Fees Paid to Bill Clinton. Similar concerns are being raised concerning the timing of substantial cash speaking fees paid to Former President Bill Clinton, and juxtaposed against key State Department decisions made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

6.  Many Assume President Obama Would Block An Indictment — But Maybe … NotSo Much.There is “no love lost” between President Obama and the Clinton’s, despite the President’s selection of Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State.  President Obama might be willing to allow the indictment to go forward, at which point Vice President Joe Biden and/or others might enter the Democratic Primary race.  It is still not too late, in the event of an indictment. There have been a number of quiet meetings between Vice President Joe Biden, not only with key fundraisers, “bundlers,” and union leaders, but also with Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who might consider joining Vice President Biden, and seeking the second spot on a “White Knight” ticket.

7.  But President Obama Has Been “Tilting” Toward Hillary Clinton As Opposed to Bernie Sanders. But it would notbe too far-fetched to view this as preparation for an indictment … political “cover” designed to ensure that no one blames President Obama in the event that Secretary Clinton is indicted.  Couldn’t you just hear President Obama’s prepared remarks? … I have the highest regard for Secretary Clinton, but unfortunately, grave matters and allegations have been presented to me by the FBI and Justice Department … it is with a heavy heart that I must announce … etc.

8.  But Then Why Wait — Wouldn’t President Obama Want His Justice Department To Move Forward Right Away … But Maybe … Not So Much.If Secretary Clinton were to be indicted right now, then Bernie Sanders would be essentially unopposed in the remaining State primaries, and he might actually reach the Democrats’ “magic number” of delegates by the time of the Philadelphia Democratic Convention.  Perhaps better to wait, until just prior to the Convention, when Sanders has been more or less “beaten” by Secretary Clinton.  Then if Secretary Clinton were to be indicted, Vice President Joe Biden, along with Elizabeth Warren, could ride into town, snatch the nomination away from Secretary Clinton, win the White House, and preserve notonly President Obama’s legacy of policies … but also ensure that President Obama, and not the Clinton’s (Bill and Hillary), would lead the Democratic Party for decades to come.

The post Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted? appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

‪#‎estateplan‬ ‪#‎estateplanningattorneys‬

With the recent death of the record artist Prince, it turns out that he did not have an estate plan. This was done when his estate was valued at over $250 million. In Prince’s case, many questions exist as to who gets the rights to his music. Millions are on the line in the form of royalties. Prince had no spouse or children. He has five half siblings and one sister. The primary beneficiaries of this failure to have a will be the State of Minnesota, the Federal government and (dare I say it) lawyers! There will be extensive litigation over this fortune. Whoever finally gets control of the estate, will pay hefty estate taxes. The taxes could have been minimized with planning. A trust or will could have been established which would have skipped generations and pay taxes far down the proverbial line. Why was this not done?

Many people refuse to deal with their own mortality. Even Abraham Lincoln died without a will. In California, you can make an estate plan all by yourself. A valid will can be done so long as it is entirely in your handwriting and is signed and dated by you. This is called a holographic will. What can you and I learn from this? The answer is simple: Make a Plan!

Wills can sort out many issues and give guidance. If you own a small business, who will take over if/when you die? If you have minor children (with or without special needs) who will care for them if you and your spouse die? You can have guardians for them established. A plan can keep our estate out of the court system. The American Bar Association estimates that $2 billion is spent in probate court. Of that total, nearly $1.5 billion is paid to lawyers.

Should you die without a will, the state where you die has a statutory plan to take care of your estate. This is called intestate succession. This may or may not mirror what you want. This may or may not have estate taxes paid the way you want. Guardians for minor children will be appointed if you do not have a plan in place for persons you want to assist your children. These people may or may not be the persons you want taking care of your children.

Ensure that questions are answered so that lawyers do not get involved in sorting out what you may or may not have wanted.  Ease any pain for those you leave behind. When you go, go on your terms, from the financial sense.  The two things that are inevitable are death and taxes. Make sure you can control the tax part of your life and what happens after you leave, minimize the cost of your leaving, MAKE A PLAN!!!!

Chances are you worked very hard to make money and acquire things during your lifetime. Make sure that these things do not needlessly go to those whom you did not want them to go to.

What say you?

Did you have anyone in your family who passed without leaving behind a will?

The post Why You Must Have an Estate Plan? Ask Prince appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

CMA, John Wayne & ADA Violations

The California Medical Association is seeking to join a lawsuit filed by the ACLU against a Catholic Hospital system over one of its facilities refusal on religious grounds to allow a doctor to perform a tubal ligation after a planned Cesarean section. The CMA claims it is illegal for Dignity Health hospital administration to intervene in the decision to tie a woman’s tubes after a C-section. The CMA feels that the doctor and the patient should make this decision, not hospital administrators. The CMA represents 41,000 doctors is asking a Northern California Court to issue an injunction barring the hospital from using religious directives to override the doctor patient relationship.  The doctors maintain that tying the tubes at the time of the c section is the ideal time for this procedure. In a battle of medicine versus religion, which takes precedent?

John Wayne, American Icon. Was he a racist? A proposal for a John Wayne Day was defeated largely because of his views on race. The view included the statement: “I believe in white supremacy until the blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I don’t believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people.”   He further believed that whites could encroach on American Indians land who said that they “were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves”. We all realize that manifest destiny foretold of the Indians being sacrificed as the US expanded. However, should these views be celebrated? Should he be given here increased worship? If so, why? If not, why not? Who determines if people have reached the proper level of responsibility? What if there was a disagreement over the level, who makes the final call? Do we want blacks segregated to govern their “own kind”? What if the word black is changed to Asian, Latino, or Jew? Does this matter? Should it matter? As the Duke himself said: courage is being scared to death, but saddlin’ up anyway”. Has our society evolved that we have the courage to saddle up and repudiate these types of views?

California is using a common sense approach to allow small business to remedy ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) violations within 120 days of notice, thus avoiding potential litigation for minor, technical violations. This would allow them to avoid predatory lawsuits by attorneys who seek damages for each violation. Many businesses do not have the resources to fight these suits and pay settlements in the thousands to avoid protracted litigation. Some businesses have closed rather than fight these battles. We need more businesses in California, not less.

What say you?

The post Potpurri: CMA, John Wayne & ADA Violations appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.

Why 3 Strikes are Almost Out & How Republicans React to the Internal Crunch?

The baseball season gives us the long held song line of three strikes and you’re out. With sentencing reforms in California, the number of three strike offenders has fallen to a 15 year low. Is this caused by a decrease in crime? The change in sentencing? Other factors?

The three strike prison population has dropped 23% from 2012. Even with the drop in prison population, overcrowding exists. The prison system was designed to house 85,000 inmates, yet even with the decrease in population, the number of prisoners is at 127,000. The people of the state of California have passed legislation that has reduced the numbers along with government agreement to lessen third strike offense to those that were non-violent and did not include drug crimes. A racial disparity exists among those who are sentenced for the three strike felonies. Blacks make up a disproportionate share of three strike offenders. This is hardly surprising. A further inquiry needs to be made regarding getting these offenders and potential offenders out of the system entirely. Should schools and churches play a more prominent role in the development of these people? Should education in minority schools be better? Would increased employment opportunities in these communities derail entry into the criminal justice system in the first instance?

The sudden alliance between Ted Cruz and John Kasich is a desperate attempt by the Republican establishment to forestall what many see as inevitable. The agreement between Cruz and Kasich is an attempt at stopping Trump from obtaining the nomination prior to the Republican convention. Having Trump get the nomination will destroy the Grand Old Party (GOP). The establishment of the party may or may not support Trump if he is the nominee. If not, Trump may just spend his own money and attempt to buy the general election. This would negate the Republican establishment and take his candidacy directly to the people. It is hoped that if this occurs, the people will strongly repudiate Trump and his policies.

The earlier rants by Trump need to be examined. If Mexico refuses to pay for the wall, will we go to war with Mexico, will we invade Mexico, will we re-negotiate with Mexico? If the various countries that we trade with refuse to renegotiate agreement to “let American win again”, are we not faced with the same questions? If China refuses to agree with Trump are we going to blockade China? Go to war with China? How do we resolve this dispute?

A Trump supporter suggested increased tariffs, would be the answer. Sounds good if you say it real fast. If we increased tariffs, don’t you think that the other country would do the same? Who would pay for this? You and me. What is being accomplished? Do we want inflation in this country to cover a 50% increase in prices for foreign goods? Most would say not. This is why the GOP must make a decision of monumental effect. If Trump gets the nomination, do they adhere to what their electorate wants, or do they look at the bigger picture and look beyond the convention and look to the election and beyond? What does this nomination process say about the GOP voter? Are Republican voters racists? Bigots? Crackpots?

What say you?  

The post Why 3 Strikes are Almost Out & How Republicans React to the Internal Crunch? appeared first on Lawyers In Los Angeles.