Sunday, March 28, 2010

Hello there! I'm alive!

I know it's been quite a while since I've written a post here on my blog. I'm not going to give excuses or anything like that. I'm just going to post today... Who knows about tomorrow or the day after.

I will be posting some travel stuff later.. That's for the next post. Plus, this summer I'll try to post some travel stuff too. I'll be driving my Mom and Stepdad to Branson, Missouri. We'll be taking some side trips on the way back there and on the way home, so there will be lots of photos to share.

So, here's my "rant" for today.. lol

How not to "win friends and influence people.
The thing that brought me to the blog today was a confrontation with a "new" poster on the InSessions message boards. Well, maybe "confrontation" isn't the best description of what happened. Here's the background: Back on March 10th an appeal was filed for the Phil Spector case. Phil is still sitting in prison, serving his sentence and hoping the appeal will set him "free".

So, on March 10th, a thread was opened on the InSessions message boards with a link to a pdf of the appeal document. The discussions began and the problems in the thread began early. A lawyer (allegedly) came in and began lecturing the rest of the folks in the thread. Another poster got banned, (a temporary ban, I believe.) and this "lawyer" started posting about how the message boards were (His posts are gone now as he managed to completely piss most everyone off and someone reported him to the moderators, which resulted in him being banned.) The thread has been limping along ever since then, with several attempts to discuss the appeal. A few folks have jumped on the appeal, declaring it to be a success and predicting it will be successful. Others, me included, are waiting for the State's response before jumping down off the fence. I kind of like to hear both sides of an "argument" before I decide which side I'm going to favor.

Anyway, yesterday a "new" poster appeared in the thread. He posted an "introduction" in his first post:
As a preamble, I'm not a lawyer yet but a 3rd year law student. I sit on the law review @ my school and concentrate on evidence. I was appointed to this position after receiving an A in evidence. I also intern under a judge in the commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Ok, I'm good with that. If what the guy says is true, I suppose he's got a right to brag a bit about his accomplishments. The part of his first post that got me is where he stated that the appeal has a "reasonably good chance of having the case remanded for a retrial". He then goes on to state that he fully agrees with the poster (the lawyer who liked to lecture folks) who had been banned a couple days before. Uhm. If this poster is so "new", how'd he manage to read the other guy's posts? They were all removed when he received his "permanent ban"! Ok, so maybe this "new" guy lurked for a few days before typing.... So I'll let that little thing "pass". Now, the part I had trouble with is that this "law student" is predicting the outcome of the appeal before the State even has a chance to file their response. So, I posted back:
This is probably going to come off as a rather snide answer to your post. But... Here goes.

Based on your experience and knowledge of law (Somewhere OTHER than in California.) the appeal will be successful, huh? Are you saying that you don't even need to see or read the state's reply in order to make a judgment like that? I'm sorry, but even I know that you need BOTH sides of an argument before making a decision. And an appeal is essentially an argument over how fair a trial was, right?

As I said in a previous post. We have the defense's filing with their "argument" and now we await the state's response. We have one hand clapping. And right now it's the defense clapping and whining because things didn't go the way they wanted during the trial. I'll wait until the state's response is filed.
Then, this "law student" comes back with a post that "lectures" me about how the Federal Rules of law apply and so on and so on... Hmm.. Sounded very much like that previous poster who got banned. It was kind of comical, but also pretty rude. A few other folks agreed that predicting a successful appeal was a bit premature and they also stated that they would be interested to read the State's response. This "law student" then jumped on one of the other posts and posted this:
You know what this post looks like? Some middle aged insecure man pissed off @ the world because all he could sum up with his brilliant life experience is that he is just a small fish in a big pond. Clearly you feel motivated to lash out verbally against anyone that has substantial education, is young and has either a) surpassed your mediocre life or b) will surpass your mediocre life.
If you read my first post, I directly introduced myself as a law student and NOT a lawyer to indicate that I lack 100% experience in the field. I then briefly explained some credentials so I would not have to cite or tediously prove every little piece of information I presented.
After that post I immediately received a reply from someone who indicated from the get go their response was snide. Why be snide? I introduced myself and who I was and then stated an opinion like everyone else. But for some reason the mere introduction of anyone who is actually educated and/or young resulted in hostile replies. Then this wash-up decides to post again acting like I was the one who was "snide"... or wait, "rude"... Ooooo.. you're pathetic..
Then I made a comment to someone who for no reason ridiculed something I merely mentioned as a credential. So what? I'm proud I nailed an A in that class. It was damn hard. But then again, you wouldn't know hard work or you would have pursued your interest of law instead of typing about it on a forum.
To answer another questions as to why I'm at this forum and not a "law student" forum is this - I "googled" (yes, another grasshopper term - threatening isn't it wash-ups?) the words "phil spector appeal discussion" and this site popped up. That's it. I enjoy music, especially from your era (one admirable quality from your era) and I enjoy law. Phil Spector is a natural interest. I especially enjoy the album he did with Leonard Cohen.
Excuse me, but I have a paper to continue.
Then about 20 minutes later the "law student" comes back with a reply to one of the other folks on the board with this as the opening line:
hopefully all the insecure wash-ups have resided to their life-long slumber and we can continue this PS appeal discussion. Thanks to some ppl for actually reading my 1st post and defending my reaction to a bunch of well-rounded & obvious life-experienced posters
So. All the folks who disagree with this know-it-all "law student" are now "insecure wash-ups" who are "pissed off at the world". Amazing, isn't it? And hilarious. I'm "pathetic" now because I called the guy "rude"! Ooo! (It sure didn't take the guy long to do his "paper". LOL)

I have to wonder how long this one will last on the message board. He seems pretty good at slinging insults, which doesn't usually go over very well with the moderators on InSessions. I'll sit back and wait for the State's response to the appeal, and then, perhaps, I'll get in the discussion on the merits of both documents.

Other Cases

The Casey Anthony case continues with much drama. Cindy and George "neglected" to pay their house payment for 9 or 10 months and the bank filed foreclosure papers on them. Cindy and George claim that they had no idea that the foreclosure was filed until a reporter asked them about it. Uhm.. Yeah, right. Not very likely. I supposed they had a lot of fun on the cruise and the shopping trips and the visits to tattoo parlors instead of paying all those pesky house payments.

News came out that George had an affair with a younger woman who could be a physical match to the description of "Zanny the nanny" that he and Cindy spouted off about from the get-go. From what's been reported, there are photos and text messages between George and the young woman that proves the affair.

Then we have reports of letters, lots of letters, between Casey and another inmate at the Orange County Jail. None of the letters have been released to the public yet, and the reports are that Casey doesn't actually admit to killing her daughter in them. It will be interesting to see the letters when they are released, if nothing else, just to get a glimpse into the mind of a mother who can kill her child and then lie to everyone around her about where that child is for 31 days.

And now we wait for the next piece of "drama" in the case. And with the Anthony circus, the drama is sure to happen.

The Sandra Cantu case was in the news yesterday as well. It was one year ago today when a happy, skipping Sandra Cantu was captured on surveillance video, just minutes before she disappeared from a Tracy, California mobile home park. What a sad anniversary. Melissa Huckaby remains in jail in connection with Sandra's rape and murder, but it still could be awhile before the case makes it to trial. There is still a gag order on the case, so very little information makes it into the news.

Drew Peterson is also still sitting in jail awaiting his trial for the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and who is also a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacey. Drew's lawyer, Joel Brodsky, is a busy guy apparently. He's hitting the news in the Chicago area with a case between a divorced couple where they are arguing about which religion their child should be exposed to. I feel sorry for the child.

I'm still watching a number of other cases, but nothing much has hit the media about them.. Yet.

I don't know if you can really call this "travel", but I went over to San Francisco last week with my trucker friend and his lovely fiance who was here from England for a visit. We had a lot of fun and we took lots of photos... I'll post one here and then later today, maybe I'll add some more to a new post.............. Enjoy the flowers! These beautiful flowers were in one of the many planters on Fisherman's Wharf.


shari said...

Hey anakerie, can i snag those tulips for my desktop??? We don't have them here in Florida and I do miss them. Hope you got my Twitter message about's a hold for 72 hours in Florida...maybe we will hear soon.

Anakerie said...

Hi Shari, you're welcome to use the tulips for your desktop.. :-) They were gorgeous over there on Fisherman's Wharf.. So many things were blooming all over the city, it was apparent that spring had sprung.. lol

Yep, I got your twitter msg about Riv.. I tweeted to her about that phishing link that keeps coming from her account. Hopefully when she gets out of the hospital she'll change her password and then delete all those tweets. Hope she can get the help she needs to deal with what she's fallen into.

katfish said...

Hello! I'm glad you are back. I'm always interested in what you have to say. ;)
I'm sure the state will have a very interesting reply to Phil Spector's Appellate Brief, it's not like they weren't expecting it.
I'm sure the Court of Appeal is also very interested in seeing the State's Response Brief as well as the Appellant's reply to the State's Response. Judge Fidler has had a very good record for cases decided in his court holding up. This will be a review of legal procedures to ensure PS got a fair trial.

I'm closely following Mark Jensen's appeal, in that case briefing is done, and the case is awaiting scheduling in the district. What I find most interesting is both sides cite the same case law to support their stance, so I guess the appellate judges can decide who interpreted the law correctly.

With age comes wisdom and patience. The law student poster (if true) needs to learn that throwing insults and calling names shows a lack of confidence in his own argument and dilutes his credibility.

ritanita said...

It's so good to see you back!

I've been crawling my way through the Spector brief between document dumps in the Casey Anthony case. It's quite a document!

I agree that it's hard to discuss an appeal when all the information isn't out there. Your young "law student" poster has a few things to learn about the law! He'll either shape up or they will ship him out of there.

I knew Mark Jensen's appeal was up, I just wasn't aware the docs were available.

Thanks for the great info!

katfish said...

Anakerie- I hope you don't mind if I post this here...don't mean to be OT.

Ritanita, I have the links to the Jensen documents here:

The original brief for the appeal wasn't published but the state's response addressed each point.
I haven't done a post on Jensen's reply to the state's response yet, but the case has been sent to the district to be assigned. Both parties have requested oral arguments.

Anakerie said...

Welcome Katfish and Ritanita.. It's nice to see the two of you here...

And Katfish, an appeal isn't OT at all, no matter who it's for. There is no one topic for this post, it was more or less a rant about know-it-all posters who lecture folks.. Ah.. Oh well. One by one, the old timers on IS are dropping out of that thread and the know-it-all's can argue among themselves. lol

donchais said...

Ahhh, Mark Jenson, lol!

And, I think many of us know who the insult throwing person really does get old!

Brother an sister in SF...thanks for the pics!

katfish said...

oh my donchais, would the letter G be one of this person's initial?

noromkcabmai said...

OK, yes, I see my recollection served me well, and you in fact contemporaneously documented your view here that until the AG weighed in those who were opining that the appeal had arguable merit were like "one hand clapping", and that the lawyer posting on In Session then (StephenG) "liked to lecture folks".

I don't know if the “law student” was really Harvard Law, but I was (and am) familiar enough with the tenor and tone of his post to opine that he probably was. (See, e.g.,'s just a livelier message board style than the oldsters at IS are used to.) But I do know that the law student was not the banned commenter--who was indeed a Californian attorney with three decades experience (because I know him and follow his blog).

It seems to me, having been reading In Sessions for three years, but only recently commenting there as noromkcabmai, that posters such as yourself at IS were less offended at being "lectured" than with the fact that there was a person that you (wrongly) perceived to be "pro-Spector" daring to speak his professional opinions no less--and "who does he think he is?"

In any event, there is no longer one hand clapping.

Oh, BTW, only the most academically superior law students from the most distinguished law schools wind up clerking for judges. Therefore, it is not the law student who needs to "learn a thing or to about the law"; he is in fact qualified to work at the most prestigious law firm or teach at the most exalted law school.

Anakerie said...

Ok, Mr. noromkcabmai,
I've published your rant. You've lectured me again. First on InSessions, then in the private messages on InSessions and now here on my own blog. Happy now?

You've accused me in other places of "hating" Phil Spector. You couldn't be more wrong. I'm not going to waste my time explaining why I don't "hate" Mr. Spector. I'll admit I don't care for the man, but that just puts him in a larger group of people that I don't care for because of their behaviors or attitudes towards other people. Hate takes energy. I'd rather use my energy for positive things.

To be honest, noromkcabmai, you're in that same group. And I'll be honest again, the name you choose to use online is one of the things that puts you in the disliked group. I don't like people who call other people "morons". (Even if they think they're so clever because they spelled it all out backwards.) I hope to hell I never need to call you or someone like you as an attorney to represent me in any kind of case.

With all that, I'll repeat what I've said before. Phil Spector is sitting exactly where he belongs. In a cell at Corcoran Prison or where ever else the CDC decides he needs to be.