Click here
ATTORNEYS LAW STUDENTS PUBLIC
TOP POSTS ALL POSTS SUBMIT POST
Share | Print | Report Post Attorney Chatboard
Click here


Re: Why Nancy Grace Should be Disbarred
Posted by Godkin on 1/21/06

    " Jews have all the money and that is because of greed, not work
    ethic. So deal." Absolutly wrong !

    Jews have all the money because ...:

    We have been blessed by The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob !

    ..and because we are in the Hollywood industry or in high places in Goverment or most
    successful Lawyers !

    It is a fact!


    God: 'I will bless those that bless you and curse those that curse you'

    I just love Jews !

    Godkin

    On 8/13/05, Legal Beagle wrote:
    > Stan: well, you pitch a valiant effort for "christians" considering your name sound s
    > little Hebrew-ish...no? Jews have all the money and that is because of greed, not work
    > ethic. So deal.
    >
    > On 7/06/05, Laughing in my shoes wrote:
    >> You make me laughm, Stan! Keep up the good work! Yes, Democrats are un-Christian,
    >> most of them.
    >>
    >> Republican in Nacogdoches
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> On 7/06/05, Stanford J. Schwarzenberg wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Frankly, I like Nanch Grace. I like Dr. Kennedy from Forida, the Presbyterial
    >>> preacher who is always preaching about how the U.S. is going to the dogs. I also
    >>> like Rev. John Hagee (the guy from San Antonio), who has the show on T.V. He is a
    >>> good Republican and preaches a good Republican message. Frankly, Republicans are
    >>> the better Christians. Also, I like Dr. James Dobson and Rev. Pat Robertson. They
    >>> are all Republicans, and, as I say, Republicans make better Christians. They don't
    >>> waste their time worrying over the poor. The poor are poor for a reason: they're
    >>> lazy and won't work. Christians work, so Christians have money.
    >>>
    >>> Stan Schwarzenberg - Mobile
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> On 6/28/05, No Name Necessary wrote:
    >>>> Yes, I can understand this. Nancy Grace isn't a religious leader and does not
    >>>> confess to be one. Her show isn't a religious show. She's a former prosecutor.
    >>>> Again, her show isn't about the bible's view point on the issue, but the legality
    >>>> of the issue. So,if she has a guest on her show who is going to give a religious
    >>>> view point from the bible - she should be able to control by restricting the bible
    >>>> view point. Nancy Grace knows her viewers watch her show not for spiritual
    >>>> enlightment, but what the legal experts will say about the legal issues of the
    >>>> case. Their legal opinion.
    >>>>
    >>>> The Freedom of Speech. For the person who wants to preach about the bible on TV
    >>>> has the right to have their on TV show, as long as their in compliance with the
    >>> law.
    >>>>
    >>>> It's just that simple!
    >>>>
    >>>> On 6/25/05, Lanz wrote:
    >>>>> To: No Name Necessary,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Exactly !!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Those that want to hear what the Lord is saying will hear and those that don't
    >>>>> want to hear can cover their ears, but Nancy stop someone from excercising their
    >>>>> right to Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion, can you understand this?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Free Country
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Freedom of Speech
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Freedom of Religion
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Freedom of Press ...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ... all these are some of the freedoms we have in America
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thank God for America, we have the FREEDOM to hear or not and to make our own
    >>>> choices
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Lanz
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On 6/25/05, No Name Necessary wrote:
    >>>>>> Dear Bible Cry Baby:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Grow up! Nancy Grace has the right to tell someone to SHUT UP if she doesn't
    >>>>>> want to hear a bible verse. She knows her "viewers and other guests" are
    >>>>>> watching her show - for the legality of the issues and not for religious
    >>>>>> discipline from the bible on the issues.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You sound like a "young lawyer" who needs to understand that - not everyone
    >>>>>> believes in an ALMIGHT GOD and YOU need to LEARN TO RESPECT - others
    >>>>>> beliefs and rights. I'm NOT saying believe the way they do, but RESPECT, and as
    >>>>>> a lawyer YOU know under the United States Constitution - people have the right
    >>>>>> to believe in God/Religion or NOT.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On 6/24/05, Lanz wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I used to like her knowledge and wisdom about the Law in general, but after
    >>>>>>> watching her show tonight where she denied a guess to quote a scripture from
    >>>>>>> the bible, as if she felt threatened by God, I can't do without her truly
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Without God we are nothing!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Because the secret of my success as a Lawyer is my trust in HIM
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Lanz
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On 6/24/05, Hardy Parkerosn, Atty. wrote:
    >>>>>>>> I am no fan of Nancy Grace's, but I wonder why it took the 11th Circuit
    >>>>>>>> fifteen years to get around ruling on the case she was reprimanded in.
    >>>>>>>> According to the post I am responding to, the "unethical" act or acts took
    >>>>>>>> place in 1990, but the 11th Circuit did not issue its ruling until 1995.
    >>>>>>>> That's incredible to make such a judgment fifteen years after the fact.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> HMP
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> On 6/24/05, DC Attorney wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Let me guess - you got those stats from Nancy's own website?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Well, I am an attorney, licensed in three states, including GA, and
    >>>>>>>> Nancy
    >>>>>>>>> has one claim to fame that I do not share. She has been reprimanded by
    >>>>>>>>> the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for unethical behavior as an attorney
    >>>>>>>> by
    >>>>>>>>> 1) "failing to disclose exculpatory evidence to a criminal defendant";
    >>>>>>>>> and 2) "playing fast and loose with her ethical duties as a prosecutor";
    >>>>>>>>> and
    >>>>>>>>> 3) "failed to fulfill her ethical duties as a prosecutor."
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> She has also been reprimanded by the Supreme Court of Georgia for
    >>>>>>>> similar
    >>>>>>>>> antics during two other cases, one of which was reversed.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Maybe I will print copies of the opinions and forward them to the State
    >>>>>>>>> Bar of Georgia for disbarment proceedings.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Fancy Nancy should learn that nobody - not even her Peroxidness is above
    >>>>>>>>> the law. As this opinion shows, there is a big difference between being
    >>>>>>>> a
    >>>>>>>>> real attorney and prosecuting someone for a traffic ticket.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Anyone who is a booster of Nancy's obviously is not an attorney and is
    >>>>>>>>> deluded by her self-serving and highly inaccurate press. Real attorneys
    >>>>>>>>> behave ethically and honestly, not like FancyNancy.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> DC Attorney
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2005/05/laura_i_applema.html
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I’ve been following the Nancy Grace case with much distress. For those
    >>>>>>>>> who haven’t been following the incident, Nancy Grace, the host of a
    >>>>>>>>> epononymously-titled legal show on CNN and CourtTV, was recently
    >>>>>>>>> chastised by the 11th Circuit as having "played fast and loose" with her
    >>>>>>>>> ethical duties as a Fulton County, Georgia prosecutor in 1990. See
    >>>>>>>>> Stephens v. Hall, No. 03-15251 (11th Cir., May 2, 2005).
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> On her Court TV biography page, Grace lists her perfect record of nearly
    >>>>>>>>> 100 felony convictions at trial and no losses. This record is slightly
    >>>>>>>>> less impressive, however, when you review the 11th Circuit’s decision,
    >>>>>>>>> which, while upholding the conviction, criticizes Grace for failing to
    >>>>>>>>> follow her obligation to disclose information about other potential
    >>>>>>>>> suspects to defense counsel, as well as knowingly using a detective’s
    >>>>>>>>> false testimony that there were no other suspects. And this wasn’t the
    >>>>>>>>> first time Grace was criticized for her unethical behavior as a
    >>>>>>>>> prosecutor. In 1997, the Georgia Supreme Court called her improper
    >>>>>>>>> summations and her withholding evidence from the defense "inexcusable."
    >>>>>>>>> Carr v. State, 267 Ga. 701 (1997). And in 1995, the same court reversed
    >>>>>>>>> one of Grace’s convictions because she "exceeded the wide latitude of
    >>>>>>>>> closing argument" by referring to the defendant’s prior convictions,
    >>>>>>>>> which were not relevant to the case. Bell v. State, 263 Ga. 776 (1994).
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I don’t think it’s going out on a limb to say that achieving victory for
    >>>>>>>>> your client, whether complainant or defendant, must be done ethically.
    >>>>>>>> In
    >>>>>>>>> Stephens, Grace failed to follow her basic ethical obligations to
    >>>>>>>>> disclose relevant information to the defense. This was not just a
    >>>>>>>> mistake
    >>>>>>>>> on Grace’s part, but a purposeful and egregious tactic done to ensure a
    >>>>>>>>> conviction.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Grace is completely unapologetic about her actions, saying only that the
    >>>>>>>>> case was one of 100 that she successfully prosecuted. This attitude is
    >>>>>>>>> completely unacceptable, however. The defendant in this case was denied
    >>>>>>>> a
    >>>>>>>>> fair trial due to the trickery and deceit of a state actor, which is bad
    >>>>>>>>> enough. But to have that state actor now star on her own legal talk show
    >>>>>>>>> and suffer no consequences? I am hardly the first to suggest this, but
    >>>>>>>>> let me add my name to those calling for Grace’s resignation from CNN.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Any lawyer can make mistakes or ethical violations in the heat of trial,
    >>>>>>>>> but Grace’s systemic abuse of her power as a prosecutor brings shame on
    >>>>>>>>> the profession. That we are currently rewarding her with national
    >>>>>>>>> television exposure is distasteful. If she does not resign on her own
    >>>>>>>>> accord, then CNN should take action and remove her itself.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Laura I Appleman
    >>>>>>>>>

     
     

 
Google
 
Web Counsel.Net
  Site Map: Home Search Legal Jobs Classifieds Law Students Contacts Practice Areas Advertise
  © 1996 - 2008. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.