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


Hot Now...
• Attorney Chat Center
• Attorney Classifieds
• Attorney Chatboards
• Practice Areas
• Law Students
Most Popular
• Set Your Quick Links
• Chat Center
• All Chatboards
• Classified Ads

Re: Why Nancy Grace Should be Disbarred
Posted by No Name Necessary on 6/28/05

    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.