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 Laughing in my shoes on 7/06/05

    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.