Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Religion > Calvary Chapel > Re: Back to the...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 19 of 19 Topic 2466 of 2526
Post > Topic >>

Re: Back to the Case of the Baby-Killin' Brudder-in-Law!

by Ken Smith <forget@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Apr 15, 2008 at 08:45 AM

Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:

> For those not familiar with the background, 

   Former American Airlines baggage-handler Cameron John Brown stands 
accused of murdering his illegitimate four-year-old daughter by throwing 
her off a Rancho Palos Verdes, CA cliff.  At last count, he has spent a 
tenth of his entire life -- roughly four-and-a-half years -- in jail, as 
he awaits a retrial on the charges in June.

   Tuzla Ted Kaldis, the brother-in-law of this certifiable low-life, 
has been whining uncontrollably about the alleged injustices of our mean 
old court system.  While freely acknowledging that, under our bad, bad, 
bad, bad, bad court system, a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich 
and a judge can do pretty much anything he wants, Tuzla Ted is having a 
temper tantrum over the fact that Los Angeles ADA Craig hum indicted 
*HIS* Cam Sandwich ... and Judge Mark Arnold did pretty much anything he 
wanted at the trial.

   The Camster has been in his cage for nearly two extra years after he 
lost his bid for acquittal (the jury hung 10-2 for second-degree murder, 
with the holdouts wanting manslaughter), because he didn't like the mean 
old judge (who was actually quite fair!), and didn't want to go back to 
his courtroom.  Consider the unspeakable crime that this mean old judge 
committed:

-------------------------------
During preparation for the first trial of Cam Brown, Mark Geragos made a 
motion which, if granted, would allow him to go to the Prosecutor's 
office to get exact copies of the files regarding Cameron Brown’s case. 
Prosecutor Craig Hum vehemently objected by stating that everything he 
had was in the files held by the Sheriff's Investigator Jeff Leslie. He 
objected to his files being reviewed because the defense could get the 
same thing from the Sheriff's Department. Judge Arnold sided with Hum 
and the defense motion was denied. This decision is inconceivable for 
the following reasons:

When any evidence favorable to the accused is suppressed, the 
defendant’s right to due process is violated. The right to due process 
ensures a defendant's right to legal fairness. This right is set forth 
in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of our Constitution, which 
prohibits government from taking a person's "life, liberty or property 
without due process of law." Our United States Courts have interpreted 
these Amendments as putting limitations on the ability of legislatures 
to pass laws which would unfairly infringe on a fundamental liberty.
-------------------------------

   As if that ridiculous motion would ever be granted in *any* court. 
While the defense has a right to disclosuere of all information, they 
can't rummage through the DA's copy of it on a fi****ng expedition in 
search of work product (so they can know how the prosecutor intends to 
prosecute the case).  Oh, the evil that judges do!

   Rather than petition for a change of venue due to adverse pre-trial 
publicity (which they would have gotten), Team Cam chose to let him rot 
in his cage for another two years, just waiting for the mean old judge's 
trial calendar to get booked up.  Rather than take their chances in the 
sticks of Fresno with a jury of Tednecks who would have hung Cam without 
a trial, they wanted the illiterate m***** of Lost Angeles to hear this 
case.  They wanted to go downtown.

   While Ted loathes liberal, cop-hating Democrats, they needed a 
liberal cop-hating Democrat to hear the case if the Camster had any slim 
hope of being acquitted.  However, in the ultimate of ironies, Ted got 
the only openly-gay Democratic judge in the entire Los Angeles' court 
system.  In a jurisdiction that couldn't convict O.J., Robert Blake, or 
even Phil Spector, and a bus-load of nuns is generally requirec to 
provide enough testimony to warrant conviction, it would seem as though 
Cam should have walked along time ago.  But they had to wait two years 
to draw the right judge, because (by the attorneys' own tacit admission, 
inferred from the tactics) Cam's case is so weak.

   Cam's case was so weak, even his investment-banker daddy wouldn't put 
up the money for his defense.  Dad knows a dud when he sees it.

   Think about it, kiddies: "Tuzla Ted" is whining because they locked 
up his precious Cam, despite the fact that he could have revoked his 
speedy trial waiver at any time.  They could have gotten through seven 
or eight trials by now, but the Camster obviously likes his cage.

   When you have Ted and Patty to go home to, Bubba starts looking 
better and better....
 




 19 Posts in Topic:
Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Theodore A. Kaldis&  2008-04-09 15:22:34 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"William R. Cousert&  2008-04-09 10:25:05 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Theodore A. Kaldis&  2008-04-09 20:24:59 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
Bill Crapkin <wcrapkin  2008-04-09 13:48:19 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Theodore A. Kaldis&  2008-04-09 21:00:39 
Re:Back to the case of the Baby-Killin' Brudder-in-Law
Ken Smith <forget@[EMA  2008-04-15 10:56:37 
Re: Back to the case of the Baby-Killin' Brudder-in-Law
Kent Wills <compuelf@[  2008-04-15 18:31:04 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Kent Wills" &l  2008-04-09 22:50:45 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
jl <jls1016@[EMAIL PRO  2008-04-09 11:58:25 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Theodore A. Kaldis&  2008-04-09 20:17:36 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Kent Wills" &l  2008-04-09 22:52:17 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
forevernitefan <fvrnit  2008-04-10 03:22:03 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Kent Wills" &l  2008-04-09 22:50:24 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
kensmithiscool <kensmi  2008-04-10 03:14:06 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
forevernitefan <fvrnit  2008-04-10 03:30:36 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Kent Wills" &l  2008-04-10 18:47:45 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
"Kent Wills" &l  2008-04-10 18:43:49 
Re: Ken Smith STILL AT IT, Sues 10th Circuit Court of Appeals!
Ken Smith <forget@[EMA  2008-04-15 08:03:29 
Re: Back to the Case of the Baby-Killin' Brudder-in-Law!
Ken Smith <forget@[EMA  2008-04-15 08:45:03 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan13V112 Fri Jul 25 6:55:01 CDT 2008.