Elections are getting close. The Review Journal released its endorsements.
District Court Endorsements
Family and Justice Court
District Court Endorsements
Family and Justice Court
What do you think of their selections? Do these candidates have your vote or did the RJ get it wrong?
UPDATED: Now with working links!
link fail.
ReplyDeleteNot too bad. It is curious how KK made such a bad impression they had to call her prissy and dumb. She's never come across like that before.
ReplyDeleteyou cut and pasted the RJ http without erasing the initial http in the blogspot prompt box.
ReplyDeletePress, dumb and lesbian.
ReplyDeleteMiley IS setting hearings for Motions filed now WON'T BE HEARD UNTIL JANUARY.
ReplyDeleteNotice how quiet the RJ was about releasing this list? I think they're trying to lay low until public memory of their Halverson endorsement fades.
ReplyDeleteSorry about the link issues. Was working from a different browser and wasn't paying attention to the fact that it didn't auto-highlight the http to remove it when it pasted. All better now.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what "good ideas" Ochoa has about "reforming" teenage prostitutes.
ReplyDeleteBernie Z is under 70yo and wears a bow tie, so no thanks.
Kephart has my vote.
I don't like S. Baucum. the work "cum" is in her name. That, and who the fuck cares if you're a pro tem in muni court? Next you'll be telling me she was class president in high school.
While the RJ's endorsements are meningless, the greater problem is that the entire field as a whole is pretty horrible. Nancy Allf???
ReplyDeleteHey, Allf is a real BK hottie!
ReplyDeleteWhile I have no idea if the RJ's endorsements are "meningless", they certainly aren't meaningless. One only has to look at the Halverson debacle to realize both the validity and the power of the RJ's endorsement. Most people don't really care about judicial elections, and can't be bothered to research them. We see this with the name recognition and the existence of "judicial dynasties". Most people read the RJ, shrug their shoulders and say good enough.
ReplyDeleteBernie Zadrowski would " vows to "revamp the whole system" that allows defendants who can clearly afford an attorney to receive legal aid at taxpayer expense."
ReplyDeleteThis has got to be the dumbest thing I read in a whole string of dumb statements in RJ. First, is Bernie talking about civil legal aid? Because I don't see what authority he'd have as a Justice Court judge to order private non-profit organizations not to represent people if he thought those people made too much money.
Giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming the RJ is confusing civil legal aid with people getting free public defenders, I still don't see what he thinks he's going to do. I don't know how the PD takes clients, but I'm assuming they do some kind of income screening. Does Bernie think he'll get some kind of authority from the bench to order the PD to revamp their criteria for accepting clients? Or is he going to just stop appointing PDs? Because there might be a teensy weensy constitutional problem with that. I hope to god that this was just a misundertanding by the mentally deficient chimps running the RJ editorial board, and that the original statement was actually something sensible.
Also doesn't Kephart have more than once ethics isssue? I thought that there were some other cases where there were issue with witholding exculpatory evidence?
Kephart misconduct: Valdez v. State, 196 P.3d 465 (2008) (improperly inflaming the jury, making prejudicial statements during jury selection, injection of personal opinion, making an inflammatory argument during closing argument); Honeycutt v. State,56 P.3d 362 (finding misconduct after Kephart choked a defendant); Randolph v. State, 36 P.3d 424, 430-31 (2001) (finding misconduct after Kephart mischaracterized reasonable doubt); Steese v. State, 114 Nev. 479, 960 P.2d 321 (1998) (noting numerous allegations of prosecutorial misconduct by Kephart but finding the defendant was not prejudiced); Murray v. State, 930 P.2d 121 (1997); (finding prosecutorial misconduct because Kephart commented on the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right to remain silent). These are only the published decisions - who knows what else is out there in the unpublished orders.
ReplyDeleteHe choked a defendant? No wonder the RJ loves him. It all makes sense now.
ReplyDelete(Love how 5:25 found all that in 20 minutes, while the RJ missed it entirely. Nice work, RJ, nice work. I have such confidence in your other endorsements now.)
RE: 2:04
ReplyDeleteYeah, I noticed that too. Why are my motions in front of Miley being set for hearing in January?
Can I file something to recuse Miley so I can get my motions heard some time this year.
Bill Kephart was also investigated and found guilty of sexual harassment in the DA's Office.
ReplyDeleteBernie Zadrowski would " vows to "revamp the whole system" that allows defendants who can clearly afford an attorney to receive legal aid at taxpayer expense."
ReplyDelete5:09, you're a serious dork. He's talking about CONTRACT counsel. These are the criminal cases the PD conflicts off. Often, these are hourly appointments to retards like Jonathan MacArthur at $100 per hour.
Bernie is a dick-tard, but I actually like this idea.
Perhaps if Allf's opponent would have shown up for the interview, it would have gone differently... One cannot make the RJ feel like they are not important.
ReplyDelete"In Department 31, Phil Dabney has been a part-time, short-trial judge in Justice Court for the past eight years."
ReplyDeleteSince when is there a short trial judge in justice court?
So who is the best "alternate"; "pro tem"; "hearing master" that we all wish would run or get elected (running this election or not)?
ReplyDeleteDidn't MEC just through a fundraiser for these civil prospects?
ReplyDelete2:04 and 5:31 - Miley is off for the rest of the year, might have something to do with it.
ReplyDelete7:38 PM - That bitch. I want my tax money back.
ReplyDeleteI hope WWL got permission to use the RJ link or Righthaven might come after you guys. Seriously.
ReplyDelete5:25=David Westbrook or someone who read his recent brief which essentially went b/c Bill Kephart was on the case the D is entitled to a new trial
ReplyDeleteYou have to vote for Kephart, unless you support replacing bail hearings with handshakes, dismissals and apologies.
ReplyDelete6:35
ReplyDeleteI did a short jury trial in front of Judge Lippis in Justice Court in 2004, so it's been there a while.
Bernie also seems to lack understanding regarding DUI check points....does he really think MADD and the Cops liked that one? He should read the Supreme Court's take on it before popping off about what he would do as a pretty meaningless JP. Sounds like he is pandering to the left on this one.....after his dismal showing in the primary I am guessing he is running a bit scared. It is not like the RJ called Conrad Hafen prissy or dumb. The endorcement of Bernie was pretty weak at best.
ReplyDelete@6:49 wrote "Sounds like he is pandering to the left on this one"
ReplyDeleteDo you mean the political left? If so you should get a clue. He's pandering to the libertarian assholes at the RJ who would rather there be no laws at all.
As a defense attorney, I have to support Bernie's idea to revamp the appointemnt of counsel - MANY people with plenty of $ are given taxpayer-paid attornies (PD or contract) when they could clearly afford to pay for their own. I have seen many a JP give a PD to someone on a DUI/drug/DV case when the person has a job and could hire an attorney. The constitution only mandates free counsel for the INDIGENT, and this is $ out of my pocket (fees) and out of yours (taxes).
ReplyDeleteToo bad Bernie looks like such a dork he won't win.
Now how about a post about the big scandel at the PD's office? I need some more details about what (who?) Stacy did....
WTF is the scandal at the PD's office?
ReplyDelete@8:01
ReplyDeleteHe gets them both in one swing. He has to grab any and all because he and his clown suit are in epic free fall. No reason to try and call names in every post, is there? HAve a discussion for Christ's sake...for once.
If Miley is going to take the rest of the year off, then we might as well have Bernie. At least he shows up for work.
ReplyDelete@9:07
ReplyDeleteWhat does Miley being gone have to do with Bernie? Your response implies Bernie's opponant would not show up......Hafen rarely misses work so on that count, they are a push.
@9:07 -- Huh? The rest of the year = end of December. Bernie would not even take the bench until January and that is after miley is back. What a stupid thing to say. Hope your legal reasoning is better than that cuz that some dumb shit.
ReplyDeleteWhat can you expect from the RJ? They endorsed Angle.
ReplyDelete@801
ReplyDeleteNot no laws at all, just get the socialist government the fuck out of our lives and wallets.
Signed
Libertarian Asshole
So who isn't running that we wish would run for any judge position, Family, JP or D.Ct.?
ReplyDeleteDear Libertarian Asshole,
ReplyDeleteHow do you feel about DUI checkpoints? Are they socialist?
lib·er·tar·i·an \ËŒli-bÉ™r-ˈter-Ä“-É™n\
ReplyDeletenoun
One who espouses hypocrisy and uses the moniker as a badge of honor by constantly referring to himself or herself as a "libertarian" knowing that the definition of such varies with the situation.
@959
ReplyDeletePersonally, I dont have a problem with DUI Checkpoints.
However, @801, indicated that the "Libertarian Assholes" at the RJ do and conclusively implied (oxymoron intended) that all folks at the RJ are LA's and that LA's in general disapprove of DUI Check points.
@801 was likely trying to take a dig at the RJ and LA's collectively, because he/she himself/herself is a socialist pig that LOVES to see the government spend our money, because we arent smart enough to do it ourselves.
As a Libertarian, I want small government, low taxes and the implementation of the US Constitution, as written and as intended by the Founders.
So, @1007, your defining Libertarians as all being hypocrites defies logic, you socialist peice of shit.
Signed,
Libertarian Asshole (proudly)
Miley taking off for the rest of the year... Maybe she is pushing the baby out?
ReplyDeletecomeon I want the PD scandal already! Stacy who? wtf happened?
ReplyDeleteOh and I completely agree with every comment regarding kephart being incompetent
and lastly to the defense attorney who is wants less people to get a PD, although I agree with you....I still think you're kind of biased. Less people being appointed PDs = more clients for you
Dear Libertarian Asshole:
ReplyDeleteYou state that "As a Libertarian, I want small government, low taxes and the implementation of the US Constitution, as written and as intended by the Founders."
Apparently then you want the Fugitive Slave provision in Art. IV Sec 2 to be upheld as well as counting slaves as 3/5th of a person.
Do you have some crystal ball that permits you to see into the mind of the Framers of the Constitution?
You can drop the term "Libertarian" and substitute the term "Ignorant" and simply sign off as "Ignorant Asshole".
As a PD, I would also like to know what the big scandal is because I haven't heard anything. Also, I agree that the system needs to be revamped for appointing us. All the defendants do is fill out a paper that says how much money they make and then the judge decides. There is no verification. You could be a millionaire and write that you make $7 an hour and get a PD. Maybe our case loads would be more manageable if there was some kind of verification in place.
ReplyDelete11:57, when you say "Less people being appointed PDs = more clients for you", DUH! I wrote that it was money out of my pocket! Do you think the grocery stores would want the government to set up "food banks" in their parking lots to give away the exact same food as sold in the stores? And give it away to anyone who just SAYS they want free food, with no attempt to verify if they are needy (as the PD commenter admits is done) even if they pull up in an Escalade and covered in gold chains (as happens in court)? Damn straight I am upset they are stealing my clients, and you should be upset they are using your tax dollars to do it.
ReplyDelete@1:38 - i already said I agreed with you....not soo much because of the tax dollars, but because i think it would help ease the PDs caseload.
ReplyDeleteNext question....who would verify the person's income and how?
I must say this -- I have ragged on the RJ in the past for a variety of things including being a shill for the right wing.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in looking at their endorsements, I have to give credit where credit is due. At least they actually MADE an endorsement. Take a look at the Sun's endorsements of these same candidates -- almost all of them are "We endorse John Smith and Bill Jones..." --BOTH candidates again and again!
Have some balls, Sun -- Take a damn stand and defend it! Geez!
Sometimes, I'm just ashamed of my lib brethren...
I...heard....BJ...inmate......CCSD
ReplyDelete3:11 PM: Uh, can you clarify? A male PD gave a femals client the chance to say thanks, or a female PD went above the call of duty to make a male client feel better, or a male PD degenerate defiled himself in a mighty gross way? Inquiring, intolerant minds wanna know.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that rumor for a second. If you have EVER been inside the jail or had a client in custody .... you know the smell! They presumably have little access to showers etc and there is no way an attorney is going to give someone that nasty a BJ. Let alone all the other reasons it's ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteIt happened a few years ago -- the same scenario -- between a female PD and a male incustody.
ReplyDeleteI remember when the black widow and the chick who killed binion were in custody, the black widow demanded reassignment because the chick was intimate with the stripper who killed all those kids on the highway returning from the valley of fire. So I guess stuff like that can happen.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, the scariest part about prison is not getting laid. You can't wake up with a boner, roll over, tap the wife on the shoulder and say "hey, baby, look who's coming to dinner!"
My understanding is that it happened recently, it was a female PD and a male inmate. There was a bj involved and cell phone pictures that were discovered. The ironic part is that the PD was part of the sex assault team and consequently, the inmate was/is being charged with some form of sex offenses...
ReplyDeleteI have to admit to being impressed with his powers of persuasion.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how these rumor get started but it's total bullshit. I don't know a single PD who has the hots for clients. Absurd and insulting.
ReplyDelete6:06 here. Not a rumor douche, I'd give a name but I'm not into outing people. If you work in the RJC, it's not too hard to figure it out... Lawyers have the biggest mouths.
ReplyDeleteOh, please. Insutling? Then get the woman of the PD's office to qhuit wearing hooker shoes and g-strings under lycra tight skirts....they wave their asses in the faces of the in custodies every day and this is insulting?
ReplyDeleteWilliam Kephart is a man of integrity. I know the opinion in Honeycutt vs. The State of Nevada found there wasn't any misconduct. Permission for the demonstration was granted by the Judge and the Defense!
ReplyDeleteA rapist is off the streets. That is what is important. I believe the victim in that case would find your accusation disgusting!
Defaming someone's charachter and hiding as annonymous is interesting. What does the author have to hide?
Seems to me his opponent can't explain how she is more qualified becuase she has the minimum of experience required for the position. The voters elected Elizabeth Halverson and she had the minimum of experience required and look where that got us.
William Kephart has served the community for over 20 years protecting us. His opponent defends people that harm children.
I was a victim of sexual abuse as a child and I SUPPORT William Kephart for his demonstrated commitment of protecting those that can't defend themselves.
We need more people like William Kephart and that is a fact!
Thank you,
Marc Newman
The day someone will not disclose their identity when making these accusations is when you can trust it isn't the candidates opponent!
ReplyDelete11 Judicial Candidates violated Judicial Cannons when their campaign manager had attendees come to a fundraiser and write checks to his business. He then doled out the money. How is that reported so the voters have full disclosure?
How can anyone trust someone as a Judge if they can't obey Campaign Laws? Each Candidate is given a book on the rules they need to abide by while running for office. To say they didn't know means they didn't read the manaual.
The sexual harrasment allegation agains William Kephart is a fabrication!
ReplyDeleteHow could William Kephart still have his job if that were true? And to say he was found guilty is slander and the author should be held libel.
Unfortunately, they couldn't disclose their identity so a libel suit can be filed against them.
Rbo Bare... you have got to be joking. He was a temp municipal judge, but did not live in Las Vegas while serving in the position contrary to the requirements of a Las Vegas Muni Judge. Guess the rules apply to everyone else but him. How does he take off time from the State Bar and then go back to work there once he is off the LV Muni bench? Bare----YUCK!!!
ReplyDeletealright "marc" just becausee you put your first name does not make you someone who's not anonymous. Please cite your name and bar number....so I can know exactly which jackass has highjacked this blog with empty analysis lacking of all substance.
ReplyDeleteKephart's opponent was both a PD and a DA....so yes she too "locked up bad people" and protected your children. Simple fact is, anyone who has read transcripts from Kephart HAS to admit the guy is an idiot. He lacks all knowledge of evidence and professional resposibility rules.
My guess = either 1) you're not an attorney just some lonely conservative law kid who wished someone liked them enough to molest them or 2) you're kephart
Actually, he did leave his first and last name...it is marc newman, but alas, the state bar of NV does not have a record for him so he is still anonymous.....
ReplyDeleteWow 3:48 ripping on a man who admitted that he was a victim of sexual abuse as child by stating that he wishes he was molested. I dont care who he supports for JP have some Fing decency.
ReplyDeleteSomeone is running strong for douche cane of the year.
Oh and if you think Kephart's idiot, you've never been in trial with him- the man is a damn good trial attorney- even with his overzealousness- jury's buy it. And yes I'm a defense attorney.
Oh and Kuzemka was a LAW CLERK with the DA Office, she was never a a deputy, so stop using that stupid line that she worked both sides.
ReplyDeleteyeah I'll admit that the molestation comment was a tad bit over the top, even for me. However, I still stand by what I said about kephart....
ReplyDeleteAs far as Kuzemka, she did more on both sides than kephart ever did. Lawclerk or not, she still had to have her brain fight for the other side....
so in closing, I was being a total douche with the molestation comment....but I still stand by the fuck kephart portion of my rant
anonymous Oct 15 10:07
ReplyDeleteYou owe that man an amends and not an appology for your vicous attack!
You support Kuzemka and it seems you also condone Pedophilia by remarks like that.
I will not vote for Kuzemka if that is the type of people supporting her.
@ 10:07, you're an idiot. If you base your support of a politician can be decided based solely on the comments of someone supporting a certain party, you lack all ability to reason. If everyone thought like you, we'd never have a president or any politician for that matter
ReplyDeleteand i'll admit that what I said was wrong....however, this is a legal gossip blog. get down from your high horse. why do I have a feeling that you are "marc newman"
facts are facts. Kephart is an overzealous prosecutor with little to no knowledge of the pr or evidence rules. I'm sorry, but i don't want that man ruling over my cases.
and for the record I don't "support" Kuzemka. I just don't like kephart. there's a reason he didn't get elected last time. maybe he should do more guest speaking on 97.5 about how he is a "fair and honest" man
@ 4:47
ReplyDeleteThat was my fiance that made the post you are referring to. She was livid when she read your other comment. I don't think she was on a "high horse" but rather hurt by what you had to say.
I could care less what you have to say about me. I made the mistake of leaving the house in a hurry and left this up on my computer screen.
I don't vote party lines. I do prefer candidates that are fiscally conservative and work to protect children and the elderly. I can't spend more than I bring in or I would be homeless. Government spending is out of control. Do I need to explain why protecting children is important to me as well?
You are entitled to your opinion about Bill Kephart. It is just an opinion.
5 years of experience doesn't equal 22 years, and it seems you can make more enemies in this town the longer you serve the public. More decisions and actions happen over 22 years than would 5.
I would ask you if Bill Kephart lost the race against Jessie Walsh or was that election paid for by 2 PI attorneys? One of which isn't allowed to practice anymore.
I think you would also see if you looked at the decisions that came out of Walsh's court in 2008, that they correspond with contributions she received. Can you say "Pay to Play" Judge?
Walsh may very well have violated Judicial Cannons since the attack ad Kuzemka has on TV right now sure does look like the same ad Walsh used 2 years ago. I didn't realize Judges were allowed to do anything but give a candidate $100. Is Jessie Walsh the worst Judge in the County for a reason or do the Attorneys have an agenda against her?
I have met both candidates and feel Kephart is a candidate of integrity. I haven't seen an overzealous side to him. If he is as overzealous as you claim, then good, my tax money is going to good use.
There are two types of men in this world. Fools that think they are wise men, and wise men that know they are fools. I know I am a fool. One that is committed to seeing quality in the people that serve the community I love and call home.
@ Marc (and his fiance if she chooses to "accidentally" read this)- this is a fool's argument. The simple fact is 1) your theory that he is protecting children and that since he has 22 years of experience excuses some of his faults and that ovrzealousness is a good thing is rather distrubing. Under that logic, you would vote for the dirtiest cop.
ReplyDelete2) Yes he "protects children" but he also helps lock up the innocent and step on people's constitutional rights. The most important role of a judge is not to protect children, that's why we have DAs and cops. The role of the judge is to make sure that the rules of ethics and evidence are followed and make sure that the defendant's constitutional rights are obeyed. Protecting children is a very serious role....but so is protecting the innocent from overzealous prosecutors.
Kephart is overzealous (and no that is not a good thing). He is not competent enough to run a courtroom. I also do not vote along party lines, however, I practice in criminal defense and I would vote for many DAs....just not kephart.
Have you ever seen him in the courtroom? have you ever reveiwed his transcripts? Have you ever questioned him on his knowledge of the law or courtroom rules?
I didn't think so.
oh and walsh is a horrible judge....but i still would vote for her again against kephart. lessor of two evils
ReplyDelete