Comments on: Ignorance is Strength http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/01/ignorance-is-strength.html the art and science of criminal defense trial lawyering Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:08:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Greybear http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/01/ignorance-is-strength.html/comment-page-1#comment-915 Greybear Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:48:00 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/?p=474#comment-915 The promises of safety in exchange for liberty are always premised on the (unspoken) condition that only the rights of THOSE PEOPLE will be violated. You know, THEM. Not US, of course not US, just THEM. I am always amazed at how indignant those who made that Faustian bargain are when they discovered that they aren't really US after all. The promises of safety in exchange for liberty are always premised on the (unspoken) condition that only the rights of THOSE PEOPLE will be violated. You know, THEM. Not US, of course not US, just THEM. I am always amazed at how indignant those who made that Faustian bargain are when they discovered that they aren’t really US after all.

]]> By: Mark Bennett http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/01/ignorance-is-strength.html/comment-page-1#comment-914 Mark Bennett Thu, 24 Jan 2008 04:26:00 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/?p=474#comment-914 Clearly, this is personal and political for Lloyd Kelley. Politics suck. Like you, I'll never run for public office.<br/><br/>I thought publishing Scott's email sucked. I felt dirty reading it (and not in a good way). But Scott responds to PIA requests, and he knows how private emails on HCDA computers are. Besides, it was Chuck's lawyers who put it into the record. (Oopsie!)<br/><br/>How would Kelley prove that Chuck was in contempt without presenting evidence? Of course he presents evidence. So he gets to subpoena people to the hearing. And he gets to ask them questions. And if the questions seek information irrelevant to the issue of contempt, Judge Hoyt will sustain objections.<br/><br/>It seems to me that subpoenas for Chuck's email correspondents' personal email accounts would be a pretty good way to find some of the emails that Chuck deleted. Clearly, this is personal and political for Lloyd Kelley. Politics suck. Like you, I’ll never run for public office.

I thought publishing Scott’s email sucked. I felt dirty reading it (and not in a good way). But Scott responds to PIA requests, and he knows how private emails on HCDA computers are. Besides, it was Chuck’s lawyers who put it into the record. (Oopsie!)

How would Kelley prove that Chuck was in contempt without presenting evidence? Of course he presents evidence. So he gets to subpoena people to the hearing. And he gets to ask them questions. And if the questions seek information irrelevant to the issue of contempt, Judge Hoyt will sustain objections.

It seems to me that subpoenas for Chuck’s email correspondents’ personal email accounts would be a pretty good way to find some of the emails that Chuck deleted.

]]> By: A Harris County Lawyer http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/01/ignorance-is-strength.html/comment-page-1#comment-912 A Harris County Lawyer Thu, 24 Jan 2008 04:05:00 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/?p=474#comment-912 Mark Dearest,<br/>Seriously, I adore you to death, sweetie, but are we a bit hostile today? Now, I myself have never utilized the Patriot Act, but are YOU really naive enough to believe that subpoenaing Sam Siegler has got anything to do with the initial lawsuit against HCSO? Lloyd Kelley is clearly trying to help his friend, Clarence Bradford win the D.A.'s Office. Clearly this is personal for him.<br/>And you left out the part that I mentioned about what happened to Mr. Durfee. Doens't that tug even a little bit at your heart? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!<br/>And I'm asking this question legitimately, because I know nothing of Federal or Civil Law. But in a Federal contempt hearing, does Lloyd Kelley present evidence? If so, that would at least get a little closer to understanding the mass subpoenas.<br/>And my understanding is that a subpoena duces tecum was dropped on Dr. Siegler's personal e-mail account. Call me crazy, but that seems like over-reaching to me. Mark Dearest,
Seriously, I adore you to death, sweetie, but are we a bit hostile today? Now, I myself have never utilized the Patriot Act, but are YOU really naive enough to believe that subpoenaing Sam Siegler has got anything to do with the initial lawsuit against HCSO? Lloyd Kelley is clearly trying to help his friend, Clarence Bradford win the D.A.’s Office. Clearly this is personal for him.
And you left out the part that I mentioned about what happened to Mr. Durfee. Doens’t that tug even a little bit at your heart? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
And I’m asking this question legitimately, because I know nothing of Federal or Civil Law. But in a Federal contempt hearing, does Lloyd Kelley present evidence? If so, that would at least get a little closer to understanding the mass subpoenas.
And my understanding is that a subpoena duces tecum was dropped on Dr. Siegler’s personal e-mail account. Call me crazy, but that seems like over-reaching to me.

]]> By: Leviathan http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2008/01/ignorance-is-strength.html/comment-page-1#comment-909 Leviathan Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:42:00 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/?p=474#comment-909 Well put. Well put.

]]>