Who is More Prestigious--Dellinger, Waxman, Clement or Katyal?
| Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Mentally impaired nudist business firm preventive strike | 02/21/12 | | dashing slimy nursing home ceo | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 04/04/12 | | Blathering range | 04/06/12 | | Blathering range | 05/03/12 | | Blathering range | 06/28/12 | | Blathering range | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 08/03/12 | | Blathering range | 08/03/12 | | buck-toothed double fault | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | buck-toothed double fault | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | buck-toothed double fault | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 02/21/12 | | Blathering range | 05/01/12 | | concupiscible stag film | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 03/22/12 | | concupiscible stag film | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 03/22/12 | | concupiscible stag film | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 03/22/12 | | concupiscible stag film | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 03/22/12 | | concupiscible stag film | 03/22/12 | | Blathering range | 10/01/15 | | irradiated transparent abode | 04/06/12 | | Blathering range | 08/03/12 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: February 21st, 2012 11:42 AM Author: Blathering range
Finally, the Circuit questioned the strength of the case against Lambert. See Lambert v. Beard, 633 F. 3d 126, 135–136 (CA3 2011). It pointed out that the case against Lambert was largely based on Jackson’s testimony, explaining that “without Jackson’s statements to the police,the Commonwealth could not have indicted Lambert on these charges.” Id., at 131. Yet Jackson had made “four prior inconsistent statements to the police about who didwhat and who said what on the night in question,” and hehad admitted that his goal in testifying was “to save himself from a death sentence.” Ibid. The Circuit could not “help but observe that the evidence is very strong thatReese, not Lambert, was the shooter, even assuming that Lambert (and not Jackson, as two of the barmaids testified) was in the Prince’s Lounge that night.” Id., at 135. The Circuit stated: “One wonders how the Commonwealth could have based this case of first-degree murder on a Bernard Jackson.”
These statements suggest that the Commonwealth’s case against Lambert was unusually weak. If the Commonwealth was wrong, aninnocent man has spent almost 30 years in prison undersentence of death for a crime he did not commit
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879680&forum_id=2#20016725) |
Date: March 22nd, 2012 11:59 AM Author: concupiscible stag film
Clement is obviously the most prestigious. He said fuck you to K&S and started his own shop that is owning shit right now.
As for best advocate (which is a different question altogether), I say Clement again. He goes up there commando and has a very natural flow to his arguments that the others don't really have.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879680&forum_id=2#20267367) |
|
Date: March 22nd, 2012 12:18 PM Author: concupiscible stag film
They probably paid him a boatload.
A lot of times it comes down to wanting to be the top dog right away. He can be the immediate star of the appellate group there, that would not have been the case at several other top appellate shops in town.
Where else would you think he would go?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1879680&forum_id=2#20267491) |
|
|