One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
during the trial.

Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.

I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
the courts and outside of the view of the media.

I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
lines.

--
Rhino

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>during the trial.

>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.

If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
advantage. That's what the judge is for.

The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
defense the best copy of one of the videos.

I don't think it hurt the defense's case at all and I don't think it
would have been a mistrial.

>I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
>under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
>controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
>the courts and outside of the view of the media.

The state bar association would deal with extreme ethical violations.
It's typically a lawyer holding on to monies in escrow then failing to
release them, or taking a large retaining then failing to represent the
client.

A judge has the power to handle matters during the trial. If he wants to
make a point, he fines the attorney. There no appeal.

I don't know too much about this. Television tends to get most things
wrong about legal practice. When they address it in script, it's
probably handled worse than other aspects of law.

>I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
>opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
>there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
>lines.

On Saturday, 20 November 2021 at 21:46:40 UTC-5, Rhino wrote:
> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
> during the trial.

Lib moron prosecutors missed something very important; this was Wisconsin, not New York, L.A. or Portland. You can't railroad
white people as easily. They "made mistakes" and paid the price.

On 11/20/2021 11:50 PM, RichA wrote:
> On Saturday, 20 November 2021 at 21:46:40 UTC-5, Rhino wrote:
>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>> during the trial.
>
> Lib moron prosecutors missed something very important; this was Wisconsin, not New York, L.A. or Portland. You can't railroad
> white people as easily. They "made mistakes" and paid the price.

Holy fuck, I live five miles from the Wisconsin border and you seem to
know more about Wisconsin than I do! How the fuck is that?

> RichA
> > Rhino
> >
> > One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
> > Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
> > prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
> > during the trial.
>
> Lib moron prosecutors missed something very important; this was
> Wisconsin, not New York, L.A. or Portland. You can't railroad white
> people as easily. They "made mistakes" and paid the price.

I suspect the prosecutor knew from the start that he had no case but
was pressured from above (probably even from the White House) to do
everything possible to convict Kyle “The Kenosha Kid” Rittenhouse, as
this was clearly and beyond a doubt a justified self-defense shooting
and that simply doesn’t fit the Narrative.

On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>> during the trial.
>
>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>
> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>
> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>
I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
of the other objections.

> I don't think it hurt the defense's case at all and I don't think it
> would have been a mistrial.
>
>> I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
>> under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
>> controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
>> the courts and outside of the view of the media.
>
> The state bar association would deal with extreme ethical violations.
> It's typically a lawyer holding on to monies in escrow then failing to
> release them, or taking a large retaining then failing to represent the
> client.
>
> A judge has the power to handle matters during the trial. If he wants to
> make a point, he fines the attorney. There no appeal.
>
> I don't know too much about this. Television tends to get most things
> wrong about legal practice. When they address it in script, it's
> probably handled worse than other aspects of law.
>
That's why I'm asking you and BTR (and anyone else who knows) since you
seem to have knowledge of how things work in the real world, not just
the worlds portrayed, usually inaccurately, on TV ;-)

>> I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
>> opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
>> there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
>> lines.

--
Rhino

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>>>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>during the trial.

>>>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.

>>If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>advantage. That's what the judge is for.

>>The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>defense the best copy of one of the videos.

>I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>of the other objections.

The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
what happened.

>>I don't think it hurt the defense's case at all and I don't think it
>>would have been a mistrial.

>>>I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
>>>under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
>>>controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
>>>the courts and outside of the view of the media.

>>The state bar association would deal with extreme ethical violations.
>>It's typically a lawyer holding on to monies in escrow then failing to
>>release them, or taking a large retaining then failing to represent the
>>client.

>>A judge has the power to handle matters during the trial. If he wants to
>>make a point, he fines the attorney. There no appeal.

>>I don't know too much about this. Television tends to get most things
>>wrong about legal practice. When they address it in script, it's
>>probably handled worse than other aspects of law.

>That's why I'm asking you and BTR (and anyone else who knows) since you
>seem to have knowledge of how things work in the real world, not just
>the worlds portrayed, usually inaccurately, on TV ;-)

My legal experience is entirely due to tv.

>>>I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
>>>opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
>>>there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
>>>lines.

In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> >>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
> >>>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
> >>>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
> >>>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
> >>>during the trial.
>
> >>>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
> >>>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
> >>>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
> >>>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
> >>>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>
> >>If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
> >>advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>
> >>The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
> >>defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>
> >I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
> >of the other objections.
>
> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
> what happened.

When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>>>>>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>during the trial.

>>>>>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>>>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>>>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.

>>>>If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>advantage. That's what the judge is for.

>>>>The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>defense the best copy of one of the videos.

>>>I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>of the other objections.

>>The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>what happened.

>When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.

Thanks. I didn't know that.

On 2021-11-21 1:52 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>> during the trial.
>
>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>
>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>
>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>
>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>> of the other objections.
>
> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
> what happened.
>
>>> I don't think it hurt the defense's case at all and I don't think it
>>> would have been a mistrial.
>
>>>> I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
>>>> under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
>>>> controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
>>>> the courts and outside of the view of the media.
>
>>> The state bar association would deal with extreme ethical violations.
>>> It's typically a lawyer holding on to monies in escrow then failing to
>>> release them, or taking a large retaining then failing to represent the
>>> client.
>
>>> A judge has the power to handle matters during the trial. If he wants to
>>> make a point, he fines the attorney. There no appeal.
>
>>> I don't know too much about this. Television tends to get most things
>>> wrong about legal practice. When they address it in script, it's
>>> probably handled worse than other aspects of law.
>
>> That's why I'm asking you and BTR (and anyone else who knows) since you
>> seem to have knowledge of how things work in the real world, not just
>> the worlds portrayed, usually inaccurately, on TV ;-)
>
> My legal experience is entirely due to tv.
>
Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
laws, rulings, etc.

>>>> I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
>>>> opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
>>>> there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
>>>> lines.

--
Rhino

On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>> during the trial.
>>
>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>
>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>
>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>
>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>> of the other objections.
>>
>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>> what happened.
>
> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
>
So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
if it thinks the offense egregious enough?

--
Rhino

In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
> > "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> >>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
> >>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
> >>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
> >>>>> during the trial.
> >>
> >>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
> >>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
> >>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
> >>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
> >>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
> >>
> >>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
> >>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
> >>
> >>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
> >>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
> >>
> >>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
> >>> of the other objections.
> >>
> >> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
> >> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
> >> what happened.
> >
> > When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
> > limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
> > only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
> > standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
> >
> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?

The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
disbar him. Or any combination of the two.

On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:46:55 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
>whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
>laws, rulings, etc.

Marbury isn't exactly an obscure US legal decision...

On 2021-11-21 2:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>>> during the trial.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>>>
>>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>>>
>>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>>>
>>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>>> of the other objections.
>>>>
>>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>>> what happened.
>>>
>>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
>>>
>> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
>> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
>> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
>
> The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
> disbar him. Or any combination of the two.
>
Would any punishment he gets from a judge or bar in one state preclude
him simply pulling up stakes and practicing law in another state?

The reason I ask is that I remember several cases where a doctor lost
his license in one province, typically due to sexual impropriety with
patients, and simply moves to another province to be a doctor there with
no apparent obstacles to that put in his way. Of course these cases were
mostly decades ago; it may be harder to move a practice to another
province now. Or not.

--
Rhino

On 2021-11-21 3:13 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:46:55 -0500, Rhino
> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
>> whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
>> laws, rulings, etc.
>
> Marbury isn't exactly an obscure US legal decision...
>
It's the first one that came to mind. Adam has cited many more from
various eras in American jurisprudence.

--
Rhino

In article <snebu2$mlv$1@dont-email.me>,
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

> On 2021-11-21 2:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
> > Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
> >>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> >>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
> >>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
> >>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
> >>>>>>> during the trial.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best
> >>>>>>> guess
> >>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
> >>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
> >>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
> >>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
> >>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
> >>>>
> >>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
> >>>>> of the other objections.
> >>>>
> >>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
> >>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
> >>>> what happened.
> >>>
> >>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
> >>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
> >>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
> >>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
> >>>
> >> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
> >> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
> >> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
> >
> > The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
> > disbar him. Or any combination of the two.
> >
> Would any punishment he gets from a judge or bar in one state preclude
> him simply pulling up stakes and practicing law in another state?

He'd have to take the bar exam again to be licensed, which is no small
thing. And every state bar has a fitness to practice standard which
reviews a candidate's personal history to determine if they're ethically
qualified.

On 11/21/2021 4:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <snebu2$mlv$1@dont-email.me>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-11-21 2:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>>>>> during the trial.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best
>>>>>>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>>>>> of the other objections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>>>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>>>>> what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>>>>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>>>>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>>>>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
>>>>>
>>>> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
>>>> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
>>>> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
>>>
>>> The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
>>> disbar him. Or any combination of the two.
>>>
>> Would any punishment he gets from a judge or bar in one state preclude
>> him simply pulling up stakes and practicing law in another state?
>
> He'd have to take the bar exam again to be licensed, which is no small
> thing. And every state bar has a fitness to practice standard which
> reviews a candidate's personal history to determine if they're ethically
> qualified.

....or at least smart enough to evade McGruff the Ethics Reviewer.

On 11/21/2021 12:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>

>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>> what happened.
>
> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.

From what I'm reading, a motion in limine has to be granted by the
judge, so you're either lying or you don't know what you're talking
about. The judge excluded evidence, which is a different situation. Do
you EVER tell the truth?

On 11/21/2021 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>>> during the trial.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>>>
>>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>>>
>>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>>>
>>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>>> of the other objections.
>>>>
>>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>>> what happened.
>>>
>>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
>>>
>> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
>> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
>> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
>
> The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
> disbar him. Or any combination of the two.

I don't believe that either. I believe he could be disbarred in
response to the judges actions, not instead of them. I can't figure out
if you're confused or just lying again.

Disbarment may be imposed by the state bar association if a lawyer
commits an offense that directly relates to his or her fitness to
practice law. Such offenses may include dishonesty, fraud, felony,
substance abuse, abuse of public office, or “conduct that is prejudicial
to the administration of justice.”

Disbarment | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

I propose that being a weasel is normal for attorneys and would not lead
to disbarment.

On 11/21/2021 3:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <snebu2$mlv$1@dont-email.me>,
> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-11-21 2:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>>>>> during the trial.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best
>>>>>>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>>>>> of the other objections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>>>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>>>>> what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>>>>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>>>>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>>>>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.
>>>>>
>>>> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
>>>> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
>>>> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
>>>
>>> The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
>>> disbar him. Or any combination of the two.
>>>
>> Would any punishment he gets from a judge or bar in one state preclude
>> him simply pulling up stakes and practicing law in another state?
>
> He'd have to take the bar exam again to be licensed, which is no small
> thing. And every state bar has a fitness to practice standard which
> reviews a candidate's personal history to determine if they're ethically
> qualified.

More exercises in bullshit.

On 11/21/2021 4:18 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 11/21/2021 4:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <snebu2$mlv$1@dont-email.me>,
>>   Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-11-21 2:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> In article <sne7rv$n9c$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>    Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2021-11-21 1:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>> In article <sne4gn$mgh$5@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>     "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>>>>>> Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>>>>>> prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their
>>>>>>>>>> actions
>>>>>>>>>> during the trial.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best
>>>>>>>>>> guess
>>>>>>>>>> would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they
>>>>>>>>>> felt the
>>>>>>>>>> prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and
>>>>>>>>>> BTR (at
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>>>>>> curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>>>>>> advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>>>>>> defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have
>>>>>>>> a list
>>>>>>>> of the other objections.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't
>>>>>>> need to
>>>>>>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial,
>>>>>>> which is
>>>>>>> what happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the
>>>>>> motion in
>>>>>> limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>>>>>> only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the
>>>>>> prosecutor.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So there are no laws per se being broken but the judge or the bar
>>>>> association can punish him and the bar association can even disbar him
>>>>> if it thinks the offense egregious enough?
>>>>
>>>> The judge can jail him or fine him for contempt, the bar can suspend or
>>>> disbar him. Or any combination of the two.
>>>>
>>> Would any punishment he gets from a judge or bar in one state preclude
>>> him simply pulling up stakes and practicing law in another state?
>>
>> He'd have to take the bar exam again to be licensed, which is no small
>> thing. And every state bar has a fitness to practice standard which
>> reviews a candidate's personal history to determine if they're ethically
>> qualified.
>
> ...or at least smart enough to evade McGruff the Ethics Reviewer.

This whole line of inquiry is based on Derp lying.

On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 15:59:36 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>On 2021-11-21 3:13 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:46:55 -0500, Rhino
>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
>>> whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
>>> laws, rulings, etc.
>>
>> Marbury isn't exactly an obscure US legal decision...
>>
>It's the first one that came to mind. Adam has cited many more from
>various eras in American jurisprudence.

All I'm saying is that Marbury is commonly taught in civics classes -
you don't have to go to law school to hear about it.

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>On 2021-11-21 1:52 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>>>>>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>>>>>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>>>>>during the trial.

>>>>>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>>>>>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>>>>>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>>>>>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>>>>>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.

>>>>If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>>>>advantage. That's what the judge is for.

>>>>The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>>>>defense the best copy of one of the videos.

>>>I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>>>of the other objections.

>>The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>>disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>>what happened.

>>>>I don't think it hurt the defense's case at all and I don't think it
>>>>would have been a mistrial.

>>>>>I'm also not clear on if prosecutorial misconduct is an actual crime
>>>>>under the laws of the state or or is more of an administrative thing
>>>>>controlled by the state bar association and therefore handled outside of
>>>>>the courts and outside of the view of the media.

>>>>The state bar association would deal with extreme ethical violations.
>>>>It's typically a lawyer holding on to monies in escrow then failing to
>>>>release them, or taking a large retaining then failing to represent the
>>>>client.

>>>>A judge has the power to handle matters during the trial. If he wants to
>>>>make a point, he fines the attorney. There no appeal.
>>>>I don't know too much about this. Television tends to get most things
>>>>wrong about legal practice. When they address it in script, it's
>>>>probably handled worse than other aspects of law.

>>>That's why I'm asking you and BTR (and anyone else who knows) since you
>>>seem to have knowledge of how things work in the real world, not just
>>>the worlds portrayed, usually inaccurately, on TV ;-)

>>My legal experience is entirely due to tv.

>Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
>whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
>laws, rulings, etc.

It's easier to look up legal citations and read cases these days. In
olden days, I'd go to the law library at the courthouse or at university
and photocopy.

Also, C-SPAN is just wonderful. I loved the Landmark Cases series. There
was a lot of really good discussion and even the callers asked decent
questions, not the usual nutcases you might get on Washington Journal.

Also, BTR1701 and everyone else are perfectly happy to tell me I'm
wrong.

>>>>>I should make it clear that I didn't watch the trial so I have no
>>>>>opinion on the matter. I'm just curious what the process would be if
>>>>>there was a strong sentiment that the prosecutors had crossed important
>>>>>lines.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:46:55 -0500, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>>Yet you regularly cite precedents from real-life cases like Marbury or
>>whatever so you've obviously done some sort of research into actual
>>laws, rulings, etc.

>Marbury isn't exactly an obscure US legal decision...

We learn the facts of the earliest, most important John Marshall-era law
cases in high school.

atropos@mac.com wrote:
> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>> Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>> >On 2021-11-20 10:36 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> >>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>> >>>One of the sentiments I've seen expressed repeatedly after the
>> >>>Rittenhouse trial is that the prosecutors should be charged with
>> >>>prosecutorial misconduct with a view to disbarment for their actions
>> >>>during the trial.
>>
>> >>>Who could initiate such if they were deemed appropriate? My best guess
>> >>>would that Rittenhouse's attorneys could request it if they felt the
>> >>>prosecutors crossed lines but that's just a guess. Adam and BTR (at the
>> >>>very least) seem knowledgeable on how these things work so I'd be
>> >>>curious to know how prosecutorial misconduct charges work.
>>
>> >>If a prosecutor has a weak case, he may push the line and take
>> >>advantage. That's what the judge is for.
>>
>> >>The complaint was about the violation of discovery, not giving the
>> >>defense the best copy of one of the videos.
>>
>> >I think that was only one of several objections but I don't have a list
>> >of the other objections.
>>
>> The prosecutor repeatedly ignored the judge's orders. You don't need to
>> disbar someone for that. The judge takes care of it at trial, which is
>> what happened.
>
>When a prosecutor does what Binger did-- blatantly violate the motion in
>limine and introduce prejudicial material in front of the jury-- not
>only is the judge empowered to impose sanctions, but the defendant has
>standing to file a grievance with the state bar against the prosecutor.

Let us hope they do!

--
Let's go Brandon!