Lawsuit funding

Lawsuit funding, also known as pre settlement cash advances, are a form of non-recourse funding that has become a popular service in the past few years. Injured clients all over the United States can use this service to get cash for their lawsuit now. Funds advanced can be used by the client for any immediate financial pressures including mortgage payments, credit card bills, to get out of debt, car payments and more.

Obtaining a cash advance on a pending settlement or lawsuit is a quick and simple process. If you have been seriously injured in an accident and are represented by an attorney, just contact a pre settlement funding company like Injury Funds Now to apply. The funding company will review your case file and contact you with the results of their review. If you accept the offer, a portion of your potential settlement is advanced in return for a percentage of the anticipated recovery. Injury Funds Now (http://www.injuryfundsnow.com) probably has the fastest turn-around time in the industry and will have an answer for you in just 24 hours; they will even wire funds directly into your bank account the very same day.

Lawsuit funding companies offer cash advances solely on the merits of the case. There are no credit checks and the person applying need not be employed. If the case makes a successful recovery, the money advanced plus a previously agreed upon fee are paid out of the case proceeds. If the case loses, there is no fee and the funds do not have to be repaid so this is a 100% risk free service. This also makes the service very risky for the funding company and as such rates and fees vary dramatically between each company, so choose wisely. Many companies charge hidden fees such as closing costs, application fees and more. They offer what appear to be very low rates, but when the hidden fees are added on and the rates are compounded every month, it can get quite high. Injury Funds Now is does not use compounding or have any hidden fees. They even have a flat rate program by which you will know what amount you will have to pay back upon a successful recovery before even accepting their offer.

Other than taking care of a client's immediate financial pressures, what are the benefits of lawsuit funding? The strategy of the Defense insurance company is to drag a case out as long as possible in the hopes that the client becomes desperate and will settle for less than the case is worth. A pre settlement advance balances the playing field, by giving the attorney the time he or she needs to obtain the highest possible recovery! So by using a lawsuit funding service, the case can actually make a higher recovery yielding both the client and attorney more funds!

personal injury lawyer

Finding the right personal injury lawyer to assist you in your personal injury case can really be overwhelming especially when you don't have any idea on where to go and who to run to. As we all know, after seeking medical treatment prior to an accident, finding a lawyer is the next step that you have to do when you are involved on any other matter relating to personal injury. There are definitely various ways on how to locate the best personal injury lawyer for your lawsuit.

As with what most people would recommend, one sure way to find a personal injury lawyer is through legal matchmaking services. Through this, you are assured that you'll be able to get in touch with qualified and experienced lawyers because these services offer only the finest, most credible legal specialists to handle your case. These lawyers are all being screened to meet certain standards in terms of legal qualifications, profile evaluation, and practical experience.

Online legal matchmaking services are also widely used nowadays. What you need to do is just fill-up an online form and submit it. After careful assessment of some online attorneys if they can handle and help you out with your case well, they will then contact you as soon as possible. From there, you can also evaluate the capacity of the lawyer to take charge of your lawsuit through his personal profile before deciding to avail his services.

In addition, you can also visit the sites of these legal matchmaking services if you are having some doubts about how well can they answer your legal demands and concerns. After doing some rigorous research about these law firms and attorneys on personal injury, you can now contact the services with which you were most impressed and fill out their form. You must take note that you have to do it in a little rush because your legal problems can definitely be solved in just a few hours.

These methods in finding a personal injury lawyer have all been tried and tested through the years. Some can be effective for you, others cannot. You can try all of them and see for yourself if which is the best way to locate the perfect attorney for your personal injury case. Please just remember that you have to be careful in doing so because if you'll commit even a small mistake in choosing your lawyer, you might not get the proper attention and defense that you deserve.

California defence attorney

There are many branches of law in the United States. For instance, civil law is the law as it pertains to personal relationships, unions such as marriage, and interpersonal situations such as personal injury cases. Criminal Law is the branch of law that seeks to define crimes - what a crime is, who the victim is, and who the perpetrator is. Criminal law can be divided into two sections, each section involving specialized lawyers, criminal defense lawyers.

The first type of criminal law is criminal procedure. This subsection of criminal law defines how trials are to be conducted. Criminal procedure law dictates how claims are to be investigated and outlines how evidence must be collected. Criminal procedure aims to maintain an orderly legal system that is most effective in the pursuit of justice in light of the truth. Criminal Defense attorneys who specialize in criminal procedure are very careful to review how evidence is collected. They will be very specific in regards to their client's right and privileges under the law. A criminal defense attorney will ensure that the ideal of "innocent until proven guilty" is maintained through the investigation and presentation process.

The second type of criminal law is substantive. Substantive criminal law focuses on crime and punishment. Criminal Defense Attorneys involved in the substantive area of criminal law will be working with individuals accused of a crime. They will begin work when sought out by a client accused of a crime or appointed by the court, as in cases of financial need. Criminal defense attorneys will meet with clients and hear the details of events from their point of view. Everything shared between a client and his or her criminal defense attorney is confidential. A criminal defense attorney will not turn a client in if the client admits guilt, but will continue to help the client achieve success in the courtroom.

A good criminal defense attorney understands that everything is relative. The law is not black and white, but leaves a lot of gray room for interpretation. A criminal defense attorney will gather all of the facts of the case, both from the client and from the state or federal investigators. Armed with the facts, a criminal defense attorney will begin to build a case that presents the client in the best possible light. IF the client is guilty, the criminal defense attorney will try to present the facts of the case in such a way as to maintain a doubt of guilt. The jury, as the criminal defense attorney knows, is instructed that a person on trial must be proven guilty and does not need to be proven innocent. They will begin to comb through possible witnesses and will divide witnesses into character witnesses and witnesses to the actual events in question. A criminal defense attorney knows that character witnesses to present the person standing in trial in a good light will go a long way in the minds of jury members.

When a criminal defense attorney is defending a client, they will also seek to ensure the punishment fits the crime if their client is found guilty. A criminal defense attorney will utilize relativity to demand proportionality of punishment to crime in their client's best interest. A criminal defense attorney stands by their client until the trial's end, ensuring the outcome is as favorable as possible for their client.

The role of public Defender

When you've been wrongly accused of a certain crime and been prosecuted, you'll certainly need the legal help and assistance of a public defender especially when you can't afford to pay for the legal fees and bills covering the consultations, gathering of evidences, and actual proceedings regarding the case. However, getting a public defender is not that easy. You also have to go through a somewhat-rigorous process.

The role of a criminal defense attorney is really complex. He can challenge probable cause for arrest, argue in favor of being released on your own recognizance or on very low bail, negotiate plea bargains with prosecutors, discuss the pros and cons of going to trial, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of pleading guilty instead of going to trial. These things are what a public attorney can offer you when you're in the same circumstances.

As what I've said, getting the service of a public attorney from a public attorney's office is not so simple. You have to go through a careful evaluation of your financial assets, properties, incomes and debts to determine if you are eligible for representation by a public attorney. And, if you can't afford to hire a lawyer from the private legal community, the court will automatically appoint a government-paid lawyer to represent you.

Being freed from the payment of your legal fees is not the only advantage in hiring a public defender. With regards to a public defender's capabilities, you can consider him as the "perfect knights for justice? because he is very efficient at sizing up your case and presenting an acceptable plea bargain deal to the prosecutor and judge. Additionally, he is updated on new laws and legal theories in his area of specialty. As a result, you may be done with the criminal process and on with the rest of your life sooner than if you were represented by a private attorney.

Regarding the drawbacks, you have to know that a government-paid lawyer often has a huge overload of cases so he can't devote a lot of time to a certain lawsuit. He also often lacks office equipment and adequate research access, and can't afford to hire investigators to properly flesh out your case. As a result, you may have little or no access to your lawyer except during actual court hearings.

With all these, the decision is still left for you to decide on if you'll want a public defender to back you up in your case or not.

Criminal Procedure in Minnesota

Criminal Procedure is the process that is followed through the Court system as a criminal case is processed and moves toward trial. The procedures are designed to provide persons accused of crimes with "Due Process" protections as set out in the State and Federal constitution and Bill of Rights.

1. Arrest: A law enforcement officer may arrest a person when he/she has probable causeto believe that a suspect has committed a specific crime. The probablecause cannot be a mere vague suspicion. When probable cause is present, an officer may make an arrest with or without a warrant. When an arrest is made, the person accused may be ticketed and released or taken into custody and transported to the police station where they are finger printed and booked.

2. Booking: At the police station, the person arrested goes through "booking." This may include entering information about the person into a police blotter as well as taking photographs and fingerprints.

3. Filing complaint: In the State system, the law enforcement officer prepares a report that is then transmitted to the prosecutor. In Minnesota, the prosecutor may be a U.S. attorney for federal crimes or a County attorney, a member of the Attorney General's office ora city prosecutor for state crimes. Once a prosecutor isprovided a report, they must decide decide whether there is sufficient evidence to file criminal charges. If charges are appropriate,the prosecutor prepares a "tab charge" or a "complaint."

4. Filing of indictment or information- Federal System: In the federal system, the first step is too convene a grand jury to hear the prosecutor's evidence and to issue an indictment. The indictment is a form of Complaint.

5. Bail Hearing. If the person charged has been taken into custody and remains in jail, the must be brought before the court to determine conditions of release. At this hearing, the Judge weighs arguments relative to whether the suspect presents a risk of harm to others or is a flight risk unlikely to return to Court for his/her next appearance. Generally the Court will weigh factors related to family and business ties to the community, the nature of the crime charged, and stability of the suspect.

6. Firstappearance (Arraignment) - State System: After the complaint has been filed, it is served on the person charged by mail or by the suspect is brought before a Judge. This is called the "first appearance" or "arraignment." At the first appearance, the court is crowded with other defendants. As a result, this is likely to be a lengthy proceeding and it may not be possible to discuss your case with the prosecutor prior to having the matter called before the Judge. Each person in the Court room is informed of his or her rights and given an opportunity to apply for representation from a public defender if they qualify financially. When Court convenes, each person charged with a crime is brought before the Judge where they are notified of their rights and the charges against them. If the person elects to enter a plea of "not guilty" , the matter is set on for a second appearance. If a defendant does not appear as scheduled, the Court will issue a warrant for the individual's arrest.

7. Rasmussen Hearing, Omnibus or Pretrial: If the case is a misdemeanor, the second appearance may be called a pretrial or a"Rasmussen" hearing. If the case involves afelony (where incarceration may exceed on year), an "Omnibus" hearing is held. At this second appearance, the person accused may challenge the probable cause in the case and request that the Judge dismiss the charges. This may involve submitting the issues to the court "on the record" which means that the Court makes its decision without live testimony based on the existing police reports. The person accused may also require live witnesses to testify where they can be cross examined. If the case is not dismissed, it is scheduled for atrial date.

8. Pre-trial motions: Prior to the trial, the prosecutor or Defense counsel now make any pre-trial motions, including any motions to exclude evidence or limit testimony.

9. Trial:After any pretrial motions have been heard and ruled upon by theCourt, the case proceeds to trial. If the charge is a felony, or a misdemeanor punishable by more than six months in prison, all states give the defendant the right to have the case tried before a jury.

10. Sentencing: If at any time prior to trial the Defendant pleads guilty, or if the defendant is found guilty after a trial of the issues, a hearing is held to determine sentencing. Sentences may entail jail time, restitution and fines. Often, the sentencing may occur at the end of a trial or when a plea is entered and is not always heard as a separate hearing. In cases that involve felonies, repeat DWI's or crimes of violence, the Court may require the defendant to meet with probation to discuss the charges, the circumstances surrounding the charges and past criminal history. This is called a Pre-sentence Investigation. The probation will compile the information into a summary for the Judge to review. That summary will often recommend a sentence. Ultimately, however, it is the Judge who makes the sentencing decision. In many cases, Minnesota Statutes set forth minimum sentences or presumptive sentences. These are guidelines for the Court to follow when determining punishment.

11. Appeals: A convicted defendant is then entitled to appeal (e.g., onthe grounds that the evidence admitted against him at trial was the result of an unconstitutional search).

12. Post-conviction remedies: Both state and federal prisoners, even after direct appeal, may challenge their convictions through federal-court habeascorpus procedures. Generally, to challenge a convictionthe convicted party must prove that three was ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct or newly acquired evidence which,if known, would likely have lead to a different result.

California criminal defence attorney cases

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE- Santa Monica, Ca.
A doctor was charged with spousal abuse after fighting with his fiancé. After trying to work it out with her, and many hours of counseling, they broke up. The fiancé was vengeful, and the prosecutor was determined to convict our client and throw him in jail. The doctor hired the Lombardo Law Office and they took the case to jury trial and won. Client acquitted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY- Rancho Cucamonga, Ca.
A wife and mother was charged with receiving stolen property, i.e. hundreds of stolen, expensive name brand purses. She was selling them on foreign auction websites. After a sting operation, she was caught making a transaction with the seller of the stolen merchandise. She was facing 3 years in prison, but after months of fighting in Court, we secured a plea bargain for probation, electronic monitoring (ankle bracelet) and restitution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER- San Bernardino, Ca.
A young man was playing “Russian Roulette” with his best friend. Neither man had any intention of hurting the other. The friend was shot in the head and died instantly. Client was charged with voluntary manslaughter, taken into custody and was offered 7 years in prison by the D.A. We rejected the plea bargain and started the jury trial. Part way through the trial, the judge called us back into chambers, and agreed with us. We successfully negotiated for involuntary manslaughter, probation and community service. No prison!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSSESSION OF A WEAPON- West Covina, Ca.
Our client was a 23 year old man who was on probation. During a probation search of his bedroom, a set of nunchukas were found under his mattress. The D.A. filed charges and refused to negotiate a reasonable plea bargain, so we took it to a jury trial. We convinced the jury that our client was not guilty, and he was acquitted! The probation officer later dismissed the violation. Client walked away free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMBEZZLEMENT- Los Angeles, Ca.
Our client was an employee of Los Angeles County in a purchasing department. After a covert investigation, both he and an accomplice were accused of “padding the books” for personal gain and stealing over $250,000. He hired the Lombardo Law Office and we quickly jumped in to negotiate with the authorities on his behalf. We were able to convince them not to file charges against him. Client paid no money back. The accomplice, however, was indicted in Federal Court
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DUI- Victorville, Ca.
Our client was pulled over after leaving a nightclub at 2:00 a.m. She blew a .10% BAC. She was charged with driving under the influence and driving with greater than .08% BAC. We appeared in court on her behalf and handled the entire case for her. She received probation, the minimum fine, and the minimum DUI class. No jail.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DUI- San Bernardino, Ca.
Our client was in a van with someone else in a parking lot. The police thought it was suspicious and conducted a DUI investigation against our client, because he was sitting behind the wheel. We took the case to jury trial, and before jury selection began, we produced our client’s friend, explained to the D.A. that he was the driver, and the case was dismissed. Both men walked free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LEWD ACT WITH A MINOR- Pomona, Ca.
Our client was a 30 year old man who began dating a 16 year old girl. The girls mother called the police when she found out about the relationship. After the police conducted their investigation, they submitted the reports to the D.A. for the filing of charges. We successfully convinced the D.A. that our client truly believed that the girl was over 18 years old. The D.A. did not file the charges.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEXUAL BATTERY- Long Beach, Ca.
Our client was a middle aged man who was approached by a much younger girl. He invited her into his business, and the began to flirt and get physical. The girl changed her mind, ran out and called the police, alleging that he grabbed and touched her while using force and holding her hostage in the back room. The D.A. filed charges. We settled the case for no jail time, with our client pleading to a misdemeanor simple battery, small fine and short probation. Two years later, were got the case dismissed entirely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTEMPTED MURDER- Pomona, Ca.
An upper class, middle aged husband and wife were arguing about their children, and the wife became enraged. She retrieved the gun out of the safe, approached her husband, put the gun to his chest and threatened to shoot him. He laughed and told her she was crazy. She then pointed the gun toward the floor and pulled the trigger. Husband called the police, and wife was charged with attempted murder. She was arrested and husband hired the Lombardo Law Office to defend her. After extensive motions in court, we secured a plea bargain where our client plead guilty to assault with a deadly weapon and went into custody for a 90 day diagnostic period. But, after almost 80 days, we brought her back to court and argued to the Judge that she is sane and should serve no further jail time. The Judge agreed and our client was released on probation!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIRST DEGREE RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY, 3 COUNTS (ALL STRIKES)- Laguna, Ca.
Our client was a 25 year old man who suffered a mild brain injury in the past and was on depression medication. One night, after having a few beers, he went through an affluent neighborhood and broke into three houses, one after the other. He stole some items form the first two, but in the third house he woke a sleeping woman, and had a brief conversation with her. He ran after she called 911, but was later caught with the stolen merchandise. He was facing life in prison, and the D.A. offered a plea bargain of 10 years in prison! His parents hired the Lombardo Law Office and we brought a forensic psychiatrist expert on board our team. After extensive testing and brain x-rays, we got two of the counts dismissed and convinced the judge to keep our client out of prison. Client received only one year in the county jail and probation. After a total of 8 months, he was out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL MEDI-CARE FRAUD- San Diego, Ca.
Federal Court Our client was a Mexican Doctor who practiced medicine at a clinic occasionally in San Diego. He became involved in a lucrative scheme to defraud the government out of over $100,000 in fake medi-care claims. He was arrested and detained in federal custody until his family hired the Lombardo Law Office and we convinced the Magistrate to grant our client a reasonable bail. We negotiated extensively with the Assistant United States Attorney and secured a plea bargain for a 30 day sentence in a “half-way house” and restitution to the government over a period of time.

ILLegal immigtation

Giuliani: Illegal immigration no crime-Not what he told Mike Cutler!


Mike Cutler:
"After the senator and the U.S. attorney engaged in a bit of bantering about a recent trip they had taken to Italy together, D'Amato turned to the issue of the penalties for the crime of Re-Entry After Deportation. U.S. Attorney Giuliani asked me for the statute concerning this crime and I told him that it was to be found in Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1326. After a short while, Giuliani got back on the phone, obviously he tracked down the law and said that I was correct, that the maximum punishment was 2 years in jails and that the law did not differentiate between aliens who had criminal convictions and aliens who did not. He told Senator D'Amato that boosting the penalties for criminals who are deported and illegally re-enter the United States was a great idea! "

Complete email from Mike Cutler:


The story I am about to tell you is a bit lengthy but I believe it is worth reading for several reasons. It shows how politicians can conduct themselves responsibly when they are given relevant facts. It also provides some insight to one of the candidates who is currently running for President. I am referring to none other than Rudy Giuliani. The news story I have attached below should get all of us to sit up and pay attention! Before I get to Mr. Giuliani's outrageous statement, I would like to provide some background.
In the mid 1980's I began working with then New York Senator Alphonse D'Amato on a number of immigration-related issues. I approached his staff about the need to address the immigration issue at a time that the number of criminal aliens was soaring and the agency that was supposed to lead the charge was refusing to take itself and its responsibilities seriously. The first time I made an appointment to go to the senator's office I brought along my first wife who subsequently passed away more than 20 years ago. We were both surprised that as I met with members of the senator's staff, Al D'Amato, himself poked his head into the meeting room and chatted with us for about 10 minutes. He went on to tell me that he would support my recommendations if was able to get some of my colleagues to corroborate my assertions.
I began cajoling and pleading with about 30 of my then colleagues to go to the senator's New York office which was located in the Madison Square Garden Complex. Finally, the senator agreed to another meeting that was supposed to last for 30 minutes. I brought 3 of my colleagues with me and we sat down in the senator's law library and waited for him along with a couple of his staffers. Suddenly, the senator strode into the room, carrying a huge, white mug containing steaming coffee. The mug was emblazoned with big, bold, black letters that simply said, "THE BOSS."
In the days before the meeting I focused on what I would say to him. I knew that I would only get one chance to really get his attention and so these words would be critical. I like to say that you only get one opportunity for a first impression. I felt that this first impression that the words would convey had to grab his attention immediately. After we introduced ourselves to him he said, "Mikey, how can I help you?"
I looked him in the eye and as best as I can recall, I said, "Senator, we thank you for taking time out from what we know is an incredibly busy schedule. The four of us seated in your office today are civil servants who are concerned about the situation at the INS. (One of us, Pete Mastrosimone was a supervisory immigration inspector who would die a few short years later of a heart attack. The other two guys who accompanied me were criminal investigators (special agents) as I was at that time.) I went on and told the senator that, "While we were all federal officers that we had come as his constituents, as tax payers who had all come to the unhappy conclusion that we were unable to get our money's worth from our own efforts, not because of any of our failings but because of the failings of the agency that employed us, the Immigration and Naturalization Service."
It was clear that the words resonated with the senator because he looked me squarely in the eye and asked us to explain what was going on. He seem angry, not at us, but at the picture we painted.
After about 30 minutes, one of the senator's aides stepped into the room to remind him of a luncheon appointment with an ambassador of a foreign government. We were never told who the ambassador was nor the country he represented. What surprised us was that Senator D'Amato told his aide to get someone from his office to take the dignitary to lunch because he felt that the meeting we were having with him was far too important to end. He wound up spending more than 2 hours with us.
He asked me if there was anything that I thought should be done to address some of the many failings at the INS. I provided him with 3 suggestions. I told him that it made no sense to not differentiate criminal aliens from those illegal aliens who were working illegally in the United States. The mind-set that an arrest was an arrest and that agents were evaluated purely by the number of aliens arrested and processed was absurd. I also explained that the agency was playing a "numbers game." I asked him what he thought the statement that a thousand illegal aliens had been arrested and processed for deportation meant. He told me that it sounded as though a thousand illegal aliens had been deported. I surprised him by telling him that this statement simply meant that one thousand illegal aliens were taken into custody and that the paperwork was done and that the agency counted the number of aliens processed for deportation even though many of the aliens were then released, only to disappear into communities in New York. This was the early version of the now infamous "Catch and Release" program. As you might expect, Senator D'Amato was thoroughly angered by this revelation!.
Next I told him that I would suggest that aliens who were serving jail sentences should be process for deportation inside the jails and that deportation hearings should also be conducted inside the jails in which they were incarcerated. It made no sense to have an alien serve many years behind bars and that the INS would then initiate deportation proceedings upon his release from prison. In these situations either these criminal aliens were held in our detention facilities that lacked adequate resources, or the criminal aliens were allowed to post bail and go back on the street whereupon they either absconded, committed additional crimes, or did both. In my judgement, holding hearings inside a jail would provide the alien who had been ordered deported to appeal his deportation and then ultimately be given a final order of deportation before his prison sentence expired. In these cases, these aliens would simply be taken to an airplane upon the completion of their criminal sentences and removed from our country. (This program was put into effect and became known as the Institution Hearing Program.) Like everything else at the former INS and now at DHS, limited resources hobble this program.
Finally, I suggested that the penalty for the crime of Re-Entry After Deportation be increased from the maximum of two years in jail to a maximum of 20 years in custody for criminal aliens. It made no sense to me or my colleagues who accompanied me to that meeting that the law did not differentiate between criminal aliens and aliens who were administrative law violators. Senator D'Amato was incredulous! He had trouble believing what we told him, so he called his good friend, the man who, at the time occupied the powerful position of United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Rudy Giuliani. D'Amato had one of his staffers call Giuliani's office and had the call put on the speaker phone.
After the senator and the U.S. attorney engaged in a bit of bantering about a recent trip they had taken to Italy together, D'Amato turned to the issue of the penalties for the crime of Re-Entry After Deportation. U.S. Attorney Giuliani asked me for the statute concerning this crime and I told him that it was to be found in Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1326. After a short while, Giuliani got back on the phone, obviously he tracked down the law and said that I was correct, that the maximum punishment was 2 years in jails and that the law did not differentiate between aliens who had criminal convictions and aliens who did not. He told Senator D'Amato that boosting the penalties for criminals who are deported and illegally re-enter the United States was a great idea!
As the federal prosecutor he was at that time, Giuliani certainly understood the concept of deterrence! Unbeknownst to me at the time, Walter Connery, the former head of the Internal Affairs Division of the INS who would shortly report to New York as the chief of investigation or Assistant District Director for Investigations and a former high-ranking member of the NYPD and a lawyer in his own right, would submit a legislative proposal to Senator D'Amato that paralleled my suggestion about increased penalties for the crime of unlawful re-entry into the United States by aliens who had been deported and had criminal convictions. The law was changed and now, under the current law, an alien who is defined as a "Aggravated Felon" may serve a maximum of 20 years in prison if he is deported and re-enters the United States without authorization.
Back then, United States Attorney Giuliani was a prosecutor, indeed, he was the preeminent federal prosecutor in New York.
When he was elected mayor of New York, Giuliani stated that he subscribed to the "Broken windows approach to law enforcement." You can read an interview he gave in May, 2003 where he discussed many issues, including the "Broken windows approach to law enforcement." I have attached the link to this interview below:
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/giu0int-4
His quote about "Broken Windows" follows (I have taken the liberty to highlight the most interesting part of his statement):
Rudolph Giuliani: Well, I very much subscribe to the "Broken Windows" theory, a theory that was developed by Professors Wilson and Kelling, 25 years ago maybe. The idea of it is that you had to pay attention to small things, otherwise they would get out of control and become much worse. And that, in fact, in a lot of our approach to crime, quality of life, social programs, we were allowing small things to get worse rather than dealing with them at the earliest possible stage. That approach had been tried in other cities, but all small cities, and there was a big debate about whether it could work in a city as large as New York. One of the ways that New York used to resist any kind of change was to say, "It can't work here," because they wanted to keep the status quo. There is such a desire for people to do that, to keep the status quo. And I thought, "Well, there's no reason why it can't work in New York City. We have bigger resources. We may have bigger problems, we have bigger resources, the same theory should work." So we started paying attention to the things that were being ignored. Aggressive panhandling, the squeegee operators that would come up to your car and wash the window of your car whether you wanted it or not -- and sometimes smashed people's cars or tires or windows -- the street-level drug-dealing; the prostitution; the graffiti, all these things that were deteriorating the city. So we said, "We're going to pay attention to that," and it worked. It worked because we not only got a big reduction in that, and an improvement in the quality of life, but massive reductions in homicide, and New York City turned from the crime capital of America to the safest large city in the country for five, six years in a row.
Here is my point; Mr. Giuliani, as mayor, said that he went after the low level crimes. This is stunning when you consider that he was willing to have the cops arrest those who wielded squeegees or spray paint cans that they used to create graffiti, but now declares that illegal aliens who run our borders should not be arrested! This absolutely takes my breath away!
Mayor Giuliani presided over New York City when it was a so-called "Sanctuary City." You can read the transcript of a hearing at which I testified on February 27, 2003 before the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims entitled, "NEW YORK CITY'S 'SANCTUARY' POLICY AND THE EFFECT OF SUCH POLICIES ON PUBLIC SAFETY, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND IMMIGRATION."
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju85287.000/hju85287_0f.htm
In an era of escalating gang activity and the threat of terrorism, Mr. Giuliani apparently does not consider the millions of illegal aliens who violate our borders to be committing a crime, but considered it worthwhile to go after teenagers who spray painted graffiti on buildings and other places! I frankly do not like graffiti, but what is a bigger threat to our safety? I certainly did not like the squeegee guys approaching my car and engage in aggressive panhandling, but really, is this a crime or simply a matter of disorderly conduct?
Giuliani certainly "gets it" but then makes contradictory statements! H cannot have it both ways!
He must know that many illegal aliens do not run our nation's borders but rather enter through ports of entry and then, in one way or another, violate the terms of their entry into our country.
I have made this point many time before and feel compelled to make it again. It is impossible to control illegal immigration at the border if aliens come to realize that they can count on getting rewarded for running our nation's borders if they manage to get past the Border Patrol agent or CBP inspector. I know that Rudy is an avid Yankees fan. He must realize that to not enforce the immigration laws from the interior of the United States would be the equivalent of a baseball team playing the game but having their outfielders sit out the game. Under such bizarre circumstances, anyone who could hit the ball over the second baseman's head would probably get an in the park home run!
Special agents are also desperately needed to do more than simply attempt to arrest aliens who are working illegally. We need thousands of special agents at ICE to go after the fraud in the immigration benefits program that not only rewards aliens who furnish false information on their applications for immigration benefits, but also represents a threat to national security by enabling spies and terrorists to easily game the system and acquire resident alien status and even United States citizenship.
It sometimes seems that it would be easier to nail Jello to the wall than pin down our politicians especially where the critical issue of immigration is concerned!
We the People have to get involved in the political process. The upcoming election will, I believe, mark a critical opportunity for our nation and our citizens. We are a nation at crossroads and we had better make certain that the next occupant of the Oval Office will represent our best interests rather than the best interests of special interest groups and corporations! There will be no "Do Overs!"

Organized Crime Pays in italy

Organized crime represents the biggest segment of the Italian economy, accounting
for more than $127 billion in receipts, according to a report issued Monday.

The new figure reflects a trend that has been under way for a few years, the
annual report says. The figure last year was $106 billion, making it not quite the
biggest segment of the economy.

The report also said the line between legitimate business and criminal activity
was becoming harder to discern.

The annual report was released by the Confesercenti, an association of small
businesses. It says that through various activities extortion, usury, contraband,
robberies, gambling and Internet piracy organized crime accounts for 7 percent of

Italys gross domestic product.

From the weaving factories, to tourism to business and personal services, from
farming to public contracts to real estate and finance, the criminal presence is
consolidated in every economic activity, the 86-page report said.

The report also points to a disturbing trend of collusion in which big businesses
participate, especially in public works. The businessmen prefer to make a pact
with the Mafia rather than denounce the blackmail, the report said.

The report comes on the heels of a visit to Naples by Pope Benedict XVI on Sunday,
when he condemned deplorable mob violence that he said had insinuated itself into
everyday life.

Recent news reports have described threats to journalists in Sicily and the
Campania region from organized-crime families.
Usury represents the most lucrative activity by organized crime, with syndicates
taking in $43 billion while racketeering brings in $14 billion, the report
estimated. Illegal construction nets about $19 billion.

The businesses most afflicted by organized crime are in the south in Sicily,
Campania, Calabria and Puglia, the report found.

The report says 80 percent of the businesses in the Sicilian cities of Catania and
Palermo regularly pay protection money, known as pizzo.

Attorney good or bad 4 paris hilton

By now everyone on planet earth and maybe even other planets, like the one Paris Hilton is actually from, has heard that she checked herself into jail Sunday night to start serving a 23 day sentence for violating probation.


The sentence was originally 45 days.
And now… SHE’S ALREADY OUT.


After just 3 days Paris Hilton was released from jail to house arrest… for 40 more days.









Her Mug Shot



This got me thinking, her Lawyer Richard A. Hutton from Hutton & Wilson, a supposed preeminent DUI Firm in Los Angeles must have seen a surge in prospective clients due to the publicity.






Or did he… receiving a 45 day sentence for a violation of probation after she was caught driving on a suspended license is hardly what I would call a successful DUI representation (Original DUI charge in September). I know many people that have had similar cases or even more serious charges that did not even sniff the interior of a jail cell.






So the question this poses from a marketing perspective: Is it worth it to take on a celebrity or high profile client, whether it be Pro Bono or not, in order to get free publicity even if you LOSE THE CASE? I know many people would revert to the cliche “There’s no such thing as bad press”. Of course it works for Paris, but what about her Attorney?

Attorney jokes

Stephen wrote this terribly early in the morning:
These are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts, and arethings people actually said in court, word for word, taken down andnow published by court reporters who had the torment of staying calmwhile these exchanges were actually taking place.

ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there.
_______________________________________________________

ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
______________________________________

ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something youforgot?


_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you thatmorning?
WITNESS: He said, “Where am I, Cathy?”
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?WITNESS: My name is Susan!
______________________________________

ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved invoodoo?
WITNESS: We both do.ATTORNEY: Voodoo?
WITNESS: We do.
ATTORNEY: You do?
WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.

______________________________________

ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in hissleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?____________________________________

ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: Uh, he’s twenty-one.________________________________________

ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Are you shittin’ me?______________________________________

ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: Uh…. I was gettin’ laid!______________________________________

ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
WITNESS: Are you shittin’ me? Your Honour, I think I need adifferent attorney. Can I get a new attorney?______________________________________

ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Now whose death do you suppose terminated it?______________________________________


ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Guess.
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to adeposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
______________________________________

ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed ondead people?WITNESS: All my autopsies are performed on dead people. Would youlike to rephrase that?______________________________________

ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you goto?
WITNESS: Oral.
______________________________________

ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I wasdoing an autopsy on him!____________________________________________

ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Huh….are you qualified to ask that question?
______________________________________

And the best for last:
______________________________________

ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you checkfor a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when youbegan the autopsy?WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive,nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive andpractising law.