Thursday, October 6, 2016

People Don't Like Me


  • James Pengilly says he didn't brandish his gun at the deposition, but he did have it on him as he always does because "I’m an attorney and people don’t like me." [RJ]
  • Defense attorney Dan Silverstein will be the new Deputy District Attorney over the Conviction Integrity Unit. [RJ]
  • Attorneys in Bunkerville standoff case are concerned about secret jailhouse recordings. [RJ]
  • Governor Sandoval calls a special legislative session to start Monday on more taxes for the stadium, convention center, education, and more cops. [Las Vegas SunRJ]
  • Donald Trump says you're saying Nevada wrong. [KNPR]

49 comments:

  1. Trump can go fuck himself. Or is it 'fahk" himself? Not sure. Either way, you get the idea

    ReplyDelete
  2. My take was that Trump got a cute idea from one of his advisors and then he mixed up which way was the right way. His comments about people he knows saying it the wrong way and getting ridiculed make much more sense that way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, since Trump has never been wrong about anything ever, welcome to the new reality. We are hence forth known as Ne-VAH-da. HE has spoken.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. . . . Yeah. Besides, what does it mAHtter anyway?

      Delete
  4. Now that we have heard something of the other side of the story on Pengilly v. Hayes, maybe the blog readers won't be so quick to judge. The minute I read the motion I had my doubts and suspected it was greatly exaggerated. This is a situation where opposing counsel is trying to use this to gain an advantage. It should be interesting to see how all this works out. Where do the parties go from here. Will the deposition ever be completed? Under what circumstances? What happens to the case? The case sounds really petty. Libel for "you didn't pay your HOA dues?" I suspected the allegations were too good to be true. Anyone else have any thoughts. What will the Discovery Commissioner do with this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Pengilly - I for one, still think you should relax and take it down a notch.

      Delete
    2. What we really need to hear is what the court reporter saw. While it's possible the attorney and client conspired to both say things about a gun on the record,it could be completely supported by her confirming she saw the gun. The other problem is Jim didn't say on the record that they were lying or ask why they were saying that... I know if someone accused me of pulling a gun that I didn't (on the the record), I'd try to paint my own picture on the record.

      Delete
    3. My guess is that Pengilly flashed his gun and the other side freaked out and then exaggerated it in the motion. I agree that the claims in the lawsuit sound stupid. I also agree that Pengilly probably wasn't trying to setup a Trayvon Martin scenario. But I can also see freaking out if someone flashes their gun at me.

      Delete
    4. Hey 9:42, do you know how to read? If so, read the transcript of the deposition and point out the exaggeration. Also, please explain why METRO is investigating the incident? Finally, if you are a lawyer, how many times have you called an opposing party a dipshit during a deposition?

      Delete
    5. Require future depositions to be conducted at the courthouse. Appoint a special master to sit there and babysit/rule on objections. It's been done in the past.

      Delete
    6. 9:58,

      So many times. So. Many. But never on the record and only infrequently out loud.

      Delete
    7. Hey 9:49 a.m., not Pengilly just another lawyer. The court reporter's observations and testimony won't matter. The court report will probably say I was too busy taking everything down to observe anything. METRO is obligated to investigate but probably won't do anything because it is so disputed and convoluted. It has to be almost 100 per cent certain. This is not. It is not clear whether the gun was taken out of the holster. Did he flash the gun or show he had a gun. It is all bizarre. The facts are yet to be determined. METRO will probably say it is a civil dispute and let it go from there. The facts are not important to some but the facts matter. Right now, a lot of speculation.

      Delete
    8. 10:45 - Please publicly reveal your name, so I know who NOT to hire. Ever.

      Delete
    9. 10:45-- Exactly the arguments I would make if I have no arguments. Court Reporter that Pengilly hired? Psssssh, cannot rely on the verbatim transcription of a neutral witness. It is so disputed and convoluted what "Are you ready for it?" might mean. I mean, who would take that in a threatening manner (holstered or not)?

      I will say 10:45-- you and I agree on one thing that you said: "The facts are not important to some but the facts matter." I am sorry that the facts apparently mean nothing to you but admire your ability to ignore the obvious and tell everyone to ignore the gun-toting guy behind the curtain.

      Delete
    10. I'm sorry, 10:45, but I'm with 11:40 on this one. Almost everything you said in that paragraph is wrong. I don't know if I could string together that many incorrect statements if I tried.

      Delete
    11. Trump, Pence, and Kellyanne Conway model of argument.

      Delete
    12. What a douche. You only show or pull out the weapon if you actually really need to use it. Otherwise, it is a lame intimidation attempt by a coward/wuss. MH counseling/anger management classes for sure if not a suspension. I don't know any of the parties.

      Delete
    13. What are we all going back and forth about here? It's simple, really. We should be ashamed to live in a world where ANYONE brings a gun to a legal proceeding -- especially a LAWYER. Please, someone -- ANYONE -- try to defend that kind of behavior. Let me hear the 2nd Amendment justifications. I can hardly wait.

      Delete
    14. Crim guy, no relation to any party. Bringing a gun anywhere isn't something to be ashamed of, it is your right to carry. SHOWING your gun in a deposition is beyond ridiculous. The explanation is even worse, that you're small and he's big? How about you don't provoke him then you douche? There is no debate as to who started the provocation if you actually read the transcript. As to assault with deadly weapon, 10:45 look at the statute before you opine on shit you clearly do not know. The DA has no problem charging things and then figuring out the rest later, the US Attorney's Office is the place where they don't charge unless it is sewn up tight.

      Delete
    15. Crim guy also. Agree with 2:55 with the exception of the USAO being the place where they charge if they think that they can use their position as the 800 lb. gorilla to charge things and then not let facts get in the way of good plea. However not really germane since pretty clear that Pengilly's transgressions are all state related.

      Delete
    16. The transcript speaks for itself, even without the "alleged" gun draw Pengilly was being an ass during the depo. He should be sanctioned for the "dipshit" comments alone.

      Delete
  5. I talked to a court reporter who knew the reporter that was present when Pengilly did/did not brandish his gun. She said that Stuhmer was agressive too. However, I still think that Pengilly provoked the whole thing and acted inappropriately.

    On a side note, I still cannot believe the video with his wife talking about cum in her hair. If I heard my mom say something like that I would puke and then die.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BTW: Pengilly has kids with his first wife. Notice they are not mentioned anywhere in any of those videos. Estranged?

      Delete
    2. Would you allow your children to be around that mess?

      Delete
  6. 9:50 is so right. If someone accused you of pulling a gun on the record, any sensible person would realize it was on the record and say something like "What the Hell are you talking about? I don't have a gun." Or at least "wait, what?" You wouldn't say something like, "Are you ready for it?!" That might be scientifically the worst possible thing to say to deflect a claim on the record that you have a gun. Well, maybe you could say, "Yes, I have a gun, and I hope you're ready for it!" Unless there's some allegation that the reporter was biased, the record seems to show pretty clearly that a gun was drawn or at least displayed in its holster.

    10:45, I'm not seeing anything that could be characterized as "speculation." All the comments are based on the transcript and the written filings and police report. And I'm pretty sure the reporter will have noticed a gun getting pulled. These people pay attention to detail for a living. A gun getting pulled is not a minor detail. This is not very "convoluted." Why would you think Metro would just ignore this? There's an impartial, formal recording of what was said and at least one independent witness. You could not ask for a better, impartial record apart from a video. A gun getting flashed during an argument is a mere "civil dispute?" Where did you go to law school, Santa Clara?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lawyers are not supposed to lie. IF I pulled my gun in a deposition you can be damn sure I would make a proper record of it (Let the record reflect I have pulled out my Glock 21 and am now aiming it at the deponent. He has just uttered his last insult on this earth. I have just pulled the trigger. Pardon me Ms. Court Reporter, I did know it would spray like that. The deponent has fallen backward and is bleeding everywhere. It appears I hit an artery because he is spurting blood all over the table and court reporter. I am now dialing 911 to call for emergency medical help. May the Lord have mercy on his soul and mine.)

      Delete
    2. Sounds more like Cooley.

      Delete
    3. Glock 21 has plenty of stopping power. It's a man's handgun! You made me jealous. I have the G22G4 and now I want the bigger Glock, because you have it. The guys at the handgun store are going to make a commission this afternoon.

      Delete
    4. Skip the Glock and try the FNH FNS line of pistols. Like night and day.

      Delete
    5. Hey 12:03 and 12:46: Anything else you feel inadequate about that you want to compare sizes of?

      Delete
    6. People say "Yo, Humpty, you're really funny lookin'"
      that's all right 'cause I get things cookin'
      Ya stare, ya glare, ya constantly try to compare me
      but ya can't get near me
      I give 'em more, see, and on the floor, B,
      all the girls they adore me
      Oh yes, ladies, I'm really bein' sincere
      'cause in a 69 my humpty nose will tickle ya rear.
      My nose is big, uh-uh I'm not ashamed
      Big like a pickle, I'm still gettin' paid
      I get laid by the ladies, ya know I'm in charge,
      both how I'm livin' and my nose is large
      I get stoopid, I shoot an arrow like Cupid,
      I use a word that don't mean nothin', like looptid
      I sang on Doowhutchalike, and if ya missed it,
      I'm the one who said just grab 'em in the biscuits
      Also told ya that I like to bite
      Well, yeah, I guess it's obvious, I also like to write.
      All ya had to do was give Humpty a chance
      and now I'm gonna do my dance.

      Delete
    7. For those who are wondering just WTF is going on, it appears that the RJ comments, long a source of amusement and catharsis, have apparently shut down entirely. Not content to require commenters register through facebook and thus expose themselves, the RJ has disabled the ability of the public to point out their grammatical errors, their suspicious-at-times bias, and their incorrect facts. Fare thee well, Comments. Hellooooo, RJ commenters.

      Delete
    8. Thank you for the warm welcome. The elites have stepped up their war on free speech. There is a long and glorious tradition of privacy in speech. As our founding fathers knew well, it is anonymous speech that is truly free speech. Thanks again. I look forward to being a responsible poster.

      Delete
  7. 10:45, maybe you think Pengilly was trying to be romantic when he said "are you ready for it?"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krF6LpUXODc

    ReplyDelete
  8. Something is completely missing here. Let's assume a prosecution for a charge involving the gun. Does the transcript even come into evidence? If I am Pengilly's lawyer, I want to keep it out. If I am the developer, I want it to come in. Not so sure it comes into evidence. Something to think about. Generally, you can't bolster your own testimony.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the transcript definitely comes in as excited utterance exception, as well as the fact that the court reporter will be an eye witness AND custodian of records of the transcript and will be able to testify to its authenticity.

      Delete
    2. Why wouldn't it? It's his statements/admissions. Any other statements (i.e. by the deponent) merely add context those statements. Sure sounds like ADW so far...

      Delete
    3. His statements come in as part opponent if not the full transcript. If need be, the reporter gets called as a witness to authenticate. And if no transcript at all, reporter can testify as to what she observed.

      Delete
  9. Not so sure since the statements on the transcript are self serving. It will be the direct testimony of the witnesses in any prosecution that matters. Were they in fear? Did they see gun? Were they threatened by a gun? Was the gun displayed or holstered? Was there a reference to gun holstered? The deposition was a free for all with comments made and recorded. Lawyer's arguments or factual? This will be interesting as it develops.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Wouldn't it all be excited utterances, present sense impressions, and statements by a party opponent?

    ReplyDelete
  11. the transcript is sworn testimony. it is not an "out of court" statement. Hearsay is not an issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two out of the three people recorded in that transcript, including the defendant in any gun case, didn't swear to anything, and weren't subject to the penalties of perjury.

      Delete
    2. True but I still think it easily gets in.

      Delete
    3. A deposition is a court proceeding, the attorneys involved are officers of the court. They took an oath when they were licensed. They do not need to be sworn in.

      Delete
  12. Explain how a recording from someone in jail talking with someone outside of jail can be introduced, but this can't? In a criminal case it comes in, but a civil case it can of be used for impeachment.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Don't overthink it. NRS 51.035(2). A statement made by a party offered against that party is admissible. (Admission of party opponent)

    ReplyDelete