THE ROBING ROOM

My colleague in the last post obviously has a axe to grind. Last time I checked there could be a huge difference in section (d) versus section (D) of a state law. As for giving this judge low marks for competence, scholarship, and punctuality - that is nonsense. Anybody who practices in federal court knows that both district court judges (Reade & Bennett) rate very high in these factors. You can disagree all you want with their rulings but to give low scores on these criteria gives you zero credibility. It never dawned on me that proving a statutory crime was a technicality. As for sentencing in general, this judge has always successfully predicted the Supreme Court's rulings in Booker, Rita, Kimbrough, Gall and Spears, while the U.S. Attorney's Office has been dead wrong in all of these and in every case applying their principles. Doesn't the fact that the U.S. Attorney's Office routinely ignores the Supreme Court law make them the true activists requiring a very conservative Supreme Court - the most conservative in modern history - to reign their lawlessness in?