Daylight Saving Time – It’s OFF Again
[Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
Just in case you were wondering:
Now, we have reverted back to Central Standard Time (CST) here . . . rather than Central Daylight Time (CDT).
Today at 2:00 a.m.,* Daylight Saving Time officially ended in Effingham, Illinois (and elsewhere), although DST is scheduled to return again on March 14, 2010.
Although its effects on energy consumption and health otherwise are debateable, the implementation of Daylight Saving Time appears to reduce traffic fatalities – especially where pedestrians are concerned – according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
*[Once upon a time, I was an "overnight" radio personality. At 1:59 a.m. (the second time around), I would thank listeners for spending "the longest hour of (their lives) with me." Not that I was in any way boring. ZZZzzz].
Scott Ealy
To Indict A Ham Sandwich
The Suspect - Innocent Looking Enough?
[Image By SRE: Joe Sippers]
In what totalitarian nation might one expect to find a secret government process whereby small groups of citizens are summoned together behind closed doors to indict a person on felony criminal charges?
HINT: This process usually occurs with no notice to (and, therefore, no attendance by) the defendant . . . and outside of the presence of any judge, non-prosecuting attorney, or witness for the defense!
The process is referred to as a grand jury proceeding - a virtually unknown prosecutorial manuever today outside of the United States of America.
ANSWER: Yes, we do have the process here.
In my home county, our local newspaper regularly trumpets area indictments that are handed down a couple of times each month.
But readers are never made wise to the fact that our local grand jurors:
- rarely ask questions, as grand jurors are authorized to do;
- usually hear from only one witness - usually a law enforcement officer;
- practically never subpoena witnesses, as grand jurors are authorized to do;
- usually never see the defendant or defense counsel; and
- practically never investigate the allegations, as grand jurors are authorized to do.
England abandoned the grand jury system in 1933. Canada abolished the concept more than a quarter of a century ago.
As a wise judge once commented, in reflection on the lack of constitutional safeguards in our own grand jury process: “You could indict a ham sandwich.”
But it’s hard to get the general public – much less your clients – to understand that (on the issue of guilt) being indicted by a grand jury means . . . something very close to . . . absolutely NOTHING!
Because being indicted SOUNDS prejudicially awful!
[This will continue to be the case so long as judges give significant weight to the bare fact of indictment in the setting of bond amounts].
It seems way past time to abolish the government’s secretive “rubber stamp” grand jury option, in favor of a guaranteed public preliminary hearing.
Because the world is—the world should be watching.
Scott Ealy
Pro-Life Lite
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
There aren’t many real pro-lifers left in my hometown anymore.
Sure, there are the political “pro-lifers” who publicly proclaim their politics. They adore babies, and they show up at a few breakfasts to pledge allegiance to politicians. And – publicly at least - they “pray for America.”
Assign a name or a face to a flawed human being, however, and these same ”pro-lifers” miraculously morph to . . . pro-life lite.
As in pro-life not so much.
Oppose the death penalty or a war . . . ever?
“You’ve gotta be kidding, right?”
Or, a little bit closer to home:
Publicly (or even privately) speak out againt a church’s infatuation with alcohol, which is a huge contributing factor in unwanted pregnancies, domestic violence, birth defects, drunken driving, depression, suicide, and other drug involvement?
“Sorry, but I’ve been assigned to wash the communion chalice that night (week, month, year, life).”
Funny, I have heard some of these same people proclaim that Barack Obama “isn’t a Christian” due to . . . ahem, policy inconsistencies.
Well, if the same principle applies . . .
Like I said, there aren’t many real pro-lifers left in my hometown.
Scott Ealy
Teen Driving Hours – We’re Still Confused
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
It will soon be two years since the “effective date” of the multi-faceted Public Act 95-310, which, among other aspects, invalidates the driving privileges of many teen drivers in Illinois during certain otherwise legal late night hours.
Huh? Confused already? The confusion is justified.
That’s why I sent out a public News Release in January of 2008 - a document in which I found substantial value this weekend . . . as the parent of an almost 17-year old driver.
NOTE: Be especially mindful of the many exceptions that apply to the teen “driving curfew.”
(a-1) If the licensee is less than 18 years of age, unless one of the exceptions in subsection (a-2) apply, the license shall, as a matter of law, be invalid for the operation of any motor vehicle during the following times:
(A) Between 11:00 p.m. Friday and 6:00 a.m. Saturday;
(B) Between 11:00 p.m. Saturday and 6:00 a.m. on Sunday; and
(C) Between 10:00 p.m. on Sunday to Thursday, inclusive, and 6:00 a.m. on the following day.
(a-2) The driver’s license of a person under the age of 18 shall not be invalid as described in subsection (a-1) of this Section if the licensee under the age of 18 was:(1) accompanied by the licensee’s parent or guardian or other person in custody or control of the minor;
(2) on an errand at the direction of the minor’s parent or guardian, without any detour or stop;
(3) in a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel;
(4) going to or returning home from an employment activity, without any detour or stop;
(5) involved in an emergency;
(6) going to or returning home from, without any detour or stop, an official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults and sponsored by a government or governmental agency, a civic organization, or another similar entity that takes responsibility for the licensee, without any detour or stop;
(7) exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution, such as the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, and the right of assembly; or
(8) married or had been married or is an emancipated minor under the Emancipation of Minors Act [750 ILCS 30/1 et eq.]
Excerpt from 625 ILCS 5/6-110 (2008)
Scott Ealy
Not Really United . . . When It Comes To The Practice Of Law
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
In many ways, my profession is behind the times.
For example, did you know that most attorneys are admitted to the practice of law in only one state?
This means we cannot appear in another state’s courtrooms without special pro hac vice permission and that we generally would commit malpractice if we were to offer advice on matters outside of our “territory.”
On the Legal Rebels website, attorney and consultant Bruce MacEwan describes our current system (of 51 separate legal jurisdictions) as feudalistic, antiquated, and outmoded.
Scott Ealy
Two More Peas In A Pod?
A repeat of history?
Ooh, no thank you!
Vaguely Related “Peas In A Pod” Post: “Chief” Illiniwek / Bart Simpson.
Scott Ealy
Truth . . . Or Propaganda?
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
Generally speaking, people who speak the truth will not resort to propaganda.
In society today, it’s important to know when you’re being sold “a bill of goods.”
Witness one propaganda technique frequently being employed by Republican propagandists.
Many of them won’t candidly announce their Republican status. But, they give themselves away in references to something they call the “Democrat Party” . . . rather than the Democratic Party.
It’s their smirking, petty little signal to one another. The propagandists deny only the Democratic Party its chosen name.
From Wikipedia:
On the February 26, 2009, edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews, Republican Representative Darrell Issa referred to “a Democrat Congress.” The host, Chris Matthews, took exception, saying:
Well, I think the Democratic Party calls itself the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party. Do we have to do this every night? Why do people talk like this? Is this just fighting words to get the name on?
Issa denied that he intended to use “fighting words.” Matthews replied, “They call themselves the Democratic Party. Let’s just call people what they call themselves and stop the Mickey Mouse here – save that for the stump.”
In March 2009, after Representative Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) repeatedly used the phrase “Democrat Party” when questioning U.S. Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag, Representative Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) said:
I’d like to begin by saying to my colleague from Texas that there isn’t a single member on this side of the aisle that belongs to the “Democrat Party.” We belong to the Democratic Party. So the party you were referring to doesn’t even exist. And I would just appreciate the courtesy when you’re referring to our party, if you’re referring to the Democratic Party, to refer to it as such.
One of my Democratic colleagues analyzed this behavior recently and proposed a response:
It’s a communication signal. But if your behavior choice is a childish playground tactic, why should my behavior choice be to listen to whatever else is coming out of your mouth?
You won’t agree to call me by name. Fine. Then why should I take seriously anything that you have to say?
Best Advice: When the propaganda comes on, think for yourself and turn it off (or walk away)!
Scott Ealy
Who did this?
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
My client’s voice rang flat that morning, as he confided that a friend – a young woman from our town – was dead from a heroin overdose.
Earlier in the year, a young man whom I knew personally . . . suffered the same fate (via the same drug).
Photo By Nathaniel Paluga
Who’s to blame? Who’s responsible for these deaths?
For starters, I am. For what I have done, and (more-to-the-point) for what I have left undone – in my personal life and in my professional life as an attorney.
But standing at my side - equally blameworthy - are the judgemental ”pro-lifers” who sit otherwise silent . . . as they worship at the altar of The Church of the Immaculate Beer Can.
Because generally speaking you just don’t get to Point B in our town . . . without first spending significant time at the beckoning entry port of Point A.
Sometimes the mirror casts a harsh reflection.
Scott Ealy
I’m A Dude, He’s A Dude, She’s A—Hey, Wait A Minute!
Kel Mitchell Portrays "Ed" in Nickelodeon / Paramount's "Good Burger" (1997)
From our always busy ”Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction” Department:
Police arrested one Jack Kaiser (alias “John Stone,” alias “Jack Stones,” alias “Jennifer May”) this week at a public high school in Marion, Illinois.
According to the Southern Illinoisan, Ms. Kaiser, 24, attempted to register herself as a 15-year old male student at Marion High School.
Suspicious education officials contacted law enforcement authorities and also conducted their own investigation, which eventually led to a telltale social networking website (since taken down).
“Something just didn’t seem right,” said one school staffer. “He (?) looked older than 15 and didn’t answer questions the way a 15-year old would. . . .”
Although the exact charge filed against her appears to be about as ambiguous as Ms. Kaiser herself, the 24-year old is scheduled for a preliminary hearing in Williamson County felony court on Monday, October 26th, with a public defender.
Vaguely Relevant Video: “We’re All Dudes” - Kel Mitchell & Less Than Jake
Scott Ealy
Your “Religious” Imposition Is Not Christian
[Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net]
Many moons ago – on October 09, 1635 - a good man named Roger Williams was banished from the colony of Massachusetts – for preaching that civil government had no right to interfere in religious affairs.
As we all learned later, Roger Williams was right.
[G]od requireth not a uniformity of religion to be enacted and enforced in any civil state; which enforced uniformity (sooner or later) is the greatest occasion of civil war, ravishing of conscience, persecution of Christ Jesus in his servants, and of the hypocrisy and destruction of millions of souls.
. . .
[A]n enforced uniformity of religion throughout a nation or civil state confounds the civic and religious [and] denies the principles of Christianity and civility[.]
“A Plea For Religious Liberty” by Roger Williams
Why is it that some people still don’t get it?
Scott Ealy
