taking walks through pdf's. testing how far the playback speed slider can go. if i'm wrong lmk.
NY
Joined September 2018
- Tweets2.6K
- Following1.2K
- Followers560
- Likes72.1K
Pinned Tweet
Thread of other similar "orders": nitter.gq/dotdotslashstar/status…
Judge Kaplan is allowing Chirayu Rana's attorneys to withdraw, over Hajdini's objection. Makes sense, since they have consented to continued jurisdiction over them for the pending sanctions motion.
Currently at issue for sanctions is a recording of a phone call Rana's previous attorney had with his sister. According to withdrawing attorney Norinsberg, this call provides a basis for his believing her (now recanted) affirmation.
Rana is willing to produce this call transcript, but JPMC claims that privilege is now also waived as to *all related notes, drafts, and other interviews*.
Chase and Hajdini both just filed SPICY oppositions to Chirayu Rana's attorney's withdrawal motion.
They claim that Rana's sister, and his friend Allan Flott have recanted their previous sworn statements, which formed the bulk of the evidence for Rana's claim.
And, his withdrawing attorneys were notified of this *prior* to filing Rana's latest amended complaint, which continues to use their statements.
----
Summarizing the call with the sister's attorney, JPMC attorney writes:
> [H]er brother, Chirayu Rana, came to her to ask her to present the statements in the affirmation as if they were facts within her own personal knowledge, but they were not. You stated that [she] was told by her brother the affirmation would not be used in court or disclosed publicly.
A weird thing about NY is that judges *can* explicitly consider factors like prior firearm use and seriousness of the crime when setting bail.
But, it's true that, uniquely among the states, these factors cannot be considered for reasons of public safety -- judges must consider dangerousness, but only if it (somehow!) relates to flight risk.
If this doesn't make sense, you're not alone:
Bronx County Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Zimmerman, very unhappy with this situation, laid it out on a 2023 opinion:
- we must only consider flight risk
- the legislature keeps adding factors to consider
- they don't directly relate to flight risk
- they do directly relate to dangerousness
so therefore:
- "Judges can consider dangerousness, but only as it goes to likelihood to return to court"
- "The legislature is instructing us that dangerous people […] are less likely to return to court"
He suggests (and I don't know enough to comment, but it seems reasonable) that this is really a way for lawmakers to implement community safety bail standards that people generally expect, without having to explicitly allow safety as a statutory bail eligibility factor.
People v Santiago, 2023 NY Slip Op 50770(U) nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseri…
Probably also worth noting that there are more factors judges are allowed to consider when *revoking* bail, like being charged with certain new crimes, intimidating witnesses, violating an order of protection, etc.
These do not have to be justified in terms of flight risk.
ALT § 530.60 Certain modifications of a securing order https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/CPL/530.60
THE COURT: Yes. Can I pause and just tell you, I appreciate, on behalf of Black people, your White saviordom.
MR. YOUNG: Your Honor, again, I'm not White.
THE COURT: Okay. White-appearing.
MR. YOUNG: […] the Court appears to be injecting my supposed race --
THE COURT: Oh, is it reverse racism now?
Judge Ada Brown hid the transcript of her wild by calling it a "Highly Sensitive Document".
This is a term with a specific meaning. In N.D. Tex. it means:
> Information that may be of interest to the intelligence service of a hostile foreign government
Tyrone Blackburn defamation suits: it's been 120 days since these were filed, so the ordinary time to serve has passed. I guess he is abandoning some of the claims.
- TMZ, Fox, Harvey Levin, Charles Latibeaudiere: not seved
- Reed Smith, Ian Turetsky, process server James Hunt: served // Hunt's LLC, private investigator Nicholas Palmeri: not served
Too bad, I was curious how his filing the TMZ suit one day past the SOL would play out.
The Joe Tacopina lawsuit is the only one progressing. There is a MTD pending, with a Nov 24 return date.
There are also related suits against Complex and The Source, but he has a few weeks left to serve those.
so what was this crazy hearing actually supposed to be about? judge brown accused attorney young of violating a previous order by posting docs on his site. does she have a point? let's see.
anyway, aside from the argument about what exactly is on his site, young refers in the hearing to more substantive 1A arguments in his response brief.
unfortunately, ECF 232 is still under seal and isn't included in the mandamus appendices, but would be interesting to read.
it does seem like young wanted to make a further record in the hearing, but the judge was making it very difficult. and she gish galloped all over the place with her insane additional gripes, so i cannot fault young for anything he did (or did not) do w.r.t. the merits of the OSC.
and to be clear, imo the only person judge brown can fault for the sealed docs becoming public is the author of the defective sealing order, i.e. herself.
the underlying case has been going on for at least 8 years so we're not going to get into the whole backstory. what's important is that, late last year, judge brown had reason to believe a motion to recuse her is about to be filed. in anticipation, she ordered that any recusal briefing be filed under seal.
i couldn't find any justification for this order. i don't think the order's propriety will end up mattering though.
Should add that the investigative committee reports:
> a concern that Judge Brown suffers from a mental condition that renders her unable to discharge the duties of office.
Among their findings so far (pics 3,4) is a bunch of bizarre and paranoid behavior. I'm not sure it's wise to try to read much about her politics from her behavior.
