Comments by "Joe Kelsoe II" (@nsahandler) on "Alex Jones Obliterated on Cross Because His Lawyer Sent His Cell Phone to Opposing Counsel" video.

@sarysa the respondent can easily and readily request a change of venue to another district within the same state for those exact reasons. To be denied such minor courtesy is an easy appeal on any ruling that isn't 100% in their favor.
2
Day One of Law School: You are not going to decide innocence or guilt. You are going to make sure the process to make that decision is done correctly for the sake of Justice itself. Innocence and Guilt are not your job. Making sure things are done correctly is your job."
1
@redfoxninja3173 "Defend" does not mean "lie." Defend merely means Defend. If a dude murdered someone but he was beaten like a piñata by the guards (a la Abu Ghraib), it isn't the attorney getting him off the hook - it's the guards who beat the dude to a pulp who got him off the hook. The attorney merely pointed out that persons suspected to have broken the law shouldn't be subjected to undue torture in ANY context - regardless of the person it was subjected to. It's called the Legal Process. If the law doesn't matter then the people upholding it are no different than the people breaking it.
1
Lawsuits require actual damages from the tort in question (aka "you gotta lose money from the activity") unless it's an intangible tort resulting from the issue (aka "violation of Constitutional Rights" or "pain and suffering" from the action). Federal Judges don't get elected nor do they get fired except out of gross negligence of their duties as a Federal Judge. They are solely conferred into the position by willful writ of the President of the United States and Congressional approval. They are solely conferred specifically BECAUSE of the issue you are bringing up: Bad press over your case can't hurt your future career because you will always have a fuckin career.
1
@sarysa it doesn't happen much.
1
@sarysa people who do business with a judge worth suing over will know that they are a judge.
1
People are looking at this as a "his attorney screwed him over" thing and not as a "Defense Attorney tried to get the entire case thrown out - including the judgement - on a technicality regarding discovery." The chess move they played is as distinct as night & day: Allow evidence that shouldn't be evidence to be presented into evidence by the other side. Allow evidence to taint the jury. Argue that the single mistake was so prejudicial that it should render the entire process null and void. I know you are trying to avoid anything that would expose you to a lawsuit - like suggesting that a lawyer has bad morals as opposed to incompetency in this instance - but I'm not buying it one bit.
1