|
Who does the city lawyer work for?
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 14 2016, 09:27 AM (209 Views)
|
|
Quasimodo
|
Jan 14 2016, 09:27 AM
Post #1
|
|
- Posts:
- 38,130
- Group:
- Tier1
- Member
- #17
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2008
|
- Quote:
-
http://tinyurl.com/jdh6zuu
Chicago city lawyer resigns over claim he hid evidence in deadly police shooting January 05, 2016
CHICAGO – A top city of Chicago lawyer stepped down Monday after a federal judge accused him of hiding evidence in a fatal police shooting, the latest allegation of wrongdoing amid ongoing scrutiny of how the city deals with such cases.
(snip)
Monday's 72-page opinion from U.S. District Judge Edmond Chang was part of a civil lawsuit brought by relatives of Darius Pinex, a black man, who was shot and killed by police during a 2011 traffic stop in Chicago.
(snip)
"Attorneys who might be tempted to bury late-surfacing information need to know that, if discovered, any verdict they win will be forfeit and their clients will pay the price," the judge wrote. He said Jordan Marsh, a senior corporation counsel, also later lied about when he was aware of the evidence.
The judge also accused the law department, which defends city employees accused of wrongdoing, of shoddy record-keeping, saying it contributed to the problem in the Pinex case.
The city law department announced Marsh's resignation later Monday, saying it "does not tolerate any action that would call into question the integrity of the lawyers who serve" Chicago. It also said it was reviewing its training and evidence-gathering procedures.
But a lawyer for the Pinex family, Steve Greenberg, said Marsh's actions reflect on the city law department as a whole. He accused the department of not acting quickly enough when it realized its attorney wasn't forthcoming about critical evidence.
"It shows the city hasn't just fought to protect officers, it also fights tooth and nail to protect its lawyers," he said. "I don't think they cared that (Pinex) got killed, they didn't care what the truth was and they didn't care they cheated (with the evidence)."
(snip)
|
|
|
| |
|
Quasimodo
|
Jan 14 2016, 09:29 AM
Post #2
|
|
- Posts:
- 38,130
- Group:
- Tier1
- Member
- #17
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2008
|
What did the Durham city attorney know about the lax case, and when did he know it?
What did Duke's in-house attorneys know about the lax case, and when did they know it?
Did Duke rely, or not rely, on advice given them by their in-house attorneys? Did Duke's attorneys consult, or not consult, on Duke's legal strategies, throughout the criminal and civil cases?
If any of the above knew of wronging, wasn't it their professional duty to report same to the Bar?
|
|
|
| |
|
Quasimodo
|
Jan 14 2016, 09:32 AM
Post #3
|
|
- Posts:
- 38,130
- Group:
- Tier1
- Member
- #17
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2008
|
Yeah, Duke had one of these, too:
- Quote:
-
http://andjusticeforall.dconc.gov/gallery_images/duke-university-school-of-law-3/

The Duke Law Building, pictured here, was dedicated on Law Day, 1963, with Chief Justice of the United States, the Honorable Earl Warren, as the principal speaker. Since then, the building has undergone an expansion and renovation from 2004 to 2008 to update its amenities and to give it a more compelling architectural presence, more in keeping with the architectural style of the Duke campus.
The teaching of law began at Normal College, the precursor to Duke University, in 1850. Initially conceived as a required course for all students, it became its own area of study to prepare students for the profession of law in 1868. The school’s president, Braxton Craven, taught both law and divinity singlehandedly. Following President Craven’s death, the instruction of law was abandoned, until it again became an academic requirement in 1887. The School of Law was reopened in 1891, only to be discontinued three years later for financial reasons.
The school was not established permanently until 1904, with an endowment set up by James Buchanan and Benjamin Newton Duke. Enrollment grew to around 100 students at the time Trinity became Duke University in the mid-1920s. This number dropped precipitously during World War II, forcing Duke and Wake Forest law schools to combine for the duration of the war. After the war the school was faced with the opposite problem; returning men flooded the school, causing a “”G.I. bulge”” that at its peak reached of 300. In 1961 the first African-American students were admitted. To protest the North Carolina Bar Association’s denial of membership to its African-American graduates, the school severed ties with the Bar Association until applicants were accepted without discrimination based on race in 1969. In recent decades, the school has developed an international presence and grown in number of students, course offerings, and areas of the law included in the curriculum.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|