Charlie's visit to the vet was this morning. He was such a good boy as they took out his stitches, tested him for worms of all kinds (and was all negative, yay!) and gave him his rabies shot. Unfortunately, they also determined that Charlie is indeed deaf. Jon and I had been pretty sure of it before now, but the vet confirmed it. It's crushing to find that your baby has some serious genetic defect.
But I loved him from the moment I saw him and I'm not giving up on him. I've already researched deafness in dogs and was pleased to learn that they can be trained just as easily as hearing dogs using hand signals instead of your voice. He's going to start training classes in the next week or so.
Even so, I'd like to ask, has anyone out there had experience with a deaf dog? Tips? Advice? Maybe a solution to stop Charlie from thinking I'm a chew toy?
Friday, June 22, 2007
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Name Contest!
Okay, not so much a contest because there are no awards but I will give kudos to anyone that comes up with a good name for my new puppy! Jon and I had a list of names already, but none of them seem to fit this little guy and since he was a stray, the Waco Humane Society didn't have one for him either. Suggest away!
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Manners Again
I went to a summer clerk seminar/lunch thing yesterday at the federal courthouse. Most of the people there were from law firms and another handful worked there every day as judicial interns. I think I was the only one from another government agency (the Federal public defender). I was also the only one from Baylor so far as I could tell. It was a little weird because everyone else seemed to be interning all at the same firm and/or from SMU.*
After a morning of overviews of the federal courts and the magistrate courts and a little mock trial, which was rather amusing, we had lunch with a panel. All the panelists were present or former clerks and I was pleased to hear from them until the organizer read their credentials - Yale or Harvard came up in all of them. Cue the slumping into my seat in recognizance of my futility. They reminded me of those people from the beginning of Legally Blonde, when everyone's talking about their master's and PhD's while Reese Witherspoon talks about her successful mixers.
After lunch, we were given tours of the courthouse departments, including probation, bankruptcy court, the clerk's office and the US Marshal. The Marshal's office was by far the most fun. And this is where my little rant on manners begins.
The US Marshal, whose name I never caught, was a really nice guy in his 40s who happily led our group around the training facility. You know those movies where they show army or police trainees running around a mock-up or a crack house or terrorist cell safe-house with night vision and plastic guns and they shoot each other? Yeah, they have one of those in the federal courthouse. It was pretty cool. He walked us all the way through, including the stress room, which isn't very big but they turn out the lights and the AC and make you feel like you're really fighting for your life. And the Deputy Marshal was just so excited about all of this, talking about how he brings in police and army reservists (he being a reservist himself) on weekends so that they can learn things that will potentially save their lives.
He obviously loved his job and loved teaching us about how the Marshal's trained for close combat. I thought it was really sweet. Meanwhile, some of the students began snickering at his enthusiasm as he led us from room to room, admittedly taking up way more time than we had been allotted.
But still, what snobs! If I one day loved my job as much as that deputy clearly did, I would thank my lucky stars. And if I ever have the luck to become a federal judge, I want someone exactly like him to be protecting me in court.
Don't be like those jerks. Be happy for someone who enjoys their job, especially a job that entails protecting you. In short, don't act like you were born in a barn and instead act like you have some civility and good manners.
*I'm really not trying to pick on people from SMU. I was considering going there myself. One of my close friends does go there. But in Dallas, SMU is the prevalent source for law students so this is just the result of statistics.
After a morning of overviews of the federal courts and the magistrate courts and a little mock trial, which was rather amusing, we had lunch with a panel. All the panelists were present or former clerks and I was pleased to hear from them until the organizer read their credentials - Yale or Harvard came up in all of them. Cue the slumping into my seat in recognizance of my futility. They reminded me of those people from the beginning of Legally Blonde, when everyone's talking about their master's and PhD's while Reese Witherspoon talks about her successful mixers.
After lunch, we were given tours of the courthouse departments, including probation, bankruptcy court, the clerk's office and the US Marshal. The Marshal's office was by far the most fun. And this is where my little rant on manners begins.
The US Marshal, whose name I never caught, was a really nice guy in his 40s who happily led our group around the training facility. You know those movies where they show army or police trainees running around a mock-up or a crack house or terrorist cell safe-house with night vision and plastic guns and they shoot each other? Yeah, they have one of those in the federal courthouse. It was pretty cool. He walked us all the way through, including the stress room, which isn't very big but they turn out the lights and the AC and make you feel like you're really fighting for your life. And the Deputy Marshal was just so excited about all of this, talking about how he brings in police and army reservists (he being a reservist himself) on weekends so that they can learn things that will potentially save their lives.
He obviously loved his job and loved teaching us about how the Marshal's trained for close combat. I thought it was really sweet. Meanwhile, some of the students began snickering at his enthusiasm as he led us from room to room, admittedly taking up way more time than we had been allotted.
But still, what snobs! If I one day loved my job as much as that deputy clearly did, I would thank my lucky stars. And if I ever have the luck to become a federal judge, I want someone exactly like him to be protecting me in court.
Don't be like those jerks. Be happy for someone who enjoys their job, especially a job that entails protecting you. In short, don't act like you were born in a barn and instead act like you have some civility and good manners.
*I'm really not trying to pick on people from SMU. I was considering going there myself. One of my close friends does go there. But in Dallas, SMU is the prevalent source for law students so this is just the result of statistics.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Smack down
She was found guilty.
"So why is the title of this post 'Smack down', Yee?"
Because the jury took 2 1/2 hours to decide she wasn't guilty. Apparently after the rather disastrous warm-up, she did quite well during the testimony and closing. It helped that the cop was apparently quite the jerk and made the defendant's conduct not so bad. Good for her.
But the REAL smack down was given by the judge. During sentencing, the ADA recommended 60 days in jail, 90 on probation, an $800 fine and a letter of apology to the officer. The charge was (I don't think I said this in my last post) interference with a public servant. Basically she got in the cop's face. So you can imagine the look we all gave to the ADA when he recommended this sentence. The defendant simply asked for a higher fine and less jail time. It was the only time she looked like she was going to cry.
The judge looked at the defendant, looked at the ADA and laid out her sentence. Time already served (2 days in jail) and a $1 fine plus court costs.
I would have laughed my ass off if I hadn't been so shocked. And I think the ADA would have fallen over if he hadn't frozen stiff. The public defender assisting the defendant was the only one that let out a big grin.
"So why is the title of this post 'Smack down', Yee?"
Because the jury took 2 1/2 hours to decide she wasn't guilty. Apparently after the rather disastrous warm-up, she did quite well during the testimony and closing. It helped that the cop was apparently quite the jerk and made the defendant's conduct not so bad. Good for her.
But the REAL smack down was given by the judge. During sentencing, the ADA recommended 60 days in jail, 90 on probation, an $800 fine and a letter of apology to the officer. The charge was (I don't think I said this in my last post) interference with a public servant. Basically she got in the cop's face. So you can imagine the look we all gave to the ADA when he recommended this sentence. The defendant simply asked for a higher fine and less jail time. It was the only time she looked like she was going to cry.
The judge looked at the defendant, looked at the ADA and laid out her sentence. Time already served (2 days in jail) and a $1 fine plus court costs.
I would have laughed my ass off if I hadn't been so shocked. And I think the ADA would have fallen over if he hadn't frozen stiff. The public defender assisting the defendant was the only one that let out a big grin.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Pro Se
This morning I came into court fully expecting to drift off and away to another court, perhaps a felony court on the 5th floor, to find something interesting to watch. While I love watching everything in misdemeanor court, I just needed something different than my 100th jail chain case for a DWI, my 200th plea for a DWI or 10th jury selection for a DWI.
Lo and behold, the "something different" came to me - a pro se case going to jury trial. For the non-law students in the crowd, that means the defendant is defending him or herself. Now, you might be thinking, "Hey, that's their right. How dare you take such amusement in that? That's their constitutional right!"
And yes, yes it is. I don't debate that. That Constitution of ours, it's a damn good bit of writing. That said, if you are ever in court do NOT defend yourself. If you don't have money for paying a lawyer, the court provides one for you, for FREE. And while I can't speak to many other courts, the public defenders I know are excellent lawyers committed to getting their indigent clients the best of a crappy situation.
There are precious few defendants who have a honest-to-goodness valid reason for passing up on a free lawyer or the opportunity to hire their own. I can't think of any of those reasons at the moment, but I'm sure they're out there.* But if you're not one of those few, take that lawyer and thank heaven we have a system that provides everyone who wants it with counsel.
Because really, this morning when I heard there was a pro se case going to trial, I was pleased. I've seen a few of these types of defendants and they are often real characters. I thought that I'd come home and say something like, "Hey, you would never believe what this pro se defendant did... Isn't that funny in an endearing way? Luckily the public defender who was assisting her corrected her and everything worked out and she got a fair trial."
But it wasn't funny in an endearing way. It was painful and struck up motherly instincts in me that I had long thought were dead. I just wanted to take the defendant out for soup, crackers and a big mug of hot chocolate with marshmallows (ignoring the fact that it's June) and tell her that it would be all okay. Even though I have a sneaking suspicion it wouldn't be.
The jury panel didn't understand her questions during voir dire, the state made awkward objections to things that the judge had already told her she couldn't say, and her opening statement was senseless rambling compared to the ADA's short and concise statement. By the end of the morning, the jury was already looking at her like she was insane. I'm undecided whether it made it more painful that she seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that she was alienating the 6 people that would decide her fate.
I'll tell you tomorrow what that fate is. But I think we all know already.
* Maybe that guy that Prof Crim Law ended up defending at the 5th Circuit, whose original lawyer had screwed him over so badly both monetarily and legally that he was teaching himself the law for the appeal. He won that appeal based on his own appellate brief.
Lo and behold, the "something different" came to me - a pro se case going to jury trial. For the non-law students in the crowd, that means the defendant is defending him or herself. Now, you might be thinking, "Hey, that's their right. How dare you take such amusement in that? That's their constitutional right!"
And yes, yes it is. I don't debate that. That Constitution of ours, it's a damn good bit of writing. That said, if you are ever in court do NOT defend yourself. If you don't have money for paying a lawyer, the court provides one for you, for FREE. And while I can't speak to many other courts, the public defenders I know are excellent lawyers committed to getting their indigent clients the best of a crappy situation.
There are precious few defendants who have a honest-to-goodness valid reason for passing up on a free lawyer or the opportunity to hire their own. I can't think of any of those reasons at the moment, but I'm sure they're out there.* But if you're not one of those few, take that lawyer and thank heaven we have a system that provides everyone who wants it with counsel.
Because really, this morning when I heard there was a pro se case going to trial, I was pleased. I've seen a few of these types of defendants and they are often real characters. I thought that I'd come home and say something like, "Hey, you would never believe what this pro se defendant did... Isn't that funny in an endearing way? Luckily the public defender who was assisting her corrected her and everything worked out and she got a fair trial."
But it wasn't funny in an endearing way. It was painful and struck up motherly instincts in me that I had long thought were dead. I just wanted to take the defendant out for soup, crackers and a big mug of hot chocolate with marshmallows (ignoring the fact that it's June) and tell her that it would be all okay. Even though I have a sneaking suspicion it wouldn't be.
The jury panel didn't understand her questions during voir dire, the state made awkward objections to things that the judge had already told her she couldn't say, and her opening statement was senseless rambling compared to the ADA's short and concise statement. By the end of the morning, the jury was already looking at her like she was insane. I'm undecided whether it made it more painful that she seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that she was alienating the 6 people that would decide her fate.
I'll tell you tomorrow what that fate is. But I think we all know already.
* Maybe that guy that Prof Crim Law ended up defending at the 5th Circuit, whose original lawyer had screwed him over so badly both monetarily and legally that he was teaching himself the law for the appeal. He won that appeal based on his own appellate brief.
Saturday, June 2, 2007
I'm Not As Eloquent As AlicoDreams
About 7 1/2 years ago, I was in 10th grade and had Ms. Newbold for English. She was a pretty bad teacher with the wardrobe of a 15 year old. So we ignored her and did what we wanted to do during her class. (This repeated in 11th grade with Mrs. Green, who was a better teacher but not a strong enough force against 35 teenagers in the last class period of the day. I'm surprised I know what a book is.) Anyway, I had this class with some friends including a girl named Vicki. She introduced me to the guy who sat behind her, a towering Asian guy who I'd never heard speak before.
My immediate thought was, "He's kind of scary." My second thought was, "This guy must be the best poker player in the world. He's inscrutable."
Subsequent meetings went better. We started dating in 12th grade. Our friends took bets on how long we'd last. None of them won.
Years later, Jon is still a towering Asian who is very quiet and not easily angered or amused. He is still a good poker player and can even bluff me on rare occasions. But usually he doesn't. Here's to my husband of 1 year (minus a day), who still lets me win.
My immediate thought was, "He's kind of scary." My second thought was, "This guy must be the best poker player in the world. He's inscrutable."
Subsequent meetings went better. We started dating in 12th grade. Our friends took bets on how long we'd last. None of them won.
Years later, Jon is still a towering Asian who is very quiet and not easily angered or amused. He is still a good poker player and can even bluff me on rare occasions. But usually he doesn't. Here's to my husband of 1 year (minus a day), who still lets me win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
