Okay, I think this one is really silly, but everyone seems to be talking about the two post-it notes left in the elevators at the U.S. Attorney's Office for hours last week. Someone posted two yellow sticky notes, one that says "LaPointe has to GO!!!" and the other "Congrats on Destroying Morale, LaPointe!"
Instead of taking them down, pictures were taken and head shaking emojis were texted around town.
The anonymous note author did not explain where his or her (is that handwriting from a man or woman?) angst is coming from. And I'm not sure this is the best way to express it or get things done (feel free to email me and I will post your complaints anonymously on the blog, and I will also post Mark Lapointe's response if he'd like to write one).
Anyway, here are pictures of the two notes.
Rumpole, was this you?
41 comments:
Oh no...He cares about the office and its reputation; replaced a chief who has done nothing but rubber stamp all the bad shit the office has done for years.
Save us all! Accountability...man, what a terrible concept. Why can't he just be like OPR or the 11th and treat everything as harmless error or no problem?
If the current AUSAs cared at all about their workplace and the reputation of the office, they would thank him for trying to restore the prestige it once enjoyed in this district.
They only bring cases they want, have the facts, have the law, become state, and federal magistrate, district, and appeals court judges, go to big law or in house where they monetize their government service, and have the respect of the legal and larger community. I can see why morale is so low. Hug an AUSA today.
Probably just a defense lawyer trying to stir up shit and enjoying the show.
Deep in the heart of the King building, between stacks of boxes piled high and numbered, the fluorescent lights flickered and they met:
Consp. 1: Did you bring them?
Consp. 2: Yeah, but it wasn't easy. My secretary counts these things like my husband and his stupid steps...fuck, don't get me started.
Consp 1: Good - how many?
Consp. 2: Only four - the shutdown is coming and any more, I would have had to explain. She knows I don't mark up my goddammed 302s anyhow. Who the fuck does that anymore?
Consp. 1: I do, but I prefer colored ones - the dumb shit defense lawyers always think it means something. Mix it up...red, green, blue...they think I have some "system" in place. Dance little bitches. Dance.
Consp. 2: Dumbfuckers...the tricky part is making them think we are organized...
Consp. 1: HA!...The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist...
Consp. 2: What the fuck are you talking about? You and your goddammed movies...that doesn't even make sense. You would be a Art. III judge by now if you didn't keep saying dumb shit like that all the time.
Consp. 1: Fine....but it isn't that easy to have to explain why we didn't turn over a report, or keep track of the discovery we did or did not turn over...
Consp. 2: One word...parallegal...stop being such a gunner. How fucking hard is it to ask an agent 'what happened next', 'what did he say', 'what is "Movie" code for'...
Cossp. 2: Now, you best hope is to be a county court judge in Coral fucking Gables....
Consp. 2: You did this to yourself.
Consp. 1: Quit messing around, I have mag court in an hour and need to get these up.
Consp. 2: Do you even know what a PIP case is?...FUCK! I touched the front and back one - they can't be used....prints and DNA - you know OPR has nothing better to do.
Consp. 1: No prob - two will work....the others are standing by to click and send.
Consp. 2: Fine - get on with it....those horney fucking assholes from the 4th floor are going to be coming here soon for their "lunch meeting" and I can't tolerate them explain how they are looking for a missing DEA 6 or whatever again....
Consp. 1: Here you go...bye...call me later...
Morale is low, but that is largely attributable to LaPointe’s unpopular decision to call employees back to the office 4 days a week, thus ending the more generous policy put in place by his predecessor. Morale wasn’t helped by the confrontational way in which that change or any of his other changes were messaged. It certainly wasn’t helped by the cringy introduction LaPointe gave upon AG Garland’s visit to the office last month. It was embarrassing. So, while post it notes may not be the most grown-up way to communicate frustration, such frustration isn’t unique to whoever did this.
They sound like a bunch of prima donnas.
You mean you have to show up to work to have a job?! And to boot…4 of 5 workdays!!!! Yikes. Man. Next thing he will be asking you to show up to court on time and prep for trial.
How do you think it will go over when he announces Paul Petruzzi is the next Chief of Major Crimes?
Or, that Major Crimes will now be known as Normal Stuff?
What makes him different than all those who came before him? Could that be it?
Omg omg. So many thoughts. First no- it’s not me. They confiscate my post-its at security because of a long ago troubling incident. Second - who is the genius who has gone analog and turned the elevators into an anonymous chat group? Well done sir or madam. Third- here is my advice to our US attorney- embrace it. Put a post it board in the elevator along with e board and encourage gossipy graffiti. If he did that he would be legendary.
Btw give 10:21 guest blogger status asap. S/he is a federal Rumpole in the making. Those types of genius comments belong on my blog. They can email me for guest blogger status anytime they want and I pay more than you- 7-11 hot dogs and big gulps to start.
@10:21 well done. standing rhythmic prison clap.
Markus you say you will post an anonymous response from someone with knowledge so here goes. People in the office are scared of Mark Lapointe. When you speak to him he can be abrasive and dismissive. He makes you wait for hours to meet him and acts like you are lucky to have his attention. He is indecisve on big decisions and impulsive on small ones. He cares only about what the judgees think about him and his personal reputation more than he cares about the attorneys and the office. his second in command is a person who has no personality and no people skills. this person is actually cruel and has turned everyone in the office against both of them. this has nothing to do with working more hours and everything to do with the two people at the helm who have destroyed the morale within the office, Thank you for posting
Wait?! He takes his time on big decisions and makes quick decisions on small ones?
Should we include s. 2 in count 1 or just leave it out?
Put it in.
Slow down, you’re being a bit impulsive.
Should we seek the death penalty or not?
Well, can you make a presentation on the aggravating factors so I can weigh the mitigation package?
Dude, get off the fence.
The commenter at 8:21 is exactly right. Mark is “leading” through fear and intimidation and Mike D is doing him no favors as his First Assistant. The mood in the office is miserable.
If I can be serious for a moment, it sounds like it's not so much what he is doing as HOW he is doing it- which are valuable lessons not every leader learns. So for example, how did he break the news about four days in the office? Did he call everyone to a meeting and talk about winding down from working at home and making the changes which he acknowledged would be hard after working from home for so long and that he was phasing it in? Or did he issue a cold memo to all employees "effective so and so date all employees shall be required to work from the office four days a week?"
Style counts and from the outside looking in, it seems this is a stylistic issue.
Janet Reno used to walk into court and just sit with prosecutors and watch and have their back. I once saw some idiot judge scream at a prosecutor for not offering the plea he wanted and asking for a trial call Janet and complain- which caused her to come to the court, sit next to her assistant and tell the Judge she was trying the case with him.
Style matters and a bad style is probably the quickest way to draining morale.
My two cents.
We could actually try to figure out the issue(s), or we (like 11:49 AM) could just assume it's because of race/ethnicity. Your welcome.
11:34 that's laughable. Random and anonymous blog posters are going to "figure out the issues?" It's disappointing that David allows these types of anonymous attacks to be posted. Remember, these AUSAs who are complaining about this supposed reign of terror are those who stand up every day in court and ask judges to put or keep people in prison.
Why isn’t anyone talking about the anonymous post-it notes at the FPD’s office about Caruso? Talk about ruling through fear.
Post-its in the elevator seem like a pretty childish way to express dissatisfaction with leadership. Certainly not what I would expect from the same people who are supposed to be making critical judgment calls regarding the liberty of their fellow citizens.
1:11 advocating that people be put and kept in prison where appropriate is in a prosecutor's job description. You got a problem with that, then you have a problem with our social contract.
Nice strawman argument 1:22. My point was that those entrusted with that awesome responsibility should be above posting grammar school post-it notes in a public building to complain about leadership. Be better essentially.
Also, I think you're confusing the social contract with our constitutional form of government that gives the Executive Branch the power to prosecute. I have no "problem" with our founding document.
But what social contract are you talking about, by the way? Hobbes, Locke, Rosseau? Someone else? The social contract embodied in the Declaration of Independence?
The social contract that allowed humans to own other humans? That didn't allow women the right to vote and own property? That allowed the government to take land from indigenous peoples?
Or is there an evolving social contract? Perhaps you would say our social contract has been modified by changing gender roles, technology, new models of work, aging, and the perils of climate change.
Apparently, AUSAs believe Mr. Lapointe has broken the new social contract that only requires lawyers to come to the office 3x per week. The new social contract also endorses leaving anonymous post-it notes in an elevator rather than speaking with colleagues, supervisors, and leadership.
Despite being a minority that didn’t grow up in a privileged environment, Lapointe shows no sympathy towards the minority, or any, support staff that have a long commute to Downtown Miami, which is further complicated by family obligations and low salaries. Flexible telework policies allow the office’s mission to be accomplished while not disrupting the lives of the dedicated support staff that the office heavily relies on. No one will be surprised if there is a gradual exodus of qualified employees.
2:56- you believe it was a "support staffer" who left the post-it notes?
2:53 Even Wikipedia knows what was meant: "Social contract arguments typically are that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority (of the ruler, or to the decision of a majority) in exchange for protection of their remaining rights or maintenance of the social order." Your point insinuates that AUSAs unduly treat people harshly and then complain about reasonable workplace inconveniences. Be better next time.
5:14 this is the problem with blog postings. I did not mean what you think I meant, if you actually really think that.
What I meant is what I said: they have an awesome responsibility and have to be strong advocates for their client. That strikes me at odds with leaving post-it notes in an elevator to complain about leadership.
This is what I wrote: "not what I would expect from the same people who are supposed to be making critical judgment calls regarding the liberty of their fellow citizens."
Please point me to the part where I "insinuated" that they treat people "harshly."
Sounds like you are projecting. Read better next time.
"302s"? Is that something from a Grisham novel because you don't get those IRL discovery. Unless those are inside the 3 years of wiretap transcripts slammed on the defense table 5 minutes before scheduled jury trial by a sneering AUSA.
"Your honor, may I confer with my client in light of this recent discovery filing."
"Of course...there's a few cases I can call. Talk with your client and let's recall the case in, *checks watch*, 14 minutes and then he can plea or pick."
That office is a mess and has been going down for years, long before this guy came in, with a rapid drop a couple US Attys ago. Everyone in town knows it except for the same recycled management there, which why everyone outside the office appreciates him removing the criminal chief and deputy chief. Level and quality of cases, down. quality of lawyering, down, and everyone knows that a bunch of people were hired on the friends and family plan a couple US Attys ago, and it's going to be years before that gets fixed.
Someone mention something about him caring about what the judges have been saying. But have you seen some of the orders? Judge Rosenbaum, calling out the office on their attorneys in an opinion. Judge Altman calling out the office on their attorneys in an order. Judge Gayles, etc.
I also hear no one answers the phones there, staff or attorneys, apparently because they're not in. And you wonder why he wants people to come to the office.
wow! "post its" around the office, throwing shade with terms like "abrasive" and "cringy". all because he asks people to come to the office 3 days on week 1 and 4 days on week 2. what messaging would you like? How about: COME TO WORK! i guess the honeymoon is over, but what an embarrassment for that office to air out this stuff like that, and you know from the wording it's coming from the top management (makes me wait for hours..., really?). some of these individuals make close to $200K a year, with liberal leave and benefits, and they get like that because they're asked to come into work? these people make charging and sentencing decisions?
that right here is what's wrong with this country, people so entitled. this guy better have someone test-taste his food when he eats over there.
The commenter at 12:20 is exactly right. Perhaps Lapointe cares what judges think because the judges are (rightfully) criticizing the quality of the office and its attorneys in published opinions. AUSAs are upset that Lapointe is trying to change the culture that has resulted in the steady decline of their office's reputation. Make it make sense.
“Remember, these AUSAs who are complaining about this supposed reign of terror are those who stand up every day in court and ask judges to put or keep people in prison.“
Sounds like Lapointe needs to start firing lawyers. I'm sure Marcus has a list.
Maybe a few need to get disbarred too, fired is not enough.
I just wanted to clear the record, as someone who has been at that office for many years, the office is not as bad as may be reflected by the actions of some. Yes, it was embarrassing that people put “post it” notes bashing the USA, and it’s clear it was set up to end up on the blog. But that’s not reflective of the entire office. Most of us are professional and dedicated people who care about what we do. Most of us also are buying into what the USA is trying to do, which is to build upon the tradition of excellence that the office has built for years. He’s one of the classiest, most caring and thoughtful people we’ve ever had. However, he’s also one who demands accountability and is blunt about that, and people don’t like that.
From his first speech he told us that he wanted a change of culture. He wanted us to live up to the tradition of the office, and that our performance on paper and in court needed to reflect that. He also told us that his most important accomplishment in the Marine Corps was not his time in war but was a certificate of perfect attendance his years there. I still remember that, and it was the most inspiring thing I ever heard. That should have been a sign that he was going hold people accountable, at the very least, require people to come into the office.
He does have shortcomings. Willy Ferrer used to come down to the floors a lot, smiling away. So did Alex Acosta, and people liked that. At the same time, the current USA goes to trial to support his trial attorneys, something the criminal leadership hadn’t done much of, or they would have seen some of the issues of the last few years. The USA probably could spend more time visiting the staff too. He also seems to wear his frustration on his sleeve at times. So, it’s a mixed bag, as I’m sure there are others.
But it took a lot of courage for him to change the leadership of the criminal division. Those were good people but didn’t serve the division well for years because they were entrenched. And they also knew that they could outlast him and didn’t need to follow through on his agenda of raising the performance level of the office. Removing those people however comes with cost both inside and outside the office. Don’t be surprised if more “stories” come out, both personally and professionally – this is a good time for him to ditch any side girlfriend if he has one.
He also faces a generational dilemma on the work ethic front. A lot of folks want to be able to do their work in the least burdensome manner since the pandemic. For some who live in the Gables, for instance, they would like to roll out of bed at 10:00am and walk up to the local coffee shop in their PJs at Miracle Mile and go through transcripts over bagel and mocha, while others would like to go to a park near the beach with their dog while they crank out a motion/response, and come into the office as they please for a few hours a week. Those people will fight him hard on having to come in the office on a more regular basis. I don’t think he’ll give in on that fight, because he’s told us as much, and it seems that he’s willing to lose people instead of bending on that. That too may be a shortcoming.
It should be mentioned that he shows up every day to work in Miami, rain or shine, with a full suit and tie, his briefcase in hand (central casting if ever) - I believe he lives way up north in Broward.
With some exception (not an insignificant number), we have a good office, but one that needs recalibrating. The USA is trying to do that recalibrating, and I wish him the best of luck, but he's got his work cut out for him. I thought this needed to be said.
Most thoughtful comment ever. Thank you.
@ 2:56 above.
It's bad enough USAO colleagues showed such bad judgement, but then have stooped to new low as to use the US Atty's race as an argument against his policy, because as a "minority" he should not have required more in person work because of how it affects the staff, made up substantially of other "minorities" like him. He should be more "sensitive" to that as a Black man (see above at 2:56pm).
I always felt some low-level resentment under the surface for him (from a very small segment who have never had someone of his background telling them what to do), but this comment exposed it, and that's unfortunate because there shouldn't be a different standard for him, and he should be applauded for not focusing on racial favoritism in his policies.
There is resentment for his success too, having bootstrapped himself from poverty. One of the people recently removed from management could sometimes be heard out loud how contemptuous she was of the US Atty because he's made so much money in the private practice, for expecting these high standards from gov lawyers who don't make as much money. Expecting error-free memos and pleadings is something for private practice or a different time, and the US Atty is out of touch in his demands for excellence.
This is wrong at so many levels, not what I wish these few (very few) colleagues would be putting out there.
AUSAs complaining about having to come into office to do their $180k (plus for many of them) job is exactly the problem. Fire/let them all go!
Sorry to call Alex out (seems like a nice guy), but when Acosta showed up the hiring dropped off. Suddenly only Ivy League folks were being hired...and most to the "Ivy league" hires they had were their weakest links... and if not weakest, than definitely laziest. Not all, but most of the ill prepared and unreasonable AUSAs were Ivy league losers. I'm betting they were bottom of their class, could not cut it in private sector (unlike DOM and some of the blog readers, and grew up entitled as heck... however I acknowledge DOM grew up entitled! LOL)
I'd rather see the next generation of former state DAs/defense attorneys with trial experience and some actual life experience get hired into the office. I'd like to see AUSAs have the willingness to go to trial.. I'd lie to see experienced AUSAs be given the discretion to make plea agreements they believe is fair and appropriate. Not the usual, "the office policy..."
For those complaining about getting FD-302s late... agree the rules should be changed so they are provided earlier... but current rules are ripe for abuse.
Probably a CSO... handwriting too easy to match....no AUSA would be that stupid or 🤪 in that building. Now, in Miami... maybe... from everything I've heard about that courthouse the handful of AUSAs they have, are very happy and even come to work everyday (as opposed to Miami the telework haven)
Prozac helps
Some prima donna with fake tears can’t write and doesn’t want to proof read?
Thanks Lynn for bringing this to the blog. You'll always be our Deputy Chief, no matter what!
Post a Comment