"[You are] a few French Fries short of a Happy Meal."

That's what a lawyer (a partner from McDermott Will & Emery -- Chicago) said to bankruptcy Judge Isicoff here in the SDFLA. Here's the whole story and the transcript from Abovethelaw.com.

Wilk jury deliberating...

The Miami Herald and Sun-Sentinel have stories about the Kenneth Wilk trial going to the jury. Closing arguments were heated... From the Herald:

Wilk's home had been targeted in the past by gay bashers and Wilk had been threatened over the Internet, [Defense lawyer Bill] Matthewman said.
''They're busting into a man's house, his castle, and they know he has hearing loss,'' Matthewman said.
But prosecutors contend Wilk ambushed the officers that morning, saying he was obsessed with police officers and stockpiled guns for just such a day.
Prosecutors have said Wilk repeatedly indicated he wanted to harm police officers for what he saw as unfair child-pornography charges against his partner, Jones.
''No, the defendant didn't know the day they'd come,'' prosecutor Neil Karadbil said during closing arguments. ``No, he didn't know the time, but he was ready when they did.''
Wilk has simply made up excuses for his actions, Karadbil said, criticizing the defense's contention that Wilk suffered from severe hearing loss and AIDS-related dementia.
Wilk suggested Jones use the same defense after Jones' was arrested, Karadbil said.
''He thinks he can explain away everything in the case,'' Karadbil said. ``He thinks he's the smartest man in the room, but what he is, more than anything, is a liar.''
If convicted of the murder charge, Wilk could receive the death penalty.
The panel of eight women and four men began deliberations just after 3:30 p.m. Shortly after, the jurors asked U.S. District Judge James I. Cohn for a transcript of Wilk's testimony. Cohn told jurors there was not a copy of the transcript available for them and to rely on their recollection. The jury will resume deliberations today.

The prosecution got so upset, it made a completely inappropriate remark that will be looked at very carefully by the 11th Circuit if there is a conviction. From the Sun-Sentinel:

One comment the prosecutor made caused the defense to ask for a mistrial.Kastrenakes had ridiculed the defense's experts and remarked about how they were being paid by taxpayers."Where's our tax dollars going -- to pay them?" Kastrenakes asked the jury.The defense objected. Later, when the jury was out of the courtroom, U.S. District Judge James Cohn said jurors could interpret the comment to mean that the defense was wasting jurors' money on Wilk's defense.Kastrenakes said his comment was about the "value we are getting as citizens." The defense noted that taxpayers pay for prosecution witnesses too.The judge said he had to tell jurors to ignore the comment."That is a totally improper argument and you are to disregard it," Cohn told the jury.Wilk has a constitutional right to have the court pay for expert witnesses and the way the money was spent was not an issue in the case, Cohn explained.

Exciting news!

I am excited to announce that we are the new affiliate blog of the Daily Business Review. The look and feel of the blog will remain the same (although they are planning on spiffing it up in the near future). More about this soon...

How to catch the bad guys...

Laurie Stein interviews Dan Fridman (here's the video and the print version), who will be returning shortly to this District as an AUSA, about a new training seminar on how to catch internet pornographers:

"Project Safe Childhood", based in South Florida, is the he first conference of its kind. It brought local, state and federal agents together to track and catch online predators.

Another SDFLA connection here -- Stein is married to Mike Tein of Lewis and Tein.

Louis Robles plea deal rejected

Judge Alan Gold refused to accept the deal agreed to by prosecutors and defense lawyers which would have resulted in Louis Robles, the 59 year old asbestos lawyer, serving 10 years in federal prison (previous coverage here). The deal also had the blessing of Tom Tew, the receiver in charge of getting victims paid.

Query -- does a federal judge have the power to reject this sort of deal? Because this is a charge bargain deal, can't the government just dismiss the other counts on its own, leaving only the ten year maximum count? I think the real question is whether the government will have the heart to do this after Judge Gold has said he will not approve the deal. If in our adversarial system of justice the prosecution believes that a deal is fair, should a judge step in? Please give your thoughts in the comments.

This is just another odd turn in this very odd case. Just last week, Judge Gold took Robles into custody because Robles' girlfriend said he was hiring a pilot to flee overseas. The government stated that they did not believe that the girlfriend was being truthful.