
We accept advertising through Blogads. If you're interested, click the "Advertise here" link above, or go here to place your ad through Blogads. For assistance, e-mail me here; I'd be glad to help. Reach lots of viewers -- we're up to about 2,800 unique visits a day, and more than 44,000 page views a week (as of October 26). Our rates are dirt cheap for the exposure you'll get!
As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:
Chandler Reach, Monte Regalo 2006
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2008
Kirkland, Columbia Valley Merlot 2008
D'Aragon, Old Vine Garnacha 2008
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2005
Pavin & Riley, Merlot 2006
David Hill, Estate Pinot Noir, Barrel Select 2006
Castle Rock, Paso Robles Cabernet 2006
Magnificent, Cabernet, Steak House 2008
Conundrum 2008
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1998
Saint Cosme, Cotes-du-Rhone 2007
La Granja, Tempranillo 360, 2008
Santa Rita, Mendalla Real Cabernet 2006
Columbia Crest, Grand Estates Merlot 2006
Andezon, Cotes-du-Rhone 2007
Collegiata, Montepulciano d'Abruzzo
Troon, Druid's Fluid 2008
La Granja, Tempranillo 2008
Monte Antico, Toscana 2006
Vieux Papes, Blanc de Blancs
Beaulieu, Georges De Latour Cabernet 1995
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, La Paulée, 2006
Woodbridge, Chardonnay
Paranga, Kir-Yianni 2005
L. Guigal, Cotes du Rhone Rose 2007
Newman's Own, Cabernet 2007
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Columbia Valley Merlot 2005
Monte Antico, Toscana Red 2006
Saint Cosme, Cotes-du-Rhone 2007
Vins Auvigne, Macon-Fuisse 2007
Vina Gormaz, Tempranillo 2007
Chandon, Brut Classic
Dom Martinho, Tinto 2005
Chateau St. Jean, Cabernet, California 2007
Kirkland, Napa Cabernet 2007
Revelry, The Reveler, 2007
Joseph Drouhin, Chablis 2006
Altos Las Hormigas, Mendoza Malbec 2008
Alodio, Ribeira Sacra Mencia 2007
Charles Smith, Kung Fu Girl Riesling 2008
Kiona, Lemberger 2006
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Columbia Valley Merlot 2005
Gloria Ferrer, Sonoma Brut
Kirkland, Napa Valley Meritage 2006
Abacela, Tempranillo 2006
Woodward Canyon, Columbia Valley Red
Santa Margherita, Pinot Grigio 2007
Mas Donis Barrica, Celler de Capcanes Red, 2005
Three Rivers, Merlot 2006
Raptor Ridge, Pinot Gris 2008
Lezaun, Rosado, Navarra
Lezaun, Red, Navarra
Hedges, Three Vineyards, Red Mountain 2005
Raptor Ridge, Pinot Gris 2008
Vega Sindoa, Cabernet-Tempranillo 2006
Inama, Soave Classico 2007
Alois Lageder, Lagrein Rosato 2008
Broglia, Gavi 2007
Marqués de Cáceres, Rioja Rose 2008
Spaltagna, Riserva Pinot Noir 2008
Portuga, Rose 2008
Warre's Warrior Port
Lange, Pinot Noir 2007
Chateau Guiraud, Le G, 2007
Falset, Garnacha Rose, Montsant 2006
Castello di Bossi, Chianti Classico 2004
Domaine Chandon, Pinot Noir, La Riviere Sonoma 2006
Brazin, Old Vine Zinfandel, Lodi 2006
B.R. Cohn, Silver Label Cabernet 2006
Casillero del Diablo, Cabernet 2007
Gentil Hugel, Alsace 2006
Mesoneros de Castilla, Ribero del Duero, Rosado 2008
Cor, Momentum 2007
Santa Margherita, Pinot Grigio 2006
Rubico, Lacrima di Morro d'Alba 2007
Gilstrap Brothers, Reserve Merlot 2003
Conundrum 2007
Chandler Reach, 36 Red
Santa Rita, Reserve Cabernet 2005
Marietta, Old Vine Red Lot 47
L'Ecole No. 41, Recess Red 2006
Dom Martinho, Red 2004
Beaulieu, Georges Latour 1994
Caymus, Cabernet 1995
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2005
Bergevin Lane, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2005
Savigny-les-Beaune, Les Lavieres 2003
David Hill, Reserve Merlot, Rogue Valley 2006
Educated Guess, Cabernet 2006
Maquis Lien, Red 2005
Charles Smith, Kung Fu Girl Riesling 2007
David Hill, Farmhouse White
Robert Mondavi Solaire, Cabernet 2005
Castello Monaci, Liante, Salice Salentino 2006
Ricardo Santos, Malbec 2006
Quinta da Espiga, Tinto 2006
Charles Smith, Holy Cow Merlot 2006
Charles Smith, Boom Boom Syrah 2006
Charles Smith, The Honorable Pinot Gris 2007
Santa Rita, Cabernet Reserva 2005
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2007
Gloria, Douro, Tinto 2002
Bogle, Petite Sirah Port, Clarksburg 2005
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Noir 2004
Silkwood, Red Duet Cabernet-Syrah 2004
Portuga, Vinho Branco 2006, 2007
Osborne, Solaz 2004
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Reserva 2005
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill, Shiraz Cabernet 2006
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2004
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Merlot, Horse Heaven Hills 2004
Hannah Nicole, Red 2004
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2005
Protocolo, Red 2005
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2006
Portuga, Vinho Branco 2006
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1998
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1996
Kirkland, Roogle Shiraz 2004
Garda, Classico Chiaretto
A to Z, Oregon Pinot Gris 2005
I Giusti & Zanza, Nemorino 2006
Treana, Marsanne-Viognier, Central Coast 2005
Fife, Syrah, "Stanford" 2000
B.R. Cohn, Silver Label Cabernet 2005
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Miles run year to date: 0
At this date last year: 0
Total run in 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (15)
Just because someone refuses to co-operate with the police, doesn't mean they're right, Jack. I see your point and all, but this is the wrong situation in which to utter "Amerika."
Posted by andy | November 18, 2006 6:32 AM
Whether or not an individual refuses to cooperate with authorities is not the issue here andy. I think this is yet another glaring example of how Amerika is becoming less of a free society and turning more towards a police state.
In this case, a man is sitting in federal prison to be taught a lesson. The video in question isn't going to help solve a major crime or bring down a terrorist. It is simply a case of the government attempting to intimidate a citizen.
Posted by Mr. Viddy | November 18, 2006 8:31 AM
Viddy, I see your point (the same as Jack's) but you're both still wrong.
Hiding proof of someone hurting others is wrong, morally and legally. In this case the 'bad guy' is cops, so some camps feel it is ok to not cooperate. Change the names involved to folks you feel sympathy for, and your feelings towards the guy in jail would change.
Posted by andy | November 18, 2006 8:55 AM
Am I missing something here? This guy follows and tapes "anarchists" who put either a smoke bomb or fireworks under a police car. In addition a policeman was injured and property damage occured.
The guy is in jail for refusing to cooperate with the grand jury investigating the incident. However, he is more than willing to sell some of the video to local TV stations and his lawyer has offered the full tape in exchange for release and exclusion from grand jury testimony.
What's this guy trying to hide? He probably knows the names and addresses of the "anarchists" and had prior knowledge of their plan.
Posted by Richard S/ | November 18, 2006 9:03 AM
Also, the defendants' would-be claim to "protect his sources" isn't the issue - "he had to protect the identities of those on the tape." The guy in jail is hiding someone who put a flame under a police car. Period.
Posted by andy | November 18, 2006 9:04 AM
I thought Jack was better than siding with the guy in jail... A guy who is hiding the-person-or-people who had injured police officers after placing a smoke-bomb/firework under a police car. It appears I was wrong.
Posted by andy | November 18, 2006 9:06 AM
I don't think the NYT article does the subject justice.
For one thing, my understanding is that the media broadcast the footage from his website without his permission and only later "compensated" him for it. That's not exactly the same thing as "selling" it.
The case is a bit more complicated than the article suggests. There are political issues -- like why it is being tried at a federal level rather than local, that kind of thing...
Posted by ellie | November 18, 2006 9:47 AM
Oh, and who made Andy an authority on moral and legal issues?
The "if you don't cooperate, then you must be guilty" mentality never ceases to amaze me.
And suggesting the blog host isn't "better than" the person one has just assailed as some kind of accomplice to terrorism? Smooth!
Posted by ellie | November 18, 2006 9:51 AM
He's in jail for refusing to obey a federal court order.
He claims that he's protected by the California Shield Law. The 9th Circuit Court (easily the most liberal in the nation) ruled that he's not, because the California Shield Law requires that the journalist be employed by a newspaper, magazine, wire service, etc. Joe Blow can't just invoke the shield law anytime he likes.
As other commenters have pointed out, he's not protecting a source. He's refusing to turn over evidence of a crime that caused property damage and injuries. The fact that it was a crime against the government does not make it ok.
Posted by Aaron B. Hockley | November 18, 2006 10:37 AM
Aaron --
The California "Shield Law" is irrelevant to this discussion.
Despite the inflated egos of the members of the California legislature nothing the California, or any other state legislature, does has the slightest effect upon the operations of the federal district courts or federal grand juries. Article III of the US Constitution; Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution, and Titles 18 / 28 of the US Code are the exclusive and pre emptive constitutional and statutory underpinnings of the powers of a federal court.
The California "Shield Law" is less than a weak PHART in the wind by comparison.
And the "reporter" ought to be in jail for the duration of the term of the grand jury; the grand jury term should be extended as many times as necessary to extend until the day the statute of limitations runs out, and the "reporter" should be kept in jail until that date or until he testfies, whichever comes first.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 18, 2006 11:09 AM
I feel zero sympathy for this clown. He deserves to rot in his cell for as long as necessary. These "protesters" are nothing more then cowards as if they truly believed in their "cause", they wouldn't destroy, deface and otherwise damage property that is not their's to damage, and do so in masks. Have some guts and state your case in front of a camera without hiding behind a bandana.
This guy is nothing more then a pub whore and a more than likely, a rich kid who never got attention as a kid, and is trying to get it now by running under the moniker of "anarchist" and ignoring repeated, valid requestest's for information leading to the rightful arrest and prosecution of the punk and/or punks who deserve to be in jail for their crimes.
I have no problem with protest, but blocking streets, destroying property and disrupting other people's lives to prove your point does just the opposite.
Posted by Mike | November 18, 2006 11:29 AM
The California Shield Law is relevant because that was his defense strategy. As you noted, it's a failing strategy.
Posted by Aaron B. Hockley | November 18, 2006 11:31 AM
Aaron --
The federal court never need reach the issue of whether the "reporter" is "...employed by a newspaper, magazine, wire service..." etc. because the California legislature and the "Shield Law" it enacted has / have no power to affect the operations of the federal district or federal grand jury.
Thats always the threshold question.
Once the question of the authorty / power or non power / authority of the silly Califonia Legislature to effect federal courts is answered in the negative, the federal court never has to deal with the issue of the "reporter's" status as a journalist under the definitions of the California Shield law.
Thus, the California shield law is irrelevant. Its less than a PHART in the wind.
That the "reporter's" lawyers foolishly chose to rely upon an irrelevant state statutory provision might give the "reporter" a mal practice claim against his lawyers, but it doesn't give the "reporter" a key to his jail cell. It does demonstrate that the defense lawyers are no more lawyers than the "reporter" is a reporter.
The defense lawyers reliance on the California Shield Law is far less than a "failing strategy". Its a strategy that never started, much less failed.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 18, 2006 5:31 PM
The article keeps jumping around...so which is it? Is he a "blogger" who thinks he is a journalist, or a "freelance journalist" with a blog?
Posted by Jon | November 18, 2006 8:45 PM
>> I have no problem with protest, but blocking streets, destroying property and disrupting other people's lives to prove your point does just the opposite.
It's too bad you can't go back in time to tell that to the participants of the Boston Tea Party. Since that action clearly did not prove their point...
Posted by tc | November 20, 2006 2:46 PM