Judge Kent Does Not Kiss and Tell
The days following Valentine’s Day are always a good time time to check back in with ex-flames, long lost friends and alleged abusers. On that note, what has our old friend U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent been up to?
This Tuesday, Senior U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson of Florida, who is presiding over Kent’s federal sex crimes and obstruction of justice case, denied Kent’s request that the obstruction of justice charge be dropped or moved into a separate trial.
From the Houston Chronicle:
Kent’s lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, originally argued on paper that Kent should have two trials because he must take the stand in a trial of the sexual cases to say he believed his relationships were consensual but that he would not testify on his own behalf in the obstruction case. DeGuerin said on Tuesday that Kent will only likely not testify about the obstruction.
Just how did Kent obstruct justice, you ask?
In the obstruction charge, Kent is accused of lying about sexual contact with an employee to prominent federal judges who investigated a misconduct complaint against him.
But fans of Kent, worry not, for Kent’s explanation for the lie is beyond reproach.
Kent’s amazing excuse and notes on etiquette, after the jump.
Lest you think that Kent was some sort of Philistine, his lawyer makes it clear that he lied because he is an upstanding courtier and is therefor obliged to protect the base honour of a classless strumpet:
“Through the ages the recognized proper course of conduct was to not discuss affairs of the heart. It’s nothing more than that,” DeGuerin said.
Somewhere in the distance, Fraternity Lothario weeps softly.
(22) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
el primero
el primero
lawyr 4 hire!
his lawyr
Im a LAWWWYR and from Texas
Texas hates children.
Awesome, yet again you have found a way to incorporate sex and Jewishness into a single post. Bravo...
Let me be the first to nominate Frat. Loth. to fill in for Elie next time he's away. Or, hell, even N-T10-1L. Or F&D. Or Exley. Or Arnie Becker. Or Alex Dupre.
"honour"? Is Marin British?
Marin -- very funny & clever post.
BUBBA ARMY BUBBA ARMY
www.btls.com
8 -- isn't your next post due soon? No time for self-congratulation.
Man, I've been reading the posts the last day and half thinking, "Wow, Elie has really stepped up his game."
My mistake.
Funny, I was thinking, "Marin has got her friends spamming the comment boards... again."
10 & 12: Funny, but it's difficult to deny that these posts have been consistently better.
- Not Marin (or one or her family members/friends/acquaintances)
10 & 12: Funny, but it's difficult to deny that these posts have been consistently better.
- Not Marin (or one or her family members/friends/acquaintances)
The only Marin I know is the county that pales in comparison to Sonoma, but the posts this week have been significantly better than when Jabba is on duty.
I concur that the quality of the posts on this site have been markedly better in Elie's absence. The site is actually starting to seem like a credible source once again. (Note that the quality of comments has improved, too.)
Lat, you may want to take all these observations to heart... maybe do a Tom Hagen-like force-out and keep Elie occupied with something minor out in Vegas.
Sincerely,
Random reader
Haha is this the same Judge Kent that penned Bradshaw v. Unity Marine (147 F.Supp.2d, S.D. Texas 2001) ("Before proceeding further, the Court notes that this case involves two extremely likable lawyers, who have together delivered some of the most amateurish pleadings ever to cross the hallowed causeway into Galveston, an effort which leads the Court to surmise but one plausible explanation. Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact--complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words--to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefing would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions. With Big Chief tablet readied, thick black pencil in hand, and a devil-may-care laugh in the face of death, life on the razor's edge sense of exhilaration, the Court begins. . . .")? It's a classic!!
17,
it's a "classic" example of the kind of disgusting abuse of power that Kent was well known for; apparently his abuse of those he had power over, did not halt when he ceased mocking the lawyers and litigants who appeared before him.
The man was a disgrace, well before the indictment. This stuff is funny to law students and non-lawyers, but people who work for a living in the legal business understand how chicken-shit this kind of cheap shot really is.
I can just picture Kent's reaction if this defense were put to him as a judge ...
re 18, how many times haven't you wanted a judge just to go off on the blatant idiocy before him/her? Not defending Kent, but sometimes, it's nice when a judge tells opposing counsel something like "what you just said made absolutely no sense. We are dumber for having listened to you. May God have mercy on your soul." Some people really deserve it and only a federal judge w/ life tenure can deliver.
Thank you, 18. I've had clients harmed by Kent's abuse of power and partiality and I'm loving reading about this. The Fifth Circuit routinely undid some of Kent's damage, but only after enormous cost to the parties. Petty tyrants on the bench who elevate their whims over the law are really not that funny when you actually have a case before them.
Thank you, 18. I've had clients harmed by Kent's abuse of power and partiality and I'm loving reading about this. The Fifth Circuit routinely undid some of Kent's damage, but only after enormous cost to the parties. Petty tyrants on the bench who elevate their whims over the law are really not that funny when you actually have a case before them.