Saturday, November 14, 2009

The Paralegal

I received a comment on the blog this morning under my previous post on Ethics Training that I thought was worth posting in its own article.

If you recall, during the Brady hearing last month, the testimony of Denise Oncken was contradicted by longtime Child Abuse Paralegal Kim Flores. Shortly thereafter, Kim turned in her resignation and accepted a job working for Bill Stradley. In what I think is a pretty stand up move, Stradley was willing to give her a job after she made the courageous stand by testifying against her employers.

Some might even call Kim a whistleblower . . .

All was well in the wake of the Brady hearing. Lykos and company held an Ethics Training and then went about sweeping the whole incident under the rug. The media stopped paying attention to the violation and Kim turned in her two weeks notice.

It was looking like Lykos and the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight were going to successfully dodge the issue until yesterday.

I'll just let "The Paralegal" tell the rest of the story:

Friday I was called by Judge [Hannah] Chow and was told that my last day would be that day effective immediately. I asked why (considering I gave a two week notice the Friday before). She responded with, "Because we can." and then turned around and walked out the door.

It didn't bother me that they were cutting me a week short and docking me a weeks pay, but what really bothered me was that I was insulted when I was told that I would be escorted to my office and out the door by an investigator.

I was treated like I had been fired.

Forget the 10 years of loyalty and the great reputation that I had earned for my dedication to my job. Luckily someone fought for me and I was not escorted out. Thank you for that.

What I can tell you is that information is out there. What the office chooses to do with it is up to them...which I know that nothing will change.

I have had a great deal of support from many about my difficult decision to leave the office and for that I thank you. However, I know that there are a couple...that I know of for sure that aren't pleased.. not my decision for leaving, but rather who I am going to work for.

For those doubters, you already know my character and have commented on such...do you really think it's going to change? I'll tell you like I told Denise...I have morals. I didn't put up with it when my morals were challenged at the office and I will not put up with it when I work defense.

Interesting to see how Lykos reacted when a little too much "transparency" occured.

Like I said, it sure seems like Kim Flores could be considered a whistleblower to me, but what do I know?

80 comments:

jigmeister said...

Good for you Kim. In the best Holmes tradition of "always do what you believe is right". Amy, aren't you glad you left?

Anonymous said...

If this can happen to people like Donna Goode and Kim Flores - it can happen to any of us. People like Kim are the backbone of the office - hard workers, dedicated, smart.

I am trying not to be discouraged and disgusted with my job. I am still there and I am just a worker bee - no one important.

I figure I'll work here and just do my job. I can't function if I am worried one wrong step can lead to getting fired. I am trying not to think of that.

Kim - I'm sorry this happened to you. You did not deserve to be treated that way.

None of us do. But, we have no control, input or say.

In the end - it just makes me sad.

Anonymous said...

I am in the same boat as Anon. 1023am. I am disgusted with the office and am ashamed to say that I work there. So Lykos ran on a campaign of Transparency, it doesn't seem very transparent so long as one of her favorites or political cronies does something wrong. Its only transparent if you are expendable, like Rifi and Donnelly. I wish JBH was still around. I firmly believe Rosenthal would have punished Denise Oncken as well. It wouldn't have been splashed on the front page of the chronicle, but nevertheless it would have been done. I am very afraid for the future of the DAs office. If people like anon 1023 and I leave, you are left with people like Denise Oncken who will prosecute without regard to the truth and justice.

Kim, I am very sorry you had to go through this. I know what kind of worker you are, and what kind of integrity you have. Its a shame that loyalty to Denise Oncken takes precedence over telling the truth. Kim will be much happier working for Bill Stradley.

Good Luck Kim. You will be missed.

Anonymous said...

I did not know "the Paralegal," but I admire her conviction. Sometimes doing the right thing, means doing the unpopular thing.

She stood up for what she believed was right, and this is how she got treated by an administration that felt this sort of thing needed to be eradicated?!?!? What a joke.

This whole office has become comical. Each day I walk to court, I am interested to see what happens next. Because the one thing you can count on with this administration is they will do something (or not do something) that makes you shake your head in disbelief.

Leaving soon,

An Embarrassed ADA.

Anonymous said...

Escorting someone out of the building is pretty extreme, even for that office. There has got to be more to this story.

Paralegal said...

Anonymous at 1:50...I was NOT escorted out of the building. You had better believe that if I had done something wrong and there was "more to it" then I would have been escorted out.
Here's the thing....a lot of people only know what happened by word of mouth. You don't know what happened behind closed doors. I have nothing to hide or to be ashamed of. I walked out of that office on my own with my head held high.

Anonymous said...

The escorting out was supposed to be a slap in the face to Kim. Nothing else. There was no reason to do it other than an insult to Kim. Just one extra showing of the fact that they are supporting Denise Oncken. Ridiculous. But typical of what this new administration has done.

Anonymous said...

From the brief in the case:

Brady does not require a prosecutor to do the defense’s work – it merely requires the prosecutor to make the evidence available to the defense. See, e.g., United States v. Marrero, 904 F.2d 251, 261 (5th Cir. 1990) (“While the Supreme Court in Brady held that the Government may not properly conceal exculpatory evidence from a defendant, it does not place any burden upon the Government to conduct a defendant's investigation or assist in the presentation of the defense's case.”) In short, the State can lead the horse to water, but cannot (and does not have to) make the horse drink.

Anonymous said...

Anon 413pm; agreed, you can't make a horse drink, but Denise Oncken sure as hell didn't lead the horse to the water.

Anonymous said...

Whoever cited Marrero needs to do there own research. That case was cited by the person who committed the ethical violation. Denise said it was in the file and it wasn't. She flat out lied and got caught. She didn't get punished because she is a division chief and it would look bad on Lykos the discipline her.

Mike said...

I had the privilege of working with Kim Flores at the DA's office and I can say without hesitation that she was one of the smartest, hardest-working, most dedicated employees I had ever met. She cared about the child victims we were fighting for and was an invaluable help to many a prosecutor. What a disgrace that a woman who has done so much for the citizens -- in particular the CHILDREN -- of Harris County should be treated this way. Good luck to you Kim, I wish you the best!

Paralegal said...

Mike - WOW...THANK YOU FOR THE KIND WORDS. I was very sad to make the decision that I did. I always believed that this was not just a job to me, but rather my career. I loved the work that I did and that is what kept me there for as long as I was.

Anonymous said...

Good luck Kim. Nothing but good will come to you because of the integrity you have. Bill you've got a good one, hang on to her.

Denise made the comment prior to Lykos taking office. They were very good "friends" and even invited Lykos to the CA holiday party prior to her taking office. You know, getting those points in where she could.

As for escorting you out, as soon as this administration makes the decision to terminate someone, the computer access is cut off and you are escorted out. Thank goodness someone had enough "points" with the Lykos administration that Kim was able to walk out on her own.

This adminstration doesn't share information with anyone other than the 6th floor. We get our information from the news just like everyone else in Houston. We all know how the story looks in the news, you believe very little.

With the hiring freeze and the open spots in the office I wonder if Denise will get a new paralegal. So many spots that are open because the 6th floor says, with the freeze they are not allowed to refill spots when someone quits. hum.... Oh, that's right Denise usually gets her way. We will see.

Anonymous said...

It sounds more like the paralegal betrayed the office and therefore was asked leave sooner than later. Lykos does not want any more child vixtim cases compromised. Judge Chow sent a message that these cases are important by her actions. The office is committed to fairness. Your boss (former to some) is taking the time to testify in front of the US Senate because she cares. Judge Bridgewater defended these cases and knows the importance of following the rules.

Whistleblower? Don't be so dramtic.

Paralegal said...

Denise already interviewed Jennifer Macklin (I believe this is her name...she's on the 6th floor, short hair, recently had a baby, corner office from the main hall when you enter the main door where the secretary is, deals with the interns) sister who is a paralegal. Denise wants her. I told Leitner that he would have to hire someone from the outside that knows nothing about Denise because no one else wants to work for her. So, I guess he listened to something I said.

Anonymous said...

I have known the "Paralegal" for more than 5 years. She has had the thankless job of working for both prosecutors in the division and for Denise personally. Denise treated her terrible, and on a number of occasions the "Paralegal" tried to move to a different area due to that treatment.

She is is honest, hard working, and very talented. Stradley is getting a great employee. I still cant believe the fact that Denise was shown to have lied and hid something...and did it in such a stupid way (not that that matters), and yet no punishment, nothing. This is embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

Hannah Chow personifies all that is wrong with Lykos. She has no qualifications, and in an era where we have such budget issues, she is grossly overpaid for bringing nothing to the office. Kim sure as hell could do Chow's job. Chow, however, can't do anything but have lunch with Lykos. What a disgraceful and stupid bitch.

Anonymous said...

Several spots open, admin assist positions in juvenile, intake and the trial bureau and ADA's all over the office. All areas the employees are swamped and told to get used to it because due to budget cuts they are not allowed to replace any positions.

You walk into the 6th floor and they are fully staffed. I bet central records has 15 to 20 employees now.

And before the Lykos group reads this, yes they are trying to get all records uploaded so we can have better access and the growing people in Central Records was needed to accomplish this. Well the replacement of open spots is also needed to maintain that flow to central records. So if you sold that for the budget you can sell the replacement of employees when people retire or are fired.


Central records is Chow's baby. That explains why the funds came in to do the complete revamping of Central Records and it looks better than all other open areas.

Anonymous said...

Judge is not done with the cleansing. We have said this before and will say it again. If you don't like the direction this office is headed, leave. You are lucky to have a job. No one employee makes this office. People come and go, it is the policy and the changes that are made that will last forever. The Judge's legacy will not be impacted by this blog. What she does in the Senate will impact her legacy. The fact is that the general public does not read this nor will they ever.

A Harris County Lawyer said...

Anon 9:27 a.m. sure does seem to have a familiar writing style. Kind of reminds me of "Not Clint". Kim Flores didn't betray jack shit.

She was placed on the stand and swore an oath to tell the truth. When she did, she had to directly contradict her boss. Who exactly did she betray? Certainly not the criminal justice system.

And the ensuing hostile work environment was something that she had to anticipate, and she testify anyway. I think big kudos are due to Bill Stradley for giving her a job. If the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight considered that a betrayal, they need to ask themselves what side they are on.

Kim said that she gave Leitner a list of things that needed to be considered by the Office. We'll see what becomes of that.

My prediction: Nothing.

Anon 2:10 cracks me up. Lykos spent about 6 minutes in front of the Senate at the request of one of the most anti-law enforcement Senators that Washington has to offer and the Davidians are treating her like Moses.

Give me a break. It seems like the elected Harris County D.A. having delusions of grandeur in Washington D.C. is becoming a tradition. Seems to me that her predecessor thought he was going to set some things, um, straight in front of the Supreme Court awhile back.

But Lykos' policies won't live forever. Word on the street is that the local Republicans are already furious with her and don't want her to run again. I imagine someone will eventually replace her that actually wants to do the job as it is supposed to be done.

P.S. Love the term you use of "cleansing". What kind of purity are you looking for there, pal?

Anonymous said...

lol.
"The fact is that the general public does not read this nor will they ever." Anon 210

I'm the general public and so are you, we read the blog. Guess we both like reading blogs. If we are going to read one, Murray's is the one to read.

Life at the Harris County Criminal Justice Center. At least by reading the blog I get the scope of what is going on in the office before the media slant.

ROTFL said...

Lykos and her cronies are monsters. Rachel Palmer is just like the rest of them btw. She has been so mean to so many people I know. They all need a dose of their own medicine.

Paralegal said...

To Anonymous at 9:27...Seriously, I betrayed the office????? Why, because I didn't have Denise's back and lie...under oath?????? It's funny how people shoot their mouths off when they do not know the facts.

Anonymous said...

I'm not an attorney and I read this blog, so do several of my family members.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:10...
I'll have to agree with Murray.. Sounds like words from the 6th floor (Misd. Div.)

I, too, worked with Kim several years back. I second what Mike said and commend her for having the courage to stand up to "Marge Simpson" and the rest of the crew in the "Crimes Against Brady" Division. God, can 2012 come quick enough??

Anonymous said...

Kim, hold your head high, you left with dignity and have nothing to be ashamed of. Thank you for your years of service and for being truthful.

Anonymous said...

ROTFL,
I've never seen Pachel Palmer summed up as well as your blog did it. Good work and hopefully Palmer fades in 2010.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like she quit. If they had fired her, she could have sued as a whistleblower.

Don't know her, but she sounds a bit self-righteous to me. I wonder how she lasted so long under Rosenthal. It seems like her employers are basically the same. Granted, the atmosphere under Lycos may be a bit toxic, but it sounds like she was working for Denise Oncken before Lycos and did not seem to have a problem. Was there something different that Lycos did that her predecessors didn't that caused this whole thing?

Wantingtoknow.

Anonymous said...

Since we all know that all the 6th floor senior leadership reads this blog, please note what your advocate is saying on this post: "We have said this before and will say it again. If you don't like the direction this office is headed, leave." Is this really the message that you want sent to your employees?

BLACK INK said...

Kim you are from the old JBH school. Keep your head high and know that your actions honor you.
Character does count and at the end of the day that is all you take with you.
God bless and best wishes sweetie.

Anonymous said...

I do not normally read your blog... but do you have any aspirations to be Harris County DA? If so, what do you propose be done differently? It is easy to be critical, but what are your ideas for some of the problems that office faces? I heard that bloggers do not post all of the comments they receive. And I don't care if you post this. But I am curious. I'd like to know. I respect you and would support you if I knew what you stood for and agreed with it.....

Anonymous said...

Hey, I'm "not Clint" and don't think that post sounds anything like me. Even I can't back the new administration in the Denise disaster but I am hoping the paralegal tells all in a more public forum so the bulk of the voters are made aware.

A Harris County Lawyer said...

Anon 6:25 p.m.,
When I was younger I used to have political aspirations, I suppose, but I don't anymore. It seems to me that unless you are able to finance your own campaign (like Mr. Holmes did) that you end up beholden to somebody with an agenda and I'm just not willing to sacrifice my integrity like that. I like being able to live my life on my own terms.
If I were the D.A., I think my platform would be about creating (or keeping) an office filled with good and dedicated prosecutors that I could trust and would listen to their input. I'd let the defense bar know that they would always have an open ear at the Office, but that they didn't get to run it. I'd let victims of violent crime know that they would always have strong advocates on their side, and I'd have an open door to anybody that wanted to question what I was doing.
In other words, I'd last about two seconds as a politician. Besides, I've shot my mouth off too much on this blog to ever run for office.
Don't regret that, either.

Anon 7:07 p.m. (AKA Not Clint),
Okay that actually made me laugh out loud. Sorry to have falsely accused your pseudonym.

Anonymous said...

For those of us who haven't worked with Rachel or Denise, what are some examples of their actions that cause the harsh words? Has Denise hidden stuff before?

Anonymous said...

I clicked on the Rachel Palmer is a joke blog. Now that is funny, is Rachel really that bad?

Anonymous said...

Specifically: who is Rachael Palmer? I gather from the numerous blogs that she appears to be or is apparently a butt- kissing protege of Lykos, but could you provide us neophytes a little bit of relevant information as to her background; e.g. from whence did she come, years of experience, what is her current assignment in the office, and what are her credentials (number of trials, etc.)that somehow, beyond having possibly a law license, qualify her to be a judge if elected by those moronic members of the Republican party, or posibly endorsed by those indiviuals of unquestionable character and integrity - Commissioner's Court, or the Republian Hierarchy (blue-haired Women's Club) or the local head of the party?

Janet said...

For those of you who do not know Kim Flores let me tell you a little about her....she is one heck of a paralegal! I have seen her spend countless hours getting cases ready. She loves the children and is a true professional. God bless her for working for Denise as long as she did. I have know she was treated badly because I witnessed it first hand. However, Kim is not the type of person that would use that to punish someone. She is an honest person and if put on the stand under oath will tell the truth no matter what it meant to her career. We should all take a lesson from Kim and be true to ourselves no matter what the outcome. Thank you Kim for your service to our county (and children) and God Bless you!

Xi said...

Janet,
Can you imagine if the ADAs as a whole had Kim's strength of character? By that I mean if they actually walked the walk instead of settling for talking the talk.
Therein lies the difference between mice and men....

Anonymous said...

"Hannah Chow personifies all that is wrong with Lykos."

Truer words were never spoken. The utter incompetence of Lykos, Chow, Bridgwater cannot be over-stated.

BTW, pompously addressing them as "Judge" insults the Judiciary. We can only hope that the public and the Republican Party sees through the facade that Lykos projects. Once you become familiar with her political gibberish you will realize how deceptive it is.

Anonymous said...

Here's a question to all of those spineless people who keep letting that incompetent bitch force y'all to address her in a certain way. Why do you do it? Why do you let her force you to call her something that she currently isn't and even while she was sitting as a "judge" was woefully incompetent? She'll be gone in 2012 so why give her any satisfaction now?

Anonymous said...

Judge Pat will always be the JUDGE. It is a matter of respect. Something that has been lacking at the DA's office up until Judge Pat's ascension to the throne of leadership. Whatever support staff doesn't like it they can man up and leave. Until then she is JUDGE PAT. What a bunch of whiners.
The judge spoke in front of a US Senate subcommittee to advise them at length on how to be more PC in an era of "winning at all costs". The defendants have rights and ADAs need to learn to respect these folks and the judge. I doubt any of the ADAs have ever been to DC let alone been invited by the US Senate to help our government work better. I understand Judge Pat has been asked to assist in handling the 911 terrorist trials for the government in NYC. That should put the disgruntled ADAs in their place once and for all.

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised that the crazy bitch isn't making everyone address her as "Doctor." It reminds me of a recent Nobel Peace Prize winner, actually.

Anonymous said...

anon 12:18,
Lykos insuring that the 911 admitted terrorists get a "fair" politically correct trial in a Manhattan Federal Courthouse would be way way way out of her league but right up her ally philosophically--F*ck the victims, f*ck justice just let me get good press with the Chronicle.
I'll bet Lykos is worried whether or not the Fort Hood Jihadist gets a fair trial. Look for her and the Chronicle to pander the innocence project bandwagon in his behalf next.
Pat Lykos is a master of empty self promotion if nothing else.

Anonymous said...

12:52:

You don't think defendants deserve a fair trial?

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage,
To use Bill Clinton logic that would determine on the definition of "fair". Are we talking common sense Constitutional due process or politically correct due process?
Political Pat's view on fairness differs from the Constitutional version. Just sayin'

Anonymous said...

Political Pat's view on fairness differs from the Constitutional version.

As did Rosenthal's and Siegler's.

Prosecutors should not be splitting hairs on constitutionality. Time for you to find another job that doesn't require following laws that are bigger than any one defendant, any one trial, or any one prosecutor. Just sayin.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Rage,
With respect to following Constitutional integrity:
Siegler...........West Point
Rosenthal.........ROTC
Lykos.............Brownies
and then we have VMI's Rage picking up the rear.

Anonymous said...

Neither Lykos, Chow, or Bridgewater are currently judges, the latter two having been dumped by the voters and the former having been similarly dumped while aspiring unsuccessfully to an even higher office under the Peter Principle. Since they no longer are judges it is inappropiate and maybe even illegal that they should demand and/or expect to be so addressed. It is not an issue of respect. Maybe one of the Harris County grand juries should look at whether they are in violation of Sec. 37.11 of the penal code or if chapter 52 of the procedure code might be pursued to stop this practice. It appears that they are too ashamed to just be called the District Attorney or whatever other position they occupy - possibly recognizing their lack of qualification for that.

jigmeister said...

Who in the world, in their right mind would seek the assistance of an incompetent ex-state judge with absolutely no trial experience to assist in a federal prosecution of arguably the man responsible for the largest mass murder in American history? I don't believe that for a moment. Even the feds are that stupid.

Paralegal said...

Just the talk about Lykos, Chow and Bridgwater being addressed as judge...I found it funny that when Chow dismissed me, she was wearing a judge's robe.

Anonymous said...

Chow wore a judge's robe while working at the DA's Office? Good grief! That's embarassing.

Anonymous said...

After reading the hateful and part funny blog about Rachel I started checking which other posters here had their own blogs. Black Ink's stealth actually has some very solid and thoughtful content. Check it out.

Anonymous said...

I run into former judges all the time. It's campaign season, so local events are lousy with them.

I call every one of them Judge, whether they retired or were defeated. Same goes for other politicians, you call them Senator, Governor, or whatever, as a sign of respect for the office. If they demand to be called that, it's a sign of their insecurity. There's a difference between the two.

5:03: And where does your Thurgood Marshall law degree come in?

Rage

Anonymous said...

Pat Lykos going to New York to help with the trial of the terrorist? How is God's name did that happen? She is totally under qualified. This must be a joke going around the CJC. If true, our country is in sad, sad shape.

Another thought, Miz Chow, get out of the robe. You are not a judge and therefore shouldn't wear a judicial robe.

Anonymous said...

Racist Rage @8:47,
What is the foundation for your assumption that I attended Thurgood Marshall Law School?
Obviously logic and racial equity are not your forte.
Anon 5:03

Anonymous said...

Chow wasn't wearing a robe, it was a snugglie. She just woke up from her nap.

As for Seigler's integrity, there were some interesting facts that came out during the campaign. Also, look at all the reversals she has had for going too far to win. Loyalty is good but don't ignore the truth.

A Harris County Lawyer said...

Anon 7:52 a.m.,

Kelly didn't get any of her cases reversed because of being over-aggressive. There was an issue with a statement on the Fratta-Guidry cases that can't be blamed on Kelly, and the Wright case was reversed on issues regarding Susan Wright's attorneys -- not Kelly.

Kelly supporters aren't ignoring the truth, but her detractors sure seem to like passing off untrue insinuations as facts.

BLACK INK said...

AHCL,
Politics is 100% perception. Facts and qualifications are meaningless in a campaign.
Remember, if you repeat a lie often enough people start to believe it and innuendos rule.
A good politician should always avoid answering a question but if compelled he/she should just make shit up as they go.
If you can't compete with your opponent's credentials and ability fairly; simply lie and cheat.
Who cares about tarnishing the reputation of others so long as your personal goals are met.
Thus endith the lesson in politics.

Murray, I commend you for your honor,integrity and sense of fair play. But you are too good a man for the game of politics as is your friend and colleague Kelly Siegler.

Anonymous said...

Racist Rage @8:47,
What is the foundation for your assumption that I attended Thurgood Marshall Law School?
Obviously logic and racial equity are not your forte.
Anon 5:03


What does race have to do with it? I just took it by your poor reasoning that you couldn't get into a better school. You calling me racist just because you went to a bottom tier law school reinforces my belief as to your inability to think clearly.

Rage

Anon 5:03 said...

Rage,
VMI is where people who can't get into West Point or Annapolis matriculate.
You allegedly, by admission on this blog, went to VMI.
Your criminal trial advocacy skills are no match for Kelly Siegler, despite the unfounded disparaging innuendos you sporadically spew behind her back. On the other hand, the courtroom skills of Pat Lykos seem more to mirror yours,thus the analogy.
As for my legal training, it sure as hell trumps yours.
The denigrating comments you hurled at the predominately African-American law school speaks for itself. Unfortunately these types of racially insensitive remarks are nothing new for you. If it quacks and walks like a duck I call the little feathered fuck a duck.

Anonymous said...

Where is the blog about Rachel located?

Anonymous said...

Alright folks, this is getting old. One last time:

VMI is where people who can't get into West Point or Annapolis matriculate. You allegedly, by admission on this blog, went to VMI.

As did my father, and his father. All three of us are combat vets. Aren't you flag wavers supposed to be thanking us for our service or something? And as much as you look down on VMI, you most likely could not have gotten in, much less made it through. Anyway, there are thousands of vets who went to VMI, all of whom you dishonor because you're too small minded to see past any disagreement with me and have to launch a personal attack against something far greater than you or your family will ever be.

Your criminal trial advocacy skills are no match for Kelly Siegler, despite the unfounded disparaging innuendos you sporadically spew behind her back.

Wow. That's a lot of Kelly fellating you have going on there.

On the other hand, the cortroom skills of Pat Lykos seem more to mirror yours,thus the analogy.

I missed an analogy. It's lost in your vitriol. Try to take a breath before pounding away at the keys next time, and maybe you'll make some sense.

As for my legal training, it sure as hell trumps yours.

No way in Hell.

The denigrating comments you hurled at the predominately African-American law school speaks for itself.

I don't care what color the students there are, they fail the bar in record numbers every year, and are barely accredited. You want to play the race card though, which is hilarious for a mouth breathing Republican like yourself.

Love and kisses,

Rage

Anonymous said...

anon 5:03,
arthur seaton is that you?
very impressive either way.

A Harris County Lawyer said...

I've gotten several questions wanting to know about the "Rachel Palmer blog". One did exist and it was in extremely poor taste and beyond juvenile. I intentionally did not answer those questions because it was absolutely foul.

I was glad to see this morning that it has been taken down.

Anon 5:03 said...

Rage, Rage, Rage,
Geeze! There have been far greater numbers of ROTC'ers and enlisted men and women that have sacrificed for America than all of the service academies combined many times over. That is not the issue. The fact that you have to point out YOUR personal military accolades is suspect.
As a USMA Class of '77 graduate I can assure you VMI does not intimidate.
Your daddy and grand daddy and whatever other baby daddies you want to talk about don't amount to horse shit.
You are what you make of yourself and you sir are nothing to brag about.

Anonymous said...

The bare bones of it is quite simple: It doesn't matter if you went to USMA, VMI, TSU, UH, or Harvard (unless you seek a position in Big Law), etc., as much as you apply yourself in school, pass the bar, and do your best to continue to improve and learn as you pursue your chosen carrer.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:53,
Well stated.
Anon 5:03

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:53,
Well stated.
Anon 5:03

Prosecutors Are Morons said...

You certainly don't sound like an academy graduate, 5:03. And if you agree with the subsequent poster about it not mattering where you went to school, why all the attacks on Rage and VMI? From what I remember, he only brought it up in the first place when military service came up. As for him mentioning his service record, other than 'combat' he has not said a word.

All of you ADAs and ADA lovers need to grow up. If you graduated in '77, you should be more of an adult than you apparently are.

Anonymous said...

Rage: You don't think Defendants deserve a fair trial?

5:03: VMI SUCKS!!!

Other anonymous ADA's: Excellent rebuttal 5:03!!!


No wonder convictions are tanking in Harris County. If you guys can't prosecute a case in one of the country's easiest counties to get a conviction, it has to be because the above reasoning skills are serving defendants far better than the state.

Rage

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:56,
The stages of life are molded from life experiences.
The plebes that were fuck ups and made it through the 1st year at The Academy tended to become the pettiest of the upper classmen and the poorest leaders.
We had a medal of honor warrior in my company. He was automatically accepted to The Academy based on that sacrifice. Although he struggled academically he never made excuses or threw the medal around. His humble strength of character set an example for most of us. To listen to all the bravado of the make believe warriors with no combat experience was vile in comparison.
After graduation most of these type soldiers positioned their 5 year commitment to the least risk possible.
Over the many years I have found that the truest of veteran heroes live as they led rather than talk of war's grandiosity.
It was a great privilege and honor to have graduated from the Academy and poor judgment to have engaged Rage just because his petty bravado was reminiscent of the plebe fuck ups from years past.
5:03

Anonymous said...

The plebes that were fuck ups and made it through the 1st year at The Academy tended to become the pettiest of the upper classmen and the poorest leaders.

You mean like Patton? He also had a poor academic record and was considered a fuck up. Yet you seem to be the petty one. I wonder if you ever served in combat? You speak of others who did, but something tells me you just served at one of the low points in our military's history, and probably contributed to it.

And again, I've never seen him throw his experiences around and like I said, from what I remember it was only brought up in response to a bunch of whiny DA's who wore their "service" on their sleeve in order to show that he too has served in his own way. And on top of that, it sounds like in more ways than you! I bet you did your four and out.

Anyway, I'm sure your poor judgment manifests itself (and in turn poorly represents your alma mater) in many other ways.

If you were as honorable as you claim, you'd put a name to those insults. But I'm sure that would expose you as a flunkie or a liar.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Rage,
Our definitions of fuck ups are different.
John McCain was not a fuck up at Annapolis even though he graduated near the bottom of his class and probably marched off quite a few demerits.
By fuck ups I was referring to those that were arrogant with nothing to back it up. They ridiculed others as a manifestation of their own insecurity. They never quite measured up as leaders and never garnered the respect of peers or subordinates.
As I mentioned earlier, my classmate who was awarded the Medal of Honor did not excel academically, like Patton, but nevertheless was one of the most distinguished graduates of West Point.
Fuck ups are not measured by a grade or class ranking but rather how they conduct themselves.
5:03

jigmeister said...

Murray, et.al: Can't we stop this mudslinging about which military school was better and thus who are better people. I enlisted in the army as soon as I graduated from high school and had general distain for all officers. But then I married a navy nurse and worked alongside a former OCS officer for years and developed respect for them generally for their service and their demonstrated worth. I have also known people from West Point and VMI. To me they were both honorable vets. The title of this blog is "The Paralegal"??

Aggie Pct Chair said...

Agreed Jigmeister

Anonymous said...

but rather how they conduct themselves.

And you've already admitted you conduct yourself poorly in here.


Jig: Absolutely. Their constant hatred for someone they have never met and know nothing about is certainly distracting.

Anonymous said...

How did a discussion about a Paralegal turn into a bunch of pre-pubescent teenagers comparing the size of their johnsons?

I'm glad Kim decided to move on. I will be glad when others decide to move on as well.

Anonymous said...

i have met kim only one time. she told me an unbelievable story about a three legged dog. i couldn't help but question her credibility, but then later on i saw the three legged dog hopping by and i had to admit she was telling the truth.
i have met denise only one time. she told me a story and laughed about how she was intentionally misleading a group of people in her office. i couldn't help but wonder whether she was deceiving me or she was deceiving the people she worked with.
i know who i believe.

Anonymous said...

Rage and Anon 5:03: May be you just don’t know how this works, but FYI we all can read your postings and by now everyone knows who you are. Just so you know, neither of you are leaving a good impression…. (just a thought next time you take the elevator)

Good for you Kim!

Anonymous said...

Y'all know who I am? Say hi next time you see me in the elevator.

Rage