X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
JUDGE WANTS LAWYERS FOCUSED ON CASES, NOT CAMERAS In deciding whether to allow cameras in his courtroom, Judge James Warren says he’s not too worried about the effect the lenses will have on witnesses. He’s worried about the lawyers. “The drama that gets generated by counsel is sometimes a big issue. And it’s very difficult to control,” the San Francisco Superior Court judge said last week. “It’s not, ‘There was a big dog that had a large mouth,’” Warren said, perhaps alluding to the famous San Francisco dog mauling case he presided over two years ago. “It’s, ‘There was a big dog with a large mouth,’” he said — this time speaking in a deeper voice, leaning back and snapping his arms open and shut like a crocodile’s mouth. His imitation earned some laughs from lawyers at a lunchtime panel discussion Tuesday on “Handling High-Profile Trials and the Media,” put on by the Bar Association of San Francisco. John Keker of Keker & Van Nest and KTVU/Channel 2 reporter Rob Roth also took part. And they came out on opposite sides of the camera question. “So, we cannot have cameras in the courtroom because lawyers can’t behave themselves?” Roth asked, with some incredulity. Keker, on the other hand, argued that for jurors to be fair, they shouldn’t have to worry about being “hectored” and second-guessed by everyone else who saw the trial on TV. As the topics weaved from gag orders and closed hearings to strategies for dealing with the spotlight, Keker acknowledged there are times when a defense lawyer can help his case by talking to the press. But he disagreed when Roth suggested saying “no comment” because that doesn’t provide much counterweight to police or prosecutors’ accusations. “It’s also not good strategy,” said Keker, “to explain to the press why your client broke into a house and shot four people, before you’re ready.” — Pam Smith JENNIFER WATCH: WEEK 4 Jennifer Massey hasn’t gotten much screen time in the first four episodes of “The Apprentice,” but a lot of people are betting she’ll be this season’s winner. In fact, so many bets were placed on the Clifford Chance associate that an offshore bookie suspended wagering on the outcome of the show. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Antigua-based BetWWTS.com became suspicious when an unusual number of people placed the maximum bet of $300 on Massey and fellow contestant Kelly Perdew. Massey has stood apart from her teammates on the show, avoiding cliques and plots that other women have engaged in. While she didn’t defend teammate Stacie J. when the others ganged up on her in the boardroom, she spoke out after Stacie J. was fired. “The team wanted to make her a scapegoat,” Massey said during the fourth episode. Each week Donald Trump gives the contestants, divided into two teams mainly by gender, a task to complete. At the end of the assignment the project manager of the losing team goes into Trump’s boardroom with two or three teammates and Trump fires one of them. Last week the two teams were each given a chef and an empty restaurant, which they had to open for dinner the following night. Representatives from the restaurant guide publisher Zagat Suvey judged the two eateries based on food, service and decor. Elizabeth, the team leader from the previous week, was put in charge of marketing. At one point she broke into tears, fretting that she didn’t have enough help getting fliers out and would be ousted if the team lost because of her previous performance. While one of Elizabeth’s teammates tried to console her, Massey looked disgusted. “She needs to get over it and move on,” Massey said. The women’s restaurant scored below that of the men. Customers surveyed by Zagat said the setting was stark, the service was slow and uneasy, and there were “too many women in black milling around like stewardesses.” The chilly and critical project manager Jennifer C. brought two teammates she disliked into the boardroom with her rather than the one in charge of the decor. Trump’s colleague, Carolyn Kepcher, said Jennifer C.’s choice was “completely personal,” since these teammates had nothing to do with the restaurant’s poor scoring. Trump agreed. “Your entire team hated you,” he told Jennifer C. “When you had the chance to bring in the one person who failed, you didn’t do it. Jennifer, this is easy. You’re fired.” Fired this week: Jennifer C. — Brenda Sandburg

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.