Ladies & Gentlemen, I have stated this from the beginning. There are unique issues with those involved in this case and charges but too many Bloggers and even the MSM smelled blood and went after it like wild sharks.
As I grow older I seem to find more peace and patience. I've been doing this long enough to know, sometimes things just aren't what they seem. Yes, sometimes we even get fooled but this one was just too over the top and we were the only ones to sit back and wait until the court date to report on it.
There was NO Press and NO other Bloggers in the court room because, (like I said) they only wanted fabrication and not facts. Facts don't sell papers, (so to speak).
If you want to see if any of the MSM have any class, let's see if they retract and or provide any balance to their original stories.
18 comments:
I would like to know what Judge presided over the proceedings? if it was one of our regular Judges than they violated the law by not requising themselves from it becouse of their close relationship with him when he was States Attorney, did they? If they didn't then I would say it was just a case of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".
If they do print a retraction it will be an inch of print on a back page.
Gerald, first of all it was going to be a retired Somerset County Judge. Considering it was dropped BEFORE court even went into session, your comment is out of line.
Thank you Joe for sticking with it while others didn't.
I imagine the motion to dismiss was initiated and/or agreed upon by the plaintiff.
I believe Gerald is unfamiliar with this motion. If it was found that there was no reasonable grounds for relief than that would be a decision made by a judge.
I knew it! im so glad to hear this!
Thank you! I'm glad to see that the system does work no matter how people feel about the person.
There are always TWO sides to a story.
Love it! I smell bacon....(referring to JT's ass)
ROTFLMAO
Congrats to former State's Attorney Ruark.
Thank you Joe for keeping us informed with FACTS!
According to the Daily Times the "victim" filed a written request yesterday to have the peace order dismissed. To call this person a "victim" is irresponsible.
Sounds more like vindictiveness to me and at the 11th hour when she realized the good and the bad and the ugly were about to be revealed not only about Ruark but also about her she had a change of heart.
The Peace Order charges of Sept were dropped by the victim in Oct. LE charged Davis Ruark with violation of a protective order in Oct before the Peace Order was rescinded. My question is will Ruark still have to appear in court in Dec for violation of the Peace Order, a more serious charge than a Peace order, as charged by LE?
1:54: Keep in mind the Peace Order is not a criminal charge. It is civil action. However, Violation of the Peace Order is a criminal charge. So I also ask: Does that criminal charge still stand? Regardless of whether the allegations in the Peace Order are true, false, vindictive, whatever, he was still ordered by the judge not to have any contact.
anonymous 3:12, NO. Mind you, I'm no lawyer but the moment she DROPPED the charges, its done.
I'm no lawyer either but if I understand correctly, the criminal charges could still stand because while the Peace Order has been dismissed now, it was in effect at the time of his alleged violation. I think the state's attorney could absolutely go forward on the charges if they wished to....but that doesn't necessarily mean they will. Actually, they probably won't, mainly because what's the point if the Peace Order is dismissed by the plaintiff? It just seems unnecessary at this point.
The MD State Legislature needs to look into Peace Orders. It is the most abused process in the court system. Studies have shown that they clearly do not provide the intended protection and the level of misuse is as much as 75%.
Maybe a fine for the action like this woman pulled or if a petioners fails to show is the answer to the misuse. Something needs to be done to stop tying up the court system unnecesarily.
Well I AM a lawyer and a former Assistant State's Attorney so here you go:
The Petitioner in the peace order case does not have the ability to "drop" the criminal charges. Once charged, the charges belong to the State of Maryland and the appropriate State's Attorney has the discretion as to whether to proceed on the charge(s). The only thing that was "dropped" today was the peace order.
Since the peace order was in effect at the time the alleged violation occurred, the criminal case still has legs. The Petitioner may confer with the State's Attorney as to her wishes with the case, but in the end, it is up to the State's Attorney.
Thanks, 6:42, for clearing that matter up. Though no lawyer, I had the same idea that you have validated. It's the same thing, I guess, of a spouse requesting a peace order against her estranged husband; once she has done that, the state takes over and she does not have the power to rescind it.
I do look forward to Davis' having his day in court and having all charges dropped. He has been through the mill, exploited by so much of the press. Now it's time for him to have a chance to get his personal life in order and to resume being what he is--a fine lawyer.
Post a Comment