By a reader

July 23, 2009 12:02 PM | Link to this

I did not know who else to contact, but I hope you will “hear me”. I am presently out of state and read the PBP on line. How disturbing it is to see the quote :The Homepage of Paradise” and just below it are the ugly mug shots of two recently reluctant admissions to the local jail!! Is this your picture of “paradise”????

By The Church Lady!

July 16, 2009 9:59 AM | Link to this

Seems to me that this “eureka” is a quite severely deranged sociopath.She has nothing better to do than come in here and write mean negative disparaging remarks? And yet she claims to be an “attorney” ….???????? Now seriously—-does anyone believe THAT!

I’m sure Satan made her do it.

By DON CORLEONE

July 15, 2009 9:08 PM | Link to this

I see now that “eureeeeeeeka” is actually the idiot lawyer with the holes in his shoes that caused the MISTIAL!

What an ignorant hateful typical attorney.

By Susan D'Andrea-Grantham

July 15, 2009 3:54 PM | Link to this

Frank- my comment has nothing to do with this article. I was relieved to see you are still at the PB Post. My son was in one of your articles in 1996 (he was 9) and a victim of battery from a Hollywood P.O.; I saved your column for him to read when he was older. After Tom Simcox’s arrest last year (God’s hands move slow, but, they are sure)I told my son about the sweet justice that came to Simcox and I pulled out the column and gave it to him-he is now 22. He enjoyed the fact that you “backed him up” He didn’t realize how many people backed him up-he was so young when it happened.He has grown into a wonderful young man. I thought I would let you know that your columns helped me through that horrible time and 13 years later it placed a smile on my son’s face. Thank you.

By Susan D'Andrea-Grantham

July 15, 2009 3:49 PM | Link to this

Frank- my comment has nothing to do with this article. I was relieved to see you are still at the PB Post. My son was in one of your articles in 1996 (he was 9) and a victim of battery from a Hollywood P.O.; I saved your column for him to read when he was older. After Tom Simcox’s arrest last year (God’s hands move slow, but, they are sure)I told my son about the sweet justice that came to Simcox and I pulled out the column and gave it to him-he is now 22. He enjoyed the fact that you “backed him up” He didn’t realize how many people backed him up-he was so young when it happened.He has grown into a wonderful young man. I thought I would let you know that your columns helped me through that horrible time and 13 years later it placed a smile on my son’s face. Thank you.

By Susan D'Andrea-Grantham

July 15, 2009 3:48 PM | Link to this

Frank- my comment has nothing to do with this article. I was relieved to see you are still at the PB Post. My son was in one of your articles in 1996 (he was 9) and a victim of battery from a Hollywood P.O.; I saved your column for him to read when he was older. After Tom Simcox’s arrest last year (God’s hands move slow, but, they are sure)I told my son about the sweet justice that came to Simcox and I pulled out the column and gave it to him-he is now 22. He enjoyed the fact that you “backed him up” He didn’t realize how many people backed him up-he was so young when it happened.He has grown into a wonderful young man. I thought I would let you know that your column helped me through that horrible time and 13 years later it placed a smile on my son’s face. Thank you.

By eureeeeeeeka

July 15, 2009 3:30 PM | Link to this

Alright, Mrs. Cerebino, the gig is up.

I must confess. I only posted here to see what kind of insulting and incoherent tirades I would get from you. And every time you would promptly respond with another insulting and incoherent rant, without fail.

I took pleasure in knowing that 30 seconds a day from me would get you to waste 30 minutes of your life. I imagined you typing furiously, foaming at the mouth, ready to put down any criticism toward your husband (because he’s so perfect).

But, I realized that I made a mistake. With my 6 figure salary, 30 seconds from me still worth a lot more than 30 minutes from you, who are unemployed. Any number times zero is still zero (read this one again, I know it’s hard for you to comprehend).

I won’t be back so there is no point in responding. However, I would not be surprised to see another insulting comment from you. Just make sure you wipe the foam off the keyboard, because I know rabies is contagious.

Chuckles.

By Guido Sarducci

July 15, 2009 1:01 PM | Link to this

oh, so john asserts that he is, indeed, an “attorney” ,albeit one not “practicing” in the State, eh …???

Well now —-that would explain much of the lack of “pertinence” most of his.her statements signified ????

Now as per your “gubu” ; this is not my first rodeo nor my first gubu either my dear friend and “attorney “john” ! I have endured & survived, and indeed THRIVED during hundreds of gubu’s. How many gubus have YOU endured Dear John?

And speaking of posting GRUDGES : why not re-read YOUR last few posts, eh Dear John ???? Talk about a blatant and obvious HYPOCRITE ???????

Aggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh! I couldn’t make a better case for multible gubus than Dear John herself!!!!! Have you perhaps tried gubus anonymous? I hear they can de-gubu you in severe cases such as those you’ve shown on this blog in only a matter of a few years with daily gubu therapy!!! Try it!

By GW BUSH

July 15, 2009 12:28 PM | Link to this

again eureeeeekaaaaaaaa bores us all with her sick obsession with just posting negative remarks.

and I’m as much “frank cerabino” as ” eureeeeeka” is an “attorney” and “has a “job”!!! Heh heh …..

anyone with half a brain; (oops—didn’t mean to disparage your mental retardedness there eureeeeekaaaaaaaa)……can see immediately tha tCerabino’s writing style is totally different (and I hate to admit-much better) than MINE.

But we’ll humor our little sad distraught friend eureeeeeka, and just AGREE with her….

OK little out-of-work-on-welfare-with-no-income-and-all-the-time-in-the-world-to-post-inane-replies-here we’re patiently waiting for your next totally off-topic reply!!!!!!!

Come on girl; we know you can do it !!!! Don’t give up yet!!!!!

By John

July 15, 2009 12:22 PM | Link to this

Guido Sarducci,

I know you are intentionally misreading my posts, but I do not mind rising to the bait, as each one of your posts, and those of your ilk, make anyone who supports this column and this writer look stupid (and I do not believe that they are, but your posts make it hard to see those who have true reasons to support this writer). I am not and have not criticize others spelling. I am saying that if you are going to criticize other people’s spelling, make sure your own posts are spelled correctly.

Also, I have no grudge. I just could not believe the arrogance of the writer. I am a lawyer who does not live in Florida. I discovered this article, and the paper, from the blog, Above the Law (www.abovethelaw.com). Search shoes on the site and you will discover the post. I came only to see how stupid the lawyers had been, and then read the amazing “how wonderful am I” piece by this journalist.

The fact that you think that people would comment due to a grudge makes me think this is not the first gubu this writer did.

By eureeeeeka

July 15, 2009 9:39 AM | Link to this

GW Bush = Frank Cerebino

By GW BUSH

July 14, 2009 6:58 PM | Link to this

Is this wack-job “eureeeeka” for real ????

what kind of a fat ugly smelly crack-whore skank is she that she has nothing better to do than write back and forth stupid immature childish rants in a newspaper blog ?????

Her childish remarks have absolutely nothing to do with the column! ???? She just loves to see her idiot writing in print obviously—-she is a Wannabe-reporter! No wonder she’s taking issue with Cerabino!!! What a pathetic sad person.

By eureeeeka

July 14, 2009 5:32 PM | Link to this

One time I dated this guy who also claimed to be a licensed clinical worker “working full time on his schedule.”

I dumpted him right after I found out it was another clever way of saying “I am an unemployed loser.”

Oh how I digress. My sincerest apologies! What were we arguing about again, Mrs. Cerebino? Oh I remember know - perhaps something in the realms of how after Frank gets fired for causing a mistrial, your unemployment check amount will double?

Your move, wifey!

By F. Lee Bailey

July 14, 2009 1:04 PM | Link to this

i see that eureeeeekaaaaaaa, who denies the obvious : that she is NOT an attorney—-also posts nasty venom-laden posts ALL DAY LONG meaning she is definitely out of work and living on welfare & food stamps in HUD Housing with an old rusty broken cadillac in the cracked rust-covered driveway…………..

poor sad eureeeeeka has nothing constructive or positive to say and just enjoys coming on this blog fighting, and making denigratory defamatory remarks. This is clearly indicative of a pathological Borderline Personality with extreme Narcissistic Overlays. (oh—-by the way—-I’m a Licensed Clinical Social Worker and Psychotherapist and do work full time on my own schedule so I can answer your ill-intentioned posts any time I wish).

“ALL lawyers write in a clean & concise manner” …?????? Are you TOTALLY on MEDS …??? I’d say the answer to that question is a loud resounding YESssssssssssssssss!

Most lawyers can’t write for crap! It’s amazing any of them even got out of undergraduate school, let alone law college.They all THINK they write wonderfully; as they are some of the most arrogant individuals on the planet - as we can all witness to just from the posts we see on this blog!!!

But—-sadly— reality is they write horribly and have almost no common sense (as we see when one wants to wear old smelly shoes into court that have holes in them “because they are lucky”—-then loses the case!!! AND—-his sister who CLAIMS to be a lawyer also wears holy shoes into court claiming the same stupid rationale!!!

Pleaseeeeeeee….spare me the dumb theatrics and childish superstitions as rationale for their idotic and contemptible behavior.

OK Miss eureeeeeka ———- we’re all waiting with baited breath to see you ridicule yourself in public once more!!!! Come on; we’re all WAITING !!!!!!!!!!

By eureeeeeka

July 14, 2009 9:39 AM | Link to this

Mrs. Cerebino,

All lawyers write in a clean and concise manner because writing is what we do for a living, and that doesn’t mean we are all the same person.

It seems like your full time job is to throw insults at people on Cerebino’s comment section. I guess I’ll take back my “how about them apples” question, since you probably can’t afford them on unemployment checks.

By Guido Sarducci

July 14, 2009 6:44 AM | Link to this

I see john at 11:40pm can’t sleep & needs to sit and type another bashing nasty mean-spirited post about how “this blog is all filled with bashing, nasty meanspirited posts” …heh heh ……….

AND—-he’s got the ARROGANCE to whine about mispelling —-?? AS he does it HIMSELF …????????

Talk about a MAJOR HYPOCRITE~~~???

And see what I mean about how ALL the various FAKE named posters ALL have the same syntax and wording, showing us that they are all one person who very clearly has this major resentment and GRUDGE against Frank Cerabino or he wouldn’t be whining over & over & over about the vagaries of an intricate court trial process that resulted in a mistrial that no human on earth could have “predicted” , yet he keeps telling us all how Cerabino wrote this column KNOWING that “it would cause a mistrial” …????

NOW , he has the unmitigated stupidity to sit here at 11:40pm and give us reasons WHY that might not be so!!!! ?????

John (and his 15 other fake names in here) must be a classic schizophrenic and apparently needs to go back on his/her meds again…they obviously can’t make up their mind whether Frank actually IS the cause of the mistrial or NOT …!!!!!!

So what EXACTLY IS their point; or ——is there a point ????

As stated—I think their only REAL point is they have some long-standing GRUDGE against Cerabino and are one of those nasty negative personalities that have nothing better than to keep posting to blogs trying to show how “lovely their literate skills are”, which unfortunately comes off just the opposite, as they have shown repeatedly how illiterate and mean-spirited they are!

By John

July 13, 2009 11:39 PM | Link to this

It is beyond irony that people are pointing out spelling erros in other people’s posts while ignoring their own. And I find it especially laughable that these people also complain about rants, when their posts are filled with insults, words in ALL CAPS, and seem interested only in mean spirited put downs.

I post only to further point out that yes, the journalistic piece did indeed cause the mistrial. People who argue that its not guns who kill people, it is people who kill people miss a key point - it is both.

In this instance, there are several factors which combined to create the mistrial -

First, if no motion had been filed, no article, no mistrial.

Second, if no article was written, then no jurors find out, then nomistrial.

Finally, if the Juror had not brought it to the other juror’s attention, there is no mistrial.

[And there are several what ifs that can be added, should you want to blame the lawyer with the shoes, the judge, etc)

But the article is a cause.

By DON CORLEONE

July 13, 2009 5:39 PM | Link to this

looks like our sad little friend eureeeeekaaaaaaaaaa is getting angrier & angrier ……….and her rants are getting more & more indecipherable!

(Must be as she becomes more agitated and more upset she is typing faster & faster and ………????)

poor baby!

Come on baby, throw another rambling flame up here; we all are waiting!!!!!!!!

By eureeeeeka

July 13, 2009 5:10 PM | Link to this

EUREKA!

I get it now. You argue and type like an angry old woman. You must be Mrs. Cerebino.

How does it feel to have your second grade son overshadow you in terms of education? What happens when he gets to third grade?

By eureeeeeka

July 13, 2009 4:56 PM | Link to this

Still haven’t answered my question yet, Cerebino’s second grade son who apparently just bought a broken keyboard - I am a federal attorney, how are them apples now?

Also, this is really funny. Did you really accuse people of having “rambling incoherent angry tirades?” Really? Wow, maybe something else other than your keyboard is broken.

By Clarence Darrow

July 13, 2009 4:49 PM | Link to this

eureeeeeeeeeka ——

have you any idea what the most mispelled word in the english language is???

that’s why your last post is so pathetic……..

let’s just see:

1st there is: the very 1st word in the post- comeon—it is NOT a contraction I’m afraid to inform you oh embellished one!

2nd: “ILLOGICA” —-but perhaps you use the ancient LATIN version …??? perhaps from your training as an …????

3rd: that word that is so ften mispelled!!!!!!!!

For someone who chose to point out mispelled words—-you really are pathetic there —and you can’t even spell your own fake name correctly there EUREKA!

EUREKAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa…… heh heh heh !

Poor little baby!

Just so “busy” up there in her 13th floor office drafting immigration memos for a FEDERAL JUDGE ; not that you appear arrogant or anything!!!! heh heh! Nooooooooooo……….

Good luck loser.

By THE GODDESS

July 13, 2009 12:51 PM | Link to this

eureka is soooooo DELUDED!

and sooooooooooo ANGRY!!! wow! looks like he might actually be ready to “go over the edge” soon based on how rapidlyhis angry invective is increasing and getting more and more VEHEMENT!

Alas —-I’m “sure” he/she is sitting in their “13th floor SUITE, eh —-drafting some bs document??? NOT!!!! what crock of bs.

I knew it wouldn’t take long b-4 they spat back another rambling incoherent angry tirade too!!!!

Soooooooooooooo predictable thes wack jobs, right ????

The make us all laugh and keep us quite amused at their feebel attemps to look like they might know what they are talking about though.

Sad and so pathetic.

By eureeeka

July 13, 2009 12:27 PM | Link to this

C’mon Clarence.

No need to spend more than 5 seconds on your angry, illogica, insulting rant to realize that you are the same person, again.

Also, once again, typing in ALL CAPS and misspelling easy words kind of gave your identity away too.

Which brings me to my second point - hello Frank, it’s good to see you are either (1) zealously guarding the comments section of your article, or (2) you’ve hired a 2nd grader to do so for you (your son?)

Lastly, I know you clearly live a pathetic life just from watching you throw out insults over the internet. I am currently sitting in my 13th floor office drafting an immigration memo for a federal judge.

What are you doing now? How about them apples?

By Clarence Darrow

July 13, 2009 11:04 AM | Link to this

eureka chuckles as well he should for posting yet another defamatiry bashing flaming negative and nonsensical statement like all the others he’s posted under all those other silly fabricated names………

IF “eureka” (who is so inferiorly mentally equipped that he can’t tell all the syntax from all the posts by “cerabino supporters” is totally different; don’t even bother trying to explain THAT to “eureka”—he can’t comprehend it!); which proves statistically his lie, his statement that “ALL” the cerabino supporters type in “ALL CAPS” is a bit baffling in that there isn’t ONE SINGLE post—-either cerabino “supporter” or “basher”, that typed in “ALL CAOS” …??????? Huh ????

Now—- as to little “eureka’s” (who probaly has no idea what that term MEANS or where it came from!!!)statement that ALL the supporters of cerabino are the same person and/or are cerabino himself—-by my sentence above, which will go right over eureka’s dense little angry head, we KNOW that that’s a lie!!! BUT —-it takes one “to know one”, eh ???

As we can easily see by the same syntax in all the defamatory and libelous posts attacking cerabino in anger and resentment—-those by : eureka, christopher bone, christopher bonehead, bonehead, brian, Wow, Phil, Rachel, Cerabino The Self-Important Dolt (nobody’s a wee bit angry and psychotic here, right???), and of course that illustrious and well-know “ATTORNET”—-“BRADLEY PIERCE” (who just happens to NOT be listed on any Palm Beach county Bar Association membership????? huh ???) ……….so here we find the simple and obvious TRUTH:

all these fAKE posters who also obviouly are out of work and unemployes on welfare/food stamps, etc., as they are posting these bashing angry posts all day long EVERY DAY, are aLL the same angry malicious and intellectually WEAK person! Yep —-that’s right; all the angry negative and nonsensical posts bashing cerabino on here are by the same person and the same person who clearly is extremely anti-social, probaly a psychotic Borderline Personality with extreme narcissistic tendencies, as proven by his high image and false portrayal of himself as an “attorney”—-just a wee bit DELUSIONAL with some proclivities of Delusions of Grandeur, eh …?????

What a sad pathetic poor human being…………

I hope he gets some clinical “help” before he injures himself or others—-which seems clearly the road he’s headed by his escalatinly angry posts here……………

By Eureka!

July 13, 2009 10:14 AM | Link to this

Has anyone noticed that every commentor supporting Cerebino here types in the same incoherent and insulting style in all caps?

I think it’s reasonable to think that all of them are just one person. I think it’s also reasonable to think that this incoherent, illogical person is in fact Frank Cerebino.

Lastly, don’t throw out insults at lawyers if you know nothing about them, Frank, like how they went to a “law college” instead of a “law school.”

Chuckles.

By Cerabino the Self-Important Dolt

July 12, 2009 9:25 PM | Link to this

A bunch of jurors, the judge, and the lawyers have to redo the entire trial because Cerabino couldn’t keep it in his pants. His mother never taught him that you don’t have to do something just because you can.

If he held off on the article for a week, then the mistrial wouldn’t have happened. The news would still be funny, and things will be well.

But he’s so self-indulgent he does it anyway. A trial that many people spent a lot of time on is wasted. And Frank explains that he has the right to do it. But he doesn’t understand that it doesn’t make it right for him to have done it.

By Cerabino the Self-Important Dolt

July 12, 2009 9:21 PM | Link to this

A bunch of jurors, the judge, and the lawyers have to redo the entire trial because Cerabino couldn’t keep it in his pants. His mother never taught him that you don’t have to do something just because you can.

If he held off on the article for a week, then the mistrial wouldn’t have happened. The news would still be funny, and things will be well.

But he’s so self-indulgent he does it anyway. A trial that many people spent a lot of time on is wasted. And Frank explains that he has the right to do it. But he doesn’t understand that it doesn’t make it right for him to have done it.

By Cerabino the Self-Important Dolt

July 12, 2009 9:20 PM | Link to this

A bunch of jurors, the judge, and the lawyers have to redo the entire trial because Cerabino couldn’t keep it in his pants. His mother never taught him that you don’t have to do something just because you can.

If he held off on the article for a week, then the mistrial wouldn’t have happened. The news would still be funny, and things will be well.

But he’s so self-indulgent he does it anyway. A trial that many people spent a lot of time on is wasted. And Frank explains that he has the right to do it. But he doesn’t understand that it doesn’t make it right for him to have done it.

By Brian

July 12, 2009 7:21 PM | Link to this

Frank, in your little snipes at the lawyers you forget who you really cost here: the litigants. This was a big case, and thanks to you, the injured plaintiff- and the defendants whose money is at risk- will have to undergo the expense of a new trial.

All so you can prove nobody can stop you from running a column. Well congratulations: you are a sanctimonious, pompous jerk who successfully “proved” that nobody could stop you.

By F. Lee Bailey

July 12, 2009 6:58 PM | Link to this

John is the real BONEHEAD around here!!!!

(and if he is really a lawyer I’ll eat my holy shoes!!!) …

But he’s a pretty good liar isn’t he??

(actually not…….)

NOBODY said or insinuated that the jure was “sequestered” you pompous arrogant BONEHEAD!!!!!!!!!! I said REPEATEDLY—-understand what REPEATEDLY means bonehead—-REPEATEDLY…repeatedly————-that the a*****e JUDGE SHOULD have instructed them to not READ ANYTHING pertaining to the TRIAL—-can you possibly understand what I just wrote here BONEHEAD JOHN (Mr. “pretend to be an attorney!!!!”) ???? Does that mean SEQUESTERED you flaming idiot …????????? heh heh ………….. I’m onlysaying these taunts as ?I know it really irritates you bonehead and makes you so angry as we’ve all seen here REPEATEDLY ….got that bonehead: repeatedly …??????????? heh heh!!! SEQUESTERED …?????????? bonehead!!!

And Ilove your obfuscated inane “logic” where you TELL US that Cerabino’s column was the “CAUSE” of the mistrial…. are you on Oxycotin or quaaludes ??? or maybe you and Michael Jackson have been partying together..??? You like Jesus Juice too John Bonehead …??? (and 8 year old boys?????)

So anyways—-now john bonehead is “TELLING” us all that Cerabino has this MAGICAL POWER to write an article that will “CAUSE” a mistrial….???????? Wow! That “POWER” could be worth quite a bit of money to many people on trial who have lots of money to pay Cerabino to “fix” their trial, right …?????? He’s a very POWERFUL WRITER I see!!!!!!!

Oh—-and I beg to differ with you john BONEHEAD: the “lawyer with the holes” here IS the IDIOT (well——so are you , but that’s another story, right ???) ——-What “Normal” self-respecting sane attorney would show up in a Court of Law——disrespecting the Court and the Officers of The Court, by wearing an old pair of worn out shoes with holes in them???? (and since I know your drug-addled opiated brain incapable of logical argument, the answer john BONEHEAD, is NONE !!!! REPEATEDLY ——none….got it john BONEHEAD…??? want me to REPEAT IT …?????????)

ok john the BONEHEAD: so your REAL issue is that you feel Cerabino “passed the buck” , eh??? AND with “arrogance” …?????????

Pray tell ——WHERE, even in that opiated addled peanut you pose as a “brain”, did you perambulate THIS cosmic infraction of meta-parabolic oxymoronic NON-logic…???? Shall I REPEAT that question for your overly wrought and highly law-school educated “mind” there john the BONER …..?????????? or was that bonehead; I can’t remember as from trying to read AND make any sense out of your totally obfuscated and deranged attempt at a post, I’m confused!!!! Let me REPEAT that //////// (or NOT!!!) hahah

Now - to the point there john Bonerhead: you obviously had a very hard time passing the Florida Bar, perhaps after a few previous attempts, eh?? And you said you went to law school WHERE …???? The Virgin Islands ?????

Yes —-I do believe it shows!!!!

What also shows very very clearly john the bonerhead, is that in this “law school” that you purportedly attended, they didn’t really stress SPELLING, did they…???????

And judging from the immense amount of words not spelled correctly in your post, you can’t seem to figure out how to work your “spellcheck” feature on your computer…?????? (I’m sorry but bonerhead just leaves himself so wide open; but it IS kinda like beating up on a little kid that can’t fight, isn’t it …?????) ………..

alright now bonerhead……… let’s see if your drug addled mind can shape some sort of LUCID logical answer here!!!! Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………..snoringgggggggggg…………….waitingggggggggg………….

By John

July 12, 2009 3:16 PM | Link to this

One last commnet, Don Corleone, in reality the lawyer with the holes is not the idiot here. One would think you would have read both articles. The “idiot” was the lawyer who filed the motion - without letting the shoe issue get into his head, and without trying to one up the other side, there would have been no motion, no article, no mistrial.

Like I said, I am not saying the lawyers themselves were innocent - but that is not the issue here. I am responding to an article in which Mr. Cerabino passes the buck with a certain level of arrogance that I do not like.

By John

July 12, 2009 3:12 PM | Link to this

DON CORLEONE, et al,

While I cannot speak for Mr. Pierce, I am indeed a lawyer. I do not specialize in litigation, but to take the bar one must take tests in evidence, as well as state civil proceudre etc. My posts have not insulted anyone, neither have i called anyone names. You, and your ilk, appear to think that is how you have a debate. Nothing Mr. Pierce or I put in our posts would in anyway reach teh level needed for “slander” or “Libel and defamation of character”. Again, I typically do not resort to name calling, but when someone throws out accusations like that, without even researching the elements needeed, it does make it hard to be civil.

[As a side piece of legal education, one would not get disbarred for critiquing a journalist. Nor do we lawyers get disbarred should we make a post that others disagreed with. Anyone who has taken the MCBE will tell you that the two things are don’tysleep with your client, and never touch the money in the trust acount]

No one is saying what the journalist did was illegal. And no one is defending the two lawyers who both acted classless at different times. However, as Scalia has noted recently in relation to privacy, just because you can do something does not mean you should do something.

As I have mentioned before, please explain what fact I have wrong - The article CAUSED the mistrial (that is not in doubt - one can argue about judge directions, jurors responsibilities, but the fact you think that jurors would norammly be sequestered, or worse shows how limited your legal experience is), it is a FACT that BOTH lawyers were aware of this and ASKED the journalist to WAIT (not supress but merely WAIT) before publishing. It is a FACT that the story had no immediate need. It would have been just as “funny” a week later. It is a FACT that many people have suffered, including the local tax payer.

When someone is made aware of potential consequence of their actions, and chooses to proceed anyway, they are being reckless. Mr. Cerabino acted recklessly, with a disregard for anyone else. Had he held anyone but himself in any sort of regard he would have waited one week to publish. He could even have added a paragraph about how he wanted to run it but held it back. Maybe concluded with the verdict.

Finally, the person (and really I hope you just posted under different names, I hope there are not more people who think like this), who believes this motion was public record, your ignorance is understanable but still ignorance. Why don’t you call your local court and ask how these motions are handled. Not just anyone gets them. The fact of the matter is, without this article those jurors would not have known about the motion.

That, at least, is the perspective of this UNC law grad and New York and Florida qualified lawyer. But then, what do I know.

By Christopher Bone

July 12, 2009 12:43 PM | Link to this

“Gee … I am sure getting off this one scott free … everybody is blaming my opponent or the judge for the mistrial MY CLIENTS SUFFERED. Everyone seems to be too stupid to blame ME. Even though I was the one who filed the stupid motion in the first place. Of course I knew that this kind of motion would inspire Mr. Robb to fight back and wear his holy shoes. Whew, I sure am lucky that nobody has picked up on the fact that my immature petty motion set this whole thing in motion …

By Christopher BoneHead

July 12, 2009 12:24 PM | Link to this

Hmmmm, Maybe I should have just tried the case on its merrits instead of filing that stupid, inane, frivilous motion about my opponents shoes. Note to self, “ixnay on the ooshes-shay”

By BONEhead

July 12, 2009 12:14 PM | Link to this

Mr. Cerabino - go go go. You did the right thing. YOU didn’t cause any mistrial. YOU simply reported a story. Perhaps the attorneys - especially the BONEHEAD who filed the original motion - should refrain from filing any public paper that could result in a mistrial if read by any member of the public not to mention a juror. Perhaps the BONEHEADed attorney should not waste the Court’s time by asking it to entertain a motion about the shoes his opposing counsel is wearing. The motion was frivilous and idiotic and he and his clients got exactly what they deserved. Too bad his clients had to rely on him for representation

By BONEhead

July 12, 2009 11:58 AM | Link to this

Mr. Bone got exactly what he deserved. The only “innocent” people who were hurt by this article were HIS CLIENTS … In a complete breach of fiduciary duty to the interests of his clients, Mr. Bone filed an assinine motion that made its way all over the legal community. He got what he deserved … actually, he should PERSONALLY have to pay all the court costs too. BONEHEAD

By Chris

July 12, 2009 9:05 AM | Link to this

I think the blame lies with the attorney who filed the motion. It’s about as ridiculous as it gets and if i’m a juror and i see an attorney whose shoes have holes in them its not going to leave a good impression of that attorney that he cant drop 30 bucks at payless for even basic simple shoes.

They were within their rights to ask you to not file the story until after the trial, and honestly i think you should have waited, but there is no rule against what you did. Unfortunately, they will now have to pick a whole other jury and lose another week or two of their lives trying the case all because of a dumb shoe motion.

By CHOMP CHOMP

July 12, 2009 1:50 AM | Link to this

If I was Cerabino, I would sue this idiot “bradley pierce” for libel and defamation of character.

he sure doesn’t sound like a lwayer and if he IS—-why is he so stupid to have triple posted his remark …???????

what an assinine immature moron!!!!

IF he IS a lwayer—-(i’m sure he’s NOT!) —— he should be disbarred for giving that stupid advice that goes against every tenet of modern jurisprudence!!!!!!

Disbar his childish A*S!!!!!!

By DON CORLEONE

July 12, 2009 1:41 AM | Link to this

Pierce & John—-IF, as you “say” you “are” indeed attorneys (which seems EXTREMELY FARFETCHED in view of your total lack of INSIGHT and/or RESPONSIBILITY of the Trial JUDAGE in this matter: that it was HIS JOB & RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that the jurors were not corrupted by outside influences such as a newspaper article, that just might sway their decisions!

How DARE you accuse a journalist for an ERROR the Trial Judge made!!!!!!!

This JUDGE was mandated by his profession and background to instruct the jury to NOT read any newspaper articles related to the case.His lack of enforcement of that in this case borders on serious MALPRACTICE and idiocy!

Now as to whether Cerabino or ANYBODY could “know” or, even THINK, that publishing what was simply PUBLIC RECORD ALREADY …………. MIGHT have ANY effect, let alone “cause” a “mistrial”is, I firmly believe, a little bit out of the realm of a journalist,lawyer, or ANYONE to “KNOW” in advance of said inept Judge MAKING such Ruling!!!

IF, as you said, you two ARE indeed “ATTORNEYS” ——you must have both slept through most of your Law Classes to erroneously think that a Journalist might ever be responsible for anything a JUROR might be wrongly allowed to SEE and then TALK ABOUT with other JURORS ….????????

How, might I inquire, was Cerabino supposed to have had all THAT under HIS CONTROL …?

You two are at best inept, and at worst-extremely slanderous and libelous and should be sued in a civil court for slander & defamation of character by Mr. Cerabino.

I wouldn’t publicize what Law College I went to if I was either of you two morons!

The “request? by the two case attorneys for Cerabino to not print that story, was strictly from a materialistic and monetary concern that each one though it might create a situation where he LOST the case ——NOT that it might result in a “MISTRIAL”. Get your s**t together and follow Legal Logic and TRY to show that you actually MIGHT have Law Degrees (which I STRONGLY DOUBT!!!!. Cerabino’s JOB and RESPONSIBILITY IS to report to the Public what IS Public Record, as this is a Free Democratic Nation and the Public relies on the Press to inform it of cases just such as this.

Again—-the real moron and original mitigant in this fiasco was the idiot attorney that thought he “needed” to wear his “lucky shoes” with the holes in them to “win the case”. As we’ve all SEEN—-his stubborn and arrogant superstitious belief IS what actually CAUSED this mistrial and resulted in a financial burden toi the County and State of Florida!

Now get real and stop trying to “blame” a Journalist for doing what he SHOULD HAVE done—-and doing it with class and honor!

By Bradley Pierce

July 11, 2009 11:53 PM | Link to this

Sorry for the multiple posts.

Internet issues.

By Bradley Pierce

July 11, 2009 11:40 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Cerabino,

I am an attorney.

Attorneys certainly do need to be held accountable whenever they act unreasonably. However, newspaper reporters should not be held to any lesser standard.

A mistrial will cost all parties to a lawsuit (plaintiffs and defendants) thousands of dollars, a long delay because of the difficulty in getting a trial scheduled with the court, and a pretty heaping helping of mental grief. This does not even begin to describe the waste of time of the judge and the court staff and the consequent tax dollars which will have to be spent all over again when they have to re-do the trial. Moreover, because of the costs, a mistrial can effectively deprive someone with a legitimate case of their day in court—it robs them of justice.

Mr. Bone made a request of you: “Could you please put a warning at the top of the article that says something like: ‘This is an actual legal case in progress. If you are sitting on a Palm Beach County Jury, don’t read my column today.’”

Mr. Bone explained to you the gravity of the situation and why such a disclaimer was needed. However, for a reason known only to you (which you did not explain in your article), you dismissed Mr. Bone’s request and ran your article—without any disclaimer at all—with full knowledge of the consequences which would potentially result from your actions.

You claim that you had no responsibility to put the disclaimer on the article. According to you, “holding the column or putting a warning at the top of it went far beyond my responsibilities here.” If you mean that you had no legal responsibility, you are probably correct—you probably had the legal right to run the article as-is.

However, that is not the reason why you are drawing fire from critics. The simple fact of the matter is that many reporters today act as if they are above any social standards and can and should report and print whatever they want—regardless of the consequences. Such reporters view themselves as entirely without responsibility for the wounds which their words may create.

Mr. Cerabino, I hope that you are not among such reporters. However, your actions cannot help but create the impression that you care more about exercising your journalistic freedom that you do about being a good citizen, agreeing to a reasonable request, and taking 30-seconds out of your day to cut and paste a disclaimer in order to save a whole lot of people a whole lot of time, effort, and money (including tax money).

Mr. Cerabino, I hope what has happened here will be a reminder to you and to us all to think more of how our actions might affect others before we hastily exercise what we believe to be our rights.

Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.

By Bradley Pierce

July 11, 2009 11:38 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Cerabino,

I am an attorney.

Attorneys certainly do need to be held accountable whenever they act unreasonably. However, newspaper reporters should not be held to any lesser standard.

A mistrial will cost all parties to a lawsuit (plaintiffs and defendants) thousands of dollars, a long delay because of the difficulty in getting a trial scheduled with the court, and a pretty heaping helping of mental grief. This does not even begin to describe the waste of time of the judge and the court staff and the consequent tax dollars which will have to be spent all over again when they have to re-do the trial. Moreover, because of the costs, a mistrial can effectively deprive someone with a legitimate case of their day in court—it robs them of justice.

Mr. Bone made a request of you: “Could you please put a warning at the top of the article that says something like: ‘This is an actual legal case in progress. If you are sitting on a Palm Beach County Jury, don’t read my column today.’”

Mr. Bone explained to you the gravity of the situation and why such a disclaimer was needed. However, for a reason known only to you (which you did not explain in your article), you dismissed Mr. Bone’s request and ran your article—without any disclaimer at all—with full knowledge of the consequences which would potentially result from your actions.

You claim that you had no responsibility to put the disclaimer on the article. According to you, “holding the column or putting a warning at the top of it went far beyond my responsibilities here.” If you mean that you had no legal responsibility, you are probably correct—you probably had the legal right to run the article as-is.

However, that is not the reason why you are drawing fire from critics. The simple fact of the matter is that many reporters today act as if they are above any social standards and can and should report and print whatever they want—regardless of the consequences. Such reporters view themselves as entirely without responsibility for the wounds which their words may create.

Mr. Cerabino, I hope that you are not among such reporters. However, your actions cannot help but create the impression that you care more about exercising your journalistic freedom that you do about being a good citizen, agreeing to a reasonable request, and taking 30-seconds out of your day to cut and paste a disclaimer in order to save a whole lot of people a whole lot of time, effort, and money (including tax money).

Mr. Cerabino, I hope what has happened here will be a reminder to you and to us all to think more of how our actions might affect others before we hastily exercise what we believe to be our rights.

Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.

By Bradley Pierce

July 11, 2009 11:36 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Cerabino,

I am an attorney.

Attorneys certainly do need to be held accountable whenever they act unreasonably. However, newspaper reporters should not be held to any lesser standard.

A mistrial will cost all parties to a lawsuit (plaintiffs and defendants) thousands of dollars, a long delay because of the difficulty in getting a trial scheduled with the court, and a pretty heaping helping of mental grief. This does not even begin to describe the waste of time of the judge and the court staff and the consequent tax dollars which will have to be spent all over again when they have to re-do the trial. Moreover, because of the costs, a mistrial can effectively deprive someone with a legitimate case of their day in court—it robs them of justice.

Mr. Bone made a request of you: “Could you please put a warning at the top of the article that says something like: ‘This is an actual legal case in progress. If you are sitting on a Palm Beach County Jury, don’t read my column today.’”

Mr. Bone explained to you the gravity of the situation and why such a disclaimer was needed. However, for a reason known only to you (which you did not explain in your article), you dismissed Mr. Bone’s request and ran your article—without any disclaimer at all—with full knowledge of the consequences which would potentially result from your actions.

You claim that you had no responsibility to put the disclaimer on the article. According to you, “holding the column or putting a warning at the top of it went far beyond my responsibilities here.” If you mean that you had no legal responsibility, you are probably correct—you probably had the legal right to run the article as-is.

However, that is not the reason why you are drawing fire from critics. The simple fact of the matter is that many reporters today act as if they are above any social standards and can and should report and print whatever they want—regardless of the consequences. Such reporters view themselves as entirely without responsibility for the wounds which their words may create.

Mr. Cerabino, I hope that you are not among such reporters. However, your actions cannot help but create the impression that you care more about exercising your journalistic freedom that you do about being a good citizen, agreeing to a reasonable request, and taking 30-seconds out of your day to cut and paste a disclaimer in order to save a whole lot of people a whole lot of time, effort, and money (including tax money).

Mr. Cerabino, I hope what has happened here will be a reminder to you and to us all to think more of how our actions might affect others before we hastily exercise what we believe to be our rights.

Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this matter.

By WOW

July 11, 2009 11:11 PM | Link to this

Wow, Cerabino, you are a real bone head. I could understand if you published this “article” had you not been warned by both attorneys not to do so because of the risk of a mistrial. But, you went ahead and published it even after they asked you to just hold off for a few days? It’s too bad that the Judge can’t assess all of the costs and fees to you for causing this mistrial. And, yes, you caused it; not the jurors, the attorneys, or the judge. Seriously? You called a municipal employee late on a Friday afternoon and expected a response before your deadline the next day? How were the attorneys or judge supposed to get a hold of the jurors before Sunday morning? Jurors aren’t sequestered except for very limited circumstances. They go home and spend the weekend with their families. How were the attorneys supposed to get a hold of the judge over the weekend so that he could issue a warning to the jurors? What a poor exercise of judgment. I don’t read your column and, frankly, I don’t read the Palm Beach Post anymore either. I cancelled my subscription 2 years ago. You aren’t doing much to change my mind.

By John

July 11, 2009 9:54 PM | Link to this

To this guy’s defenders, here is an earlier post of mine. This is the issue. Please let me know what part of it you think I have wrong, or what am i saying that makes me an idiot:

Look, you can justify it all you want, but it is a fact that the mistrial was caused by your article, it is a fact that you were advised of that risk, it is a fact that you thought a cheap humor piece was worth that risk, and it is a fact that it would have been just as “funny” if published after the trial ended. Those are the facts, and they are undisputed.

Motions may be public (this one was not public, at least in the normal sense of the word), but they are not easily reached by jurors. Nor should they be. Even an email is not as easily received by a juror (one would have to deliberately send it to them) or easy to pass around to other jurors. However, your article made that easier. Well done. I am a lawyer, and I know all about wrapping yourself in technicalities to justify an error. You made a mistake, at least have the balls to admit it, or if nothing else, try not to repeat your error. Lives have been changed by this.

By John

July 11, 2009 8:39 PM | Link to this

Guido and Tristan,

I am not going to just dismiss your arguments by insulting you and calling you idiots. However I think you miss the point that some of us (esp. lawyers like myself) have made. Mr. Cerabino was aware that his article MAY cause a mistrial if published before the verdict. Both sides ASKED him not to publish until AFTER the verdict. 9This was ot censorship, just common sense). While Mr. Cerabino did not know how it would play out, he did know there was a chance it would, and a high enough chance that both sides would ask him not to publish. I think everyone agrees that this was not a case that required instant publication. Mr. Cerabino weighed up the options, decide to publish and be damned, and in reality caused the mistrial that he was warned about. He has cost millions in damages, and he has no regrets.

By Guido Sarducci

July 11, 2009 4:59 PM | Link to this

You people are morons!

How on earth was Frank Cerabino supposed to be prescient enough to KNOW that printing that article would have resulted in the following complicated and ridiculous chain of events ending in a mistrial ….????

I think Cerabino is extremely talented (and humorous!!!) but you give him WAY too much credit and influence when you mistakenly ASSUME (and we all know what A*S-U-ME means, right???) …..that he KNEW “what his article would ‘CAUSE’ ” …!!!!!!!

Damn—-if he was that PSYCHIC ——he’d be a Billionaire and all the bookies in Vegas would give him a huge contract!

GET REAL whiners!!!!!

Go chase the REAL CULPRIT —-the Judge who allowed his jurors to read what they should not have been allowed to read DURING A TRIAL!!!!

By TRISTAN

July 11, 2009 4:36 PM | Link to this

I am astonished at the level of arrogance & illiterate bashing on here against Cerabino for simply doing his JOB! (And a very GOOD one at THAT!!!).

Cerabino was NOT responsible for whether a juror read or didn’t read the newsworthy article he published.And if he hadn’t published it when he did, probably some other less-efficient journalist WOULD HAVE, thus stealing a “good job” from Cerabino.

Now —- the illiteracy and arrogance in these comments BASHING Mr. Cerabino for simply doing his JOB result from the FACT that all these commentators bashing him and maligning his character and “intent” in writing/publishing the original article are all WRONG!

The individual atually responsible for this whole mess is the idiot attorney ROBB, who in his immature and irresponsible and stupporn arrogance INSISTED on wearing his old beaten-up shoes with holes in them, even AFTER they became an “ISSUE”. His “reasoning” that they were “LUCKY” proved quite obviously to be stupid & WRONG! BUT—-if he had swallowed his arrogance and pride, and just put on a normal pair of shoes, none of this would have happened—-there would not have been a mistrial, and he might even have WON!!!!!

Coupled with ROBB’s culpability as the Originating fault behind this mistrial, is the JUDGE’s culpability for not clearly instructing the jurors to NOT read anything pertinent to the case—-which very obviously was NOT enforced—-thus causing the MISTRIAL and causing the County & State to incur undue expenses for the wasted trial.

For these pathetic and illiterate commentators to whine and babble incoherently assigning “blame” and “ill intent” to Cerabino simply for reporting the TRUTH and Public Record, is like a little child caught eating all the cookies from the cookie jar—then blaming his mother for BAKING THE COOKIES as the “FAULT”!

These idiots and illiterates all owe Cerabino a sincere and full apology for their libel and slander in such a malicious uncalled for fashion!!!!!

By Phil

July 11, 2009 4:00 PM | Link to this

Weak original article and even weaker follow-up. Another example of how journalists have joined attorneys as parasitic, bottom-feeding drains on society. Congratulations.

By Rachel

July 11, 2009 11:43 AM | Link to this

What saddens me about this situation is not the publication of the article on the motion, but the publication of this second article. Sure, in retrospect, you made a perhaps ill-advised choice to go ahead and publish a fluff piece which triggered a chain reaction with serious consequences, but hindsight is 50-50. Unfortunately, rather than using this as an opportunity to write something interesting and insightful, perhaps examining the interplay between freedom of the press and judicial workings in our media-saturated entertainment news world, you devoted an entire column to explaining why as a journalist it’s not your responsibility to exercise good judgment. It doesn’t matter whose fault it is, what’s interesting about this development is what it highlights about changing judicial and media roles, and your biggest lack of journalistic judgment was in missing the story because you were too busy defending yourself.

By cd katz

July 11, 2009 9:16 AM | Link to this

there was no compelling need to publish your article while the case was in progress. the potential existed for a juror to read the article which jurors are admonished by the judge not to do. no harm would have occurred for you to have waited until after the case was over as suggested by both counsel. if there was one additional reason why newspapers are in the tank and ‘journalists’ are considered not terribly different from used car salesmen (apologies to the car industry) you have provided reasons for the public’s disdain for your profession: the story is more important than the consequences. you were wrong and now you have caused a waste of resources for the court and both parties. the costs of litigation are high enough: you have driven it up even further. the next line you should enter is the bread line.

By Realist

July 11, 2009 8:49 AM | Link to this

“‘It is my belief that innocent people could be hurt in the name of humor and entertainment when any story that doesn’t depend upon timing like this story will have the same entertainment value if told next week,’ he wrote.”

It would’ve.

“But from my perspective, holding the column or putting a warning at the top of it went far beyond my responsibilities here.”

It didn’t.

You are a sorry excuse for a journalist. This story would’ve had the same (marginal) entertainment a few days later. Yet you ran it anyway, knowing of the possibiliy of causing a mistrial.

Sure, freedom of the press is important in this society. That is why court proceedings are only sealed under extraordinary circumstances. But the reason for this is that the substance of the proceeding has public value. Not the case with a fluff piece about supposed poor conduct and unfair strategy on the part of an attorney.

Even if you had the right to run it, you SHOULDN’T have. You exercised bad judgment for no discernable gain. Not even from a business perspective. No one who reads your paper respects you for running the story.

By Jenn

July 11, 2009 4:39 AM | Link to this

Wow, way to write to self-indulgent, self-serving article to unsuccessfully attempt to justify your poor judgement and self-centeredness. What you have a right to do is not necessarily what is the right thing to do — I am not familiar with your journalistic career, but the fact that you’ve been a journalist for so long without recognizing the different scares me.

Good luck on the way to hell.

By Jenn

July 11, 2009 4:37 AM | Link to this

Wow, way to write to self-indulgent, self-serving article to unsuccessfully attempt to justify your poor judgement and self-centeredness. What you have a right to do is not necessarily what you is the right thing to do — I am not familiar with your journalistic career, but the fact that you’ve been doing it for so long without recognizing the different scares me.

Good luck on the way to hell.

By bgp

July 10, 2009 10:55 PM | Link to this

Despicable behavior on your part, Frank.

Your story loses none of its (meager) newsworthiness or(fairly substantial) entertainment value if you hold off on it for two days, but you decide to be a jerk and file it anyways.

A two week trial involves a tremendous investment of public and private resources. To risk wiping all of that out simply because of some overblown sense of journalistic integrity is shameful. Don’t get me wrong, you obviously had the right to publish the story. But publishing it when you did was an absolutely poor choice.

Jurors are essentially picked for their unsophisticated nature. Passing the buck on this whole mess is like claiming you’re not at fault when you hand a loaded gun to a child and the kid ends up killing his playmate. Jurors are idiots. They have no real idea what is and is not okay.

Your attempt to blame the judge or the attorneys is ridiculous as well. The attorneys obviously can’t contact the jurors. And think, for just a moment, what happens if the judge calls the jurors at home on Sunday, as you suggested. Wait for it… yeah, the chance that the jurors will read your article is actually increased. Because jurors are idiots.

The attorneys understand this. One of them told you that there would be a mistrial if your story ran. The other expressed concern that “innocent people could be hurt in the name of humor and entertainment.” You were given every warning that your story had a high likelihood of wasting a tremendous amount of public resources and hurting innocent people.

Any sane person would have balanced the benefit of running the story against the potential costs or running the story. Instead, you calculated some small benefit to yourself, and that was the end of your decision.

You should be fired.

(p.s.: There’s no public or journalistic right to open courts. It’s a constitutional right held by criminal defendants. Every judge in the courthouse could ban you from their courtrooms for life, Frank. I hope they do.)

By Dan

July 10, 2009 9:57 PM | Link to this

The bulk of the blame rests with the attorneys and judge who should have taken steps to ensure that the jurors did not discuss the article among themselves on Monday morning. The rest of the blame rests with the juror who read the article to the others.

Blaming the journalist who wrote about a newsworthy — and public — issue reveals two things: (1) an unfounded, and arrogant, assumption that publication of the article would cause a mistrial (the publication wass benign — the wrong was the jurors discussing the article) and (2) my fellow attorneys’ fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the press (which is to to shine a light on public goings-ons to facilitate discussion and, if necessary, change.

A reporter must have a very compelling reason to justify withholding a story. In this case, the reporter had none — and could reasonably assume that the attorneys and judge would do their job to enforce the rules designed to suppress premature jury deliberations.

By JBF

July 10, 2009 8:43 PM | Link to this

Unbelievable Frank. And, completely irresponsible. Whether or not the information was public, the bottom line is that you deliberately used information in a manner that you knew had a substantial risk of injuring the parties involved. And, injure you did, to the tune of $2.2 million dollars.

How can you claim that you have “no duty” to refrain from injuring another person? Your actions are indefensible. Your First Amendment rights would not have been restricted by waiting until a verdict was issued before publishing the column.

I only wish there were some way that Mr. Bone could sue you and put you on the hook for the jury verdict. I have no idea how you sleep at night.

By Shocked!

July 10, 2009 5:43 PM | Link to this

Seriously, you couldn’t wait a few days to write the article? You thought it was worth causing a mistrial? I’m appalled at your glibness and refusal you accept responsibility for your actions.

By LK

July 10, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this

I am a federal attorney. I am appalled by your lack of common sense and selfishness, let alone your blatant attempt, in the form of the article above, to pander to the public who is largely ignorant of the intricacies of a trial.

First, this is not a case of sleazy lawyers vs. a crusading journalist, as most of the commentors seemed to, or led to believe. There was an ongoing jury trial, a motion became publicly circulated by accident, and you chose to write about it despite the urging from both parties to hold off the article’s publication for a couple days.

This was not an attempt at censorship. The freedom of the press was not at stake here. Most newspaper editors, when faced with such requests, would weigh the pros and cons of delaying the article and derive a sensible solution.

Let’s see the pros and cons of this situation:

Pros: you get to write your Friday article on Friday, instead of next week when perhaps other journalists would have beaten you to it.

Cons: mistrial - have to start everything all over again from scratch. A colossal waste of judicial resources. Do you have any idea how much work a trial involves? Let alone one that took two weeks? Your ignorance is beyond belief.

Also, your claim that trials are public is quite wrong. Trials are public in that sometimes the judge allows causal observers to attend. But, legal documents, such as the motion at hand, was not public property because it was leaked. It’s still ok for you to write about it, b/c of the First Amendment, but your mistake, as mentioned above, was not heeding the advice of the lawyers and directly causing a mistrial.

You knew you were wrong. Don’t blame the jurors. You wrote this article to cover your tracks and appear like a good guy. You failed and you looked even worse. Congratulations.

By John

July 10, 2009 5:25 PM | Link to this

Look, you can justify it all you want, but it is a fact that the mistrial was caused by your article, it is a fact that you were advised of that risk, it is a fact that you thought a cheap humor piece was worth that risk, and it is a fact that it would have been just as “funny” if published after the trial ended. Those are the facts. Motions may be public, but they are not easily reached by jurors. Nor should they be. Even an email is not as easily received by a juror (one would have to deliberately send it to them) or passed around other jurors. However, your article made that easier. Well done. I am a lawyer, and I know all about wrapping yourself in technicalities to justify an error. You made a mistake, at least have the balls to admit it, or if nothing else, try not to repeat your error. Lives have been changed by this.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism”. Google crackhead jesus and Twitter Maverick Artist for an eye opener. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism”. Google crackhead jesus and Twitter Maverick Artist for an eye opener. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:13 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism”. Google crackhead jesus and Twitter Maverick Artist for an eye opener. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism” Google crackhead jesus and Twitter under Maverick Artist. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism” at www.crackheadjesus.com and Twitter under Maverick Artist. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism” at www.crackheadjesus.com and Twitter under Maverick Artist. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By modern art music movement

July 10, 2009 1:10 PM | Link to this

All you need to do to follow the rogue behavior of attorneys like Bone and Aaron R. Cohen trying to stifle reporting of the dangerous truth being perpetrated in Fl. by dangerous Judges like Donald Hafele is to see the real time parody being called “Modern Art Gonzo Journalism” at www.crackheadjesus.com and Twitter under Maverick Artist. Crackhead Jesus is alive and well in the South Florida court system.

By Fluffhead

July 9, 2009 6:56 PM | Link to this

Do you also take issue with President Obama for the holes in his shoes? Adlai Stevenson once said, “Better a hole in the shoe than a hole in the head” Civil cases are disputes are between two parties and rarely has anything to do with the public’s need to know or has any affect on the public at large. Running the story one day prematurely is exactly what caused the mistrial. You can’t blame the attorneys for that. Although the juror bears some responsibility, the reporter should have foreseen the possible result of this story. Since this seems to be such a contested issue from what I am reading here, these people will probably have a hard time getting a fair trial in Palm Beach anytime soon.

By TRISTAN

July 8, 2009 5:33 PM | Link to this

And I thought I’d also weigh in as enough peanut gallery charlatans have already taken too many pot-shots at Cerabino for some malicious reason totally NOT having a SHRED of jurisprudencial LOGIC: as I’ve said several times—-the person actually RESPONSIBLE for the MISTRIAL is the childish lawyer who INSISTED on wearing his “lucky” shoes with holes in them.Out of his arrogant stubborn entitled attitude, the MISTRIAL was born!

And no, Cerabino did NOT post all these various comments under differnet names in here: I DID! Dick Cheney, Guido Sarducci, THE POPE, G W BUSH, et al are ME——so there you go wonderkind!!!!! Heh heh!

Now that ALL the sour wind has been taken out of you Monday Morning BAD armchair quarterbacks, who WISH you were F. Lee Bailey (oh yeh—-another one by ME!!!!!) ………..your flawed and unsophisticated “logic” showed such an inferior mental capacity it brought out my sarcastic array of various personalities!!!!

Heh heh…………HO HO …!!!!

GO GATORS !!!!!

By Frank Cerabino

July 8, 2009 10:19 AM | Link to this

I thought I’d weigh in because the commentary here — on both sides — has been a bit overblown.

As I said in the piece, I have covered courtroom trials for many years and I have never once been warned not to publish anything about the case until it was over. I wrote both news stories and opinion pieces during ongoing civil and criminal trials, and not a single one caused a mistrial.

I was surprised, and not happy (as some have suggested) that this case ended in a mistrial. Then again, this is the first time a juror decided to bring my writing into the jury room and share it with the other jurors.

I didn’t write the initial column in an attempt to throw a monkey wrench into the wheels of justice. And I don’t take satisfaction in the fact that my column has been used by the losing lawyer in the case to argue successfully for a mistrial.

I understand that some people might consider my original column frivolous and unworthy of publication before the end of this trial. But it is not, as one writer suggested, akin to blowing an air horn at a golfer getting ready to putt.

I am not writing for the jury. I’m writing for everybody else. The beauty of our system is that the needs of open courtrooms and fair trials are adequately addressed, even though they sometimes come in conflict.

And I think it would be a sad day for all of us if any lawyer can simply demand a news blackout of his or her case because it just might cause a mistrial.

By DICK CHENEY

July 7, 2009 10:10 PM | Link to this

Oh - I forgot: it’s all about PRINCESS!!!!

when SHE decides it’s “all over” we’re supposed to just shut up, right?

And she decided that “WE let this die” simply because she has thrown out her strongest accusations (totally unfounded!) and her own skewed take on the “case” (totally absurd!) and when only the relatives of the attorney involved (or the attorney- hiding behind a woman’s fake skirts)are agreeing with her, SHE “decides” we need to just “let this rest”…………????

I think NOT! Heh heh!!!! As has been shown very logically & quite CLEARLY—-it was the ATTORNEY’S fault there was a MISTIAL.If he hadn’t been so STUBBORN and childish, insisting on his “RIGHT” to wera a pair of old shoes with holes in them, there would have been no MISTIAL! PERIOD!!!!

Which part of that can your tiny little brain not follow PRINCESS? (or is PRINCESS ALSO the attorney hiding again behind a woman’s skirts?????—-Hmmmm….???)

Anybody with a 3rd grade education can see that the attorney that insisted on wearing his smelly old holy shoes “because they are ‘lucky’ ” was the one that created the MISTRIAL!!!!

PRINCESS: get a life!!!!!!

By Princess

July 7, 2009 7:45 PM | Link to this

I would suggest that we let this die. Obviously this thoughtless journalist got his 15 minutes of local fame, which he didn’t deserve. I sure hope he gets called for jury duty and has to sit on a lengthy case which mistries so he can truly understand what it feels like to have both time and money wasted. I for one have cancelled my subscription to the Post.

By DON CORLEONE

July 7, 2009 3:53 PM | Link to this

“nobody” ….??????

that’s the BEST nik you could think of——“nobody” ………….and then you have the temerity and arrogance to accuse Cerabino of writing all these remarks under “different niks”….

I DON”T THINK SO IDIOT!!! And you’re point IS ….?????????

obviously all these defamatory and nit-picking flaming bashes written on here AGAINST Mr. Cerabino are from the idiot lawyer who is too lazy and stupid to wear a pair of NORMAL SHOES ————— and too much of a COWARD to write anything under his real name for fear of a Judicial Chastisement, eh ????? Yeh, we have your number there Mr. Incompetent Attorney!!!!! You should be disbarred for your malpractice and making your client lose the case, simply because you were so ignorantly superstitious to go and wear some old smelly shoes with holes in the sole, because you “THINK THEY ARE ‘LUCKY’ ” ….???????? Very OBVIOULY you are quite WRONG, aren’t you—-as you wore them and lost the CASE!!!! Yep—-disbar the idiot—-take his license to practice away before he hurts any more innocent clients AND burdens the county with footing the bill for another MISTRIAL—-it was HIS FAULT there was a MISTRIAL!!!! If he’s acted like an adult and wore normal shoes—-there never would have been a MISTRIAL and he might have WON for his client!!!!!! You ignoramus! Get out of the LAW business—-you are totally incompetent!

By nobody

July 7, 2009 3:15 PM | Link to this

F. Lee Bailey, et al, are obviously just bino in disguise. Bino, you probably think you’re being even cuter with all these nom de plumes.

By F. Lee Bailey

July 6, 2009 5:51 PM | Link to this

Serious: GET SERIOUS you blind wombat!

WHY are all these idits who are NOT attorney and don’t KNOW the LAW erroneously blaming Cerabino for a “MISTRIAL” …??????

Further climbing on the “bandwagon” and lambasting a journalist for DOING HIS JOB …????????

It’s Cerabin’s fault that he didn’t “KNOW” in advance: 1) that the jurors would ignore instructions not to read anything pertaining to the case, and/or discuss the case with their fellow jurors …AND that THIS SPECIFICALLY would result in a MISTRIAL …??????? Are you sheep absolutely idiots???

You people criticizing Cerabino simply for reporting what was public RECORD, are stupidly trying to INFER that he KNEW by doing his story, that a juror would see it—speak about it, and then CAUSE A MISTRIAL …?????? Yeh , right—-and if that were true—-then Cerabino would NOT be writing for a local newspaper but instead would be the highest paid PSYCHIC in LAS VEGAS or ATLANTIC CITY!!!!!

You people are so STUPID…and such sheep— to keep “feeding off each other’s ridiculous lack of legal knowledge” ………. put the “BLAME” where it BELONGS: on the JUDGE who ALLOWED the jurors to read what they shouldn’t have been allowed to read (any newspapers reporting on the trial…DUH!!!!) —-and then declaring a “mistrial” because HE was so inept he allowed the juror(s) to not follow his instructions …!!!!!!!!!

WHY , I’m wondering, would all these people commenting and showing their total ignorance of juror instruction, CHOOSE to CREATE a SCAPEGOAT of the journalist that simply said what was PUBLIC RECORD… I hate to say the obvious, but Public Record is exactly that: a PUBLIC RECORD. Figure THAT??? Duh!!!!!

Obviously these lame SHEEP climbing all oer this idiot bandwagon trying to criticize the Journalist for simply doing a GREAT JOB, must simply be writing these inane and nonsensical scathing attacks on Cerabino—-just to see their superfluous and ludicrous remarks IN PRINT. (Funny though that it also is showing just how stupid and illiterate they really ARE!!!!!)

By serious?

July 6, 2009 5:32 PM | Link to this

Bino: what case would you deem “serious” enough to refrain from causing a mistrial? You were asked by both attorneys not to run the story, for fear of this precise outcome. You persisted, and your story caused exactly that; a mistrial. You knew the risks, and you didn’t care. The fact that this claimant has effectively been denied their day in Court is not “serious” to you? A claimant that had 2.2 million in damage will see nothing for maybe another year, or more. Is that serious. How about the fact that the economic component to that award likely accounts for medical expenses and lost wages that cannot be recouped for years, possibly never. There is no guarantee that another jury will award those damages. Make no mistake, your conduct affected a person’s ability to pay bill, obtain medical care, and may have life long, devastating repercussions. That’s not “serious” to you!

By Edgar Allen Poe

July 6, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this

mark twain has no clue at all of what “blame & culpability” actually MEAN!

How childish to try and feebly infer that it might be Cerabino’s fault that there was a “mistrial” —-????????

What a total crock of bull-feces!

It is the JUDGE that is the one to BLAME for not keeping the Jurors away from the newspaper during a trial they were deliberating….. this is just elementary Common Sense during ANY TRIAL that you instruct the jury to “please don’t read anything related to this case” …….. DID the Judge instruct the jurors of that like he should have? If not, the Judge is culpable. PERIOD.
A Journalis is SUPPOSED to report the news, moron!!! WAKE UP!!!!

As to another “relative” of the LOSING ATTORNEY making a bright statement that judy robb uses her real name AND “knows of what she speaks”: she might VERY well KNOW of what she speaks, but she obviously has absolutely not a grain of Common Sense or Intelligence, or she’d know the blatantly OBVIOUS—-that the trial JUDGE is the one to blame for a mistrial for not ensuring that the jurors were not allowed to read articles pertaining to this case!

GET REAL and be big enough to admit when you are obviously and clearly WRONG!

Stop being just plain old obstinate and arrogant and defending your relative for being an inept , lazy, and poor attorney!

(and my educated guess is that the sister ALSO is an inept, lazy, and poor attorney that probaly was forced to leave the Service due to her ineptitude and possibly her substance abuse, as her brother might well be in the exact same straits……

What do you two think you are: professional alcoholic baseball players that must rely on childish and ridiculous superstitions, trying to bolster your ineptitude at the legal profession …???????

Go get some substance abuse treatment and some HONESTY, OK…??? People are so sick of hearing attorneys like them try and show people that lies are “truth” in the midst of their substance abuse………

Why won’t a school of sharks eat an attorney if they fell overboard in the middle of the sharks…?????

Professional Courtesy.

Why do most politicians come from the ranks of lawyers: as they have learned well how to lie repeatedly.

By Jean Robb

July 6, 2009 4:21 PM | Link to this

At least Judy Robb had the guts to sign her real name as George Bush did not. And yes, she had had all of that legal experiences, so she knows of what she speaks.

By Mark Twain

July 6, 2009 3:43 PM | Link to this

An almost perfect example of a journalist who believes that he has no responsibility toward the public. Yes you have the right to do what you did. Just as I have the right to stand on a public thoroughfare and blow an air horn a few feet from a golfer who is in the act of putting. I wouldn’t do it. If you thought it would be funny, you probably would. Your irresponsibility has cost taxpayers a considerable sum of money wasted on a trial.

By Guido Sarducci

July 6, 2009 1:17 PM | Link to this

For two people that are supposedly members of the legal profession, which allegedly is the epitome of rational logic in our society—-to practice such ridiculous and absurd superstitious practices which actually are the CAUSE, and underlying factor, of exactly WHY this case resulted in a MISTRIAL makes one pause and poner if much of the culpability for this MISTRIAL rests squarely on the lawyer’s shoulder which instigated this clown act in the first place.

BOTH practicing attorneys acted entirely childishly and immaturely and both should be cited for Contempt of Court for damaging both their Client’s interests AND the STATE’s Interest and the State’s BUDGET!!!! The two Attorneys should be found in Contempt and made to pay the entire Court Costs for their ridiculous and selfish Clown Act.

By GW BUSH

July 6, 2009 1:01 PM | Link to this

Not that Judith Robb might have a slightly prjudiced slant in one direction, and saying that one might think that she’d have enough, not only COMMON SENSE, but jurisprudential DISCRETION, to NOT take a “side” in an issue in which she is blatantly prejudiced in!

As HAS been stated vociferously several times already, it is not the Press’ obligation OR responsibility to “shield” pertinent items from a jury. That obligation AND responsibility rests entirely on the presiding JUDGE. If siad JUDGE did NOT perform said duty, then said JUDGE is open to malpractice AND CONTEMPT charges HIMSEF for not performing his sworn DUTY!!!!

Just because one of the participating attorneys is her BROTHER, Judith Robb—IF she indeed HAS the legal experience she CLAIMS, would KNOW what I just said is completely accurate.

There is, as was stated in a previous reply, a moral obligation of a journalist TO REPORT news when they find it, otherwise THEY are not doing THEIR JOBS!!!!!!

Ms. Robb owes Mr. Cerabino (and the readers) an APOLOGY for her inexcuseable slanted and biased OPINION which was totally in ERROR!!!!!

By Judith Robb

July 6, 2009 10:26 AM | Link to this

I am the proud sister of Michael Robb, one of the two attorneys mentioned in this article. I am also a retired government attorney who is a strong supporter of the First Amendment and the right to freedom of the press. (In fact, I am a member of the ACLU, which is dedicated to the defense of our precious rights under the First Amendment.)

Having said this, I have always believed that just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean that you should say it at that particular time, if the timing of your speech would cause unnecessary harm to others. This is the problem involving the column at issue. While the writer has an absolute and constitutionally protected right to produce a story on this amusing topic, publishing it during the course of the trial is more an example of an irrestible impulse, rather than a thoughtful decision based on the highest principles of good journalism.

It is, I believe, reaching down to the lowest level of journalism ethical standards to claim that the writer can absolve himself of any and all responsibility in this matter, considering the less than surprising result of the premature publication.

While I agree that the behavior of the jury must be under the ultimate authority and supervision of the presiding judge, there is no need, especially for the trivial purpose of providing humor and entertainment, to make the Court’s duty any more difficult than it already is. And there is especially no need to dangle such an irresistible topic of conversation in front of the jurors (whom you hope are part of your otherwise declining readership) like a piece of tasty bait. The writer knew full well that such a story would be the talk of the courthouse in the days that followed, and to now claim that he bore no responsibility for the legal aftermath of this untimely and unnecessary publication is but a poor excuse.

By the way, I have holes in my lucky trial shoes as well, which I proudly wore throughout my career in government service, first as a JAG attorney, and later with the Attorney General’s Office. So I can assure anyone who cares that Michael’s eccentricity is in the nature of a family tradition, and is certainly not a deliberate tactic to gain some sort of advantage at trial.

By DICK CHENEY

July 5, 2009 9:40 PM | Link to this

Princess needs to grow up and also to go back to grade school & learn what the 1st ammendment is! Ever hear of freedom of speech & freedom of the press princess???

she writes like a spoiled princess. actually she writes like one of the attorneys HIDING under a female fake name!!!!!!

get a life princess; Cerabino not only had every RIGHT to publish his story, but also a moral obligation to publish it!!!!!!

This is NOT IRAN or Korea; we HAVE freedom of speech & press here, and thousands of american Servicement have DIED for that RIGHT!

Leave America princess if you don’t like it; go live in IRAN where they will treat a woman like a DOG!

GREAT ARTICLE CERABINO !!!!!!!

VERY WELL WRITTEN ! And you definitelyu DID get all the facts exactly right!!!!

Princess—-are you on xanax, or valiums ?????

By Princess

July 5, 2009 9:03 PM | Link to this

Sadly, you didn’t even state the facts correctly in this article. The bottom line is you tarnished the reputation of two fine trial attorneys and caused thousands in taxpayer dollars to be wasted. Shame on you!

By princess

July 5, 2009 3:40 PM | Link to this

This is really sad. You did not accurately depict the events that transpired. Further, you have trashed the skilled and respected attorneys on both sides of this case. Your irresponsibility at running this story before a verdict was rendered has cost both the parties and tax payers countless thousands of dollars. You are irresponsible and a sad excuse for a journalist.

By TRISTAN

July 5, 2009 12:17 PM | Link to this

understands: could you please go back and RE-READ what I wrote? You took what I said and totally twisted it BACKWARDS !!!!

I was professing exactly that right to FREE SPEECH that you’re accusing me of stifling ….

ARE YOU ON DRUGS …??????????

By The POPE !

July 5, 2009 12:10 PM | Link to this

UNDERSTANDS seems to have TOTALLY missed TRISTAN’S POINT: he was saying EXACTLY what you (UNDERSTANDS) was trying to point out ALSO !!!!

Go back and Re-READ Tristan’s comments a few times and you’ll see he wasn’t telling ANYBODY NOT to exert their right of free speech but was actually defending it!!!! How could you be so MYOPIC and OBTUSE to have twisted and perverted what Tristan stated so APTLY ….??????? YOU must be one of those Fascists he was speaking about that DOES want to curtail Free Speech!!!

By Jean M. Robb

July 5, 2009 11:27 AM | Link to this

When I first forwarded your column to Michael’s 5 brothers ans sisters, their comment was ” Just Like Dad” His father the late Dr. Robb if he had 2 pairs of shoes gave one to some needy person” having sedrved as the Mayor of the City Of Deerfield Beach for 13 years, I know what the press can do to you. Mike is the father of 4, has practiced law for 21 years and has a sterling record of achievement. He also has a keen sense of humor, and frankly I thought your original column pictured the opposing attorney as complete joke. No oNe commented about his hair, why comment about Mike’s shoes as his assistant was the actual trial attorney.

By Understands

July 5, 2009 10:55 AM | Link to this

Frank C. — Great piece. You clearly state the obligations of the press and illuminate the lawyers’behavior , who should know better.

Dutch & Not Funny Frank — Try reading the piece again….and again….until you get it. You don’t need to agree with the humor. You should understand there were no grounds to “forewarn” and try to constrain Frank C. nor was his article the cause of any “lack of justice.” It’s all there in the column — just keep reading and you can get it.

Tristan — Wow. Those you object to so strongly have the same right you proclaim. Hate what any spew as you wish but realize the beauty of America….the difference from places like N. Korea and Iran…is that in America everyone has the right to “spew” what you consider “venom.”

Some of us fought and, of them, some died so all have this right….not just those who say what you like.

By Cheryl

July 5, 2009 8:51 AM | Link to this

For a juror to disreguard a judge’s orders is blatantly dishonest and the juror should have never been allowed to decide on the outcome of the trial. The juror broke the law and should be admonished and possibly punished to the fullest extent of the law. I find your column amusing yet, truthful and to the point. Jurors have a responsibility to be upheld and to disreguard a judge’s orders in my opinion is called contempt.

By JeffL

July 5, 2009 8:41 AM | Link to this

Terrific Column, Frank! From one old Navy grad, (and a trial lawyer to boot) to another!

By Alan

July 5, 2009 8:41 AM | Link to this

You go Frank !!!! I do wonder about the judge…..

By Annette

July 5, 2009 8:39 AM | Link to this

Frank - If it matters in the least what my opinion is about this subject, please know that I am 100% on your side here. You provided a very entertaining article last week that should have remained a non-issue in this case. If a juror violated their responsibilities, it had nothing to do with you. I read, and enjoyed, the story and do not see how it could have possibly swayed the verdict in either direction. Lawyers are taught the art of manipulation, and that’s all this amounts to; manipulation of the system at your expense. Love your column…keep up the fantastic job!!!

By Ron

July 5, 2009 8:30 AM | Link to this

Absolve yourself, Frank. You did, what you are suppose to do; nothing more, nothing less.

Aware of one of the lawyers, a bon vivant whose behavior indicates he has yet to grow up. A child-man, who has money and throws around his weight.

Didn’t read that particular column, but will go back and look for it.

“Bernie” a poster on your blog….said it best and very succinctly.

Keep it up…geez these …holes and long hairs play too many games and give lawyering a bad name.

Grow up guys. Guess high school was not easy for them.

By TRISTAN

July 5, 2009 8:14 AM | Link to this

not funny frank & dutch are the real “terrorists” within our nation itself!

These right-wing nazi fascists that decry & denigrate anything that has any flavor or scent of Freedom of Expression or Freedom of Speech want everyone to just shut up & let the power-elite keep running things as they are —-with no “interference” from any free-thinkers.

Again—-these fascists are the true TERRORISTS trying to erode our one-of-a-kind free Democratic Society and American Way of Life!!!!

Come on people! We just celebrated the birth of our Nation and these wimpy little whining FASCISTS are allowed to pop out & spew their dictatorial venom without any real American Patriots taking them to TASK ??????

Maybe we really don’t DESERVE the Freedoms so many brave & valiant American Servicemen gave their LIVES for, not to mention the untold thousands walking around mutilated and amputated so that we CAN celebrate these great Freedoms of The Press that are so Unique to the United States of America !!!!!!

KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK FRANK & don’t even listen to the wimps!!!!!

By Not Funny Frank

July 5, 2009 7:23 AM | Link to this

Frank,

So you were forewarned that weeks of litigation would be washed away by your “funny” little column that is so critical in bringing the warmth of humor to your cadre of readers.

Bone was right… it is those self-appointed arbiters like you who are responsible for the coarsening of society.

You are NOT funny nor insightful. My parakeet loves taking aim at your column that lines the bottom of the bird cage.

By OldForensicBag

July 5, 2009 1:02 AM | Link to this

You should choose your friends wisely, Frank. Didn’t you mother warn you about hanging around with a bad crowd that could get you in trouble? You & the press are too important to be getting jerked around by bad company ;-)

By OldForensicBag

July 5, 2009 12:48 AM | Link to this

Wow - this lawyer friend IS slick; he sees the likely loss of a big verdict & uses an old crim law trick to ultimately get the renig on the win! It’s too bad he used a news columnist to do it. Very bottom of the barrel, IMHO. He couldn’t win with skill, so he baits up a news guy for a story set-up. He ought to be reported to the Bar for ethics violations. No surprise it’s a PI atty - an ambulance chaser!

By Cindy Lou

July 5, 2009 12:17 AM | Link to this

Dear Frank, You don’t need to explain yourself. You’re a writer. A local columnist. And a very good one in my opinion. That’s what you do. If Bone-head didn’t want the press to make an issue of the holey shoes - Well Gee… Maybe he shouldn’t have brought it up in the first place himself? Duh.

Nobody can really predict how things will play out. Who knew there would be a mistrial? Who would thunk it? Sh*t happens. Oh well.

I really enjoyed your column on this trial, Frank. It’s just the kind of quirky reporting that you do best. And it was all public record now wasn’t it?

All I can say is Thank God for the Fourth Estate. It’s a luxury many nations don’t enjoy like we do. Ya done good, Frank. No need to explain.

Cindy Lou

By Cindy Lou

July 5, 2009 12:17 AM | Link to this

Dear Frank, You don’t need to explain yourself. You’re a writer. A local columnist. And a very good one in my opinion. That’s what you do. If Bone-head didn’t want the press to make an issue of the holey shoes - Well Gee… Maybe he shouldn’t have brought it up in the first place himself? Duh.

Nobody can really predict how things will play out. Who knew there would be a mistrial? Who would thunk it? Sh*t happens. Oh well.

I really enjoyed your column on this trial, Frank. It’s just the kind of quirky reporting that you do best. And it was all public record now wasn’t it?

All I can say is Thank God for the Fourth Estate. It’s a luxury many nations don’t enjoy like we do. Ya done good, Frank. No need to explain.

Cindy Lou