Prominent Jackson attorney caught lying in court.
The hottest story in the Mississippi legal community right now is the Mississippi Supreme Court's opinion that was rendered yesterday in Hyundai v. Applewhite*. The Court minced no words in ruling attorney Dennis Sweet, III lied about paying a preacher to manipulate juries in order to obtain favorable verdicts. The opinion states Mr. Sweet and the late Pastor Carey Sparks teamed up to improperly influence juries and lied in court about it.
This saga began 26 years ago when Dorothy Mae Applewhite and two employees drove hom in her Hyundai Excel after they got off work at a Tunica casino. Speeding over 68 mph, The Hyundai crossed the center line on U.S. 61 and struck an oncoming Lincoln Continental. The collision shattered the Excel, scattering pieces over 50 feet while killing the occupants. The Lincoln passengers survived. The estate of the Excel passengers filed wrongful death suits against Hyundai in Coahoma County Circuit Court. Attorney Dennis Sweet, III represented the plaintiffs. The case finally went to trial in 2008. The jury awarded $4.5 million to the plaintiffs. However, Hyundai obtained a new trial on appeal. A second trial was held in 2014. The plaintiffs asked for damages of $21 millioni but the jury awarded $10.5 million ($3.5 million to each one.). It is this trial that is the subject of the opinion.
Hyundai received "communications" the jury was tainted and manipulated. One name came up time and time again in unsolicited tips: Carey Sparks, a black Mississippi Delta preacher and the cousin of Sweet associate, Terris Harris. Pastor Sparks bragged to several lawyers at a Hinds County trial that he "helped" Mr. Sweet with the jury. One attorney stated the Pastor "told me... Sweet hires him to show up a couple of weeks before a trial in an area and preach revivals and get to know the people." Other attorneys corroborated the claim. Gay's attorney wife repeated the holy bragging:
(Sparks) worked for Sweet and was . . . helping pick a jury. That’s what he did for a living. He was giving me a pretty good sales pitch. He said that Sweet paid him to go out and preach revivals two or three weeks out, when they pick a jury in different spots so that the jury would know him when they came in. Told me that they had juries that would come in, and women would cover their mouth and say, “That’s the preacher that preached at our revival this weekend.”
[Sparks] told me that he had worked with Sweet on a case up in Clarksdale where it should have been a 21 million dollar verdict, but it was a 10 million dollar verdict.³ That there were a lot of uneducated people up that way. People couldn’t read and write. There was a lady on the jury that couldn’t count. And they spent two days trying to teach her how to count, and that just never worked out.He told me that his best friend called him. He traveled all over the Delta working, and that he never knew where he was going to be with Sweet, and that in fact, his best friend didn’t even know where he was. He called him on the phone; said, “Are you up in Clarksdale?” He said, “I am.” He said, “My aunt is on the jury.
Um, he said something about the jury saying that, um, people didn’t need to get any richer, which is why they wouldn’t give them 21 million dollars.
Hyundai presented the statements at an April 20,2015 post-trial hearing. Sparks admitted his friend, Richard "Dell" Cannon had an aunt on the jury. He said he talked to his friend about the trial but did so after the trial. He didn't deny he made statements about using revivals to manipulate juries but vehemently denied discussing jury deliberations with any of the three lawyers.
Mr. Sweet asked Mr. Sparks if the attorney had paid, hired, or asked the pastor to do anything. Mr. Sparks answered "no" to every question. However, the two men could not leave well enough alone but went even further in their denials:
[Sweet]: Whether they are talking about how you are paraphrasing it, did you ever – well, did I ever ask you to work for me?
[Sparks]: No, sir.
[Sweet]: Did I ever pay you to work for me?[Sparks]: No, sir.
Ever means never. Unfortunately for the lawyer and the preacher, more evidence emerged from the mud. Former Coahoma County Sheriff Andrew Thompson, Jr. stated in an affidavit that Sparks "picked" the jury in the second trial. However, the former Sheriff refused to sign the affidavit after talking to Mr. Sweet. A Hyundai investigator claimed he heard the Pastor bragging that he picked the jury in the case.
Hyundai asked the court to investigate possible jury tampering or at least allow the company to conduct discovery into the matter. The court denied all motions. Hyundai appealed and won. The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the trial court and ordered the court to conduct a "full" investigation of any "outside influences" which may have tainted the jury.
Discovery yielded a very poisonous tree. Hyundai presented evidence of a money trial between the lawyer and the preacher. The preacher changed his story and said well, yes he did work for Mr. Sweet and that he did help the barrister during the Hyundai trial. Mr. Sweet wrote several checks that were payable to Mr. Sparks for events and travel expenses.
More chicanery came out at a 2018 hearing (p.12):
During that hearing, Sparks revealed that he had organized a community event in the Delta promoting Sweet’s law firm and announcing Terris Harris’s decision to join Sweet’s firm. It was also admitted at that hearing that, before the Applewhite 2014 trial, Sparks had worked for Sweet in numerous other cases, including a number of GranuFlo cases in the Mississippi Delta in 2013 and another case in August 2014, one month before the Applewhite trial. It was further revealed that Sparks appeared at several other jury trials in cases in which Sweet was counsel of record. This testimony was in stark contrast to the testimony given by Sparks in April 2015, under direct questioning by Sweet, that Sparks never worked for Sweet and that Sparks never received payment from Sweet for any trial-related work.
The trial court had a Road to Damascus moment and said Dennis Sweet, III perpetuated a "deception on the court." Mr. Sweet had to self-report his misconduct to the Mississippi Bar.
The defendants tried to obtain the cell phone records of Mr. Sweet, Mr. Sparks, and several other men but the records had already been destroyed. However, the plaintiffs provided a "summary" of some of Mr. Sweet's phone calls. The preacher and lawyer exchanged texts on the third day of the trial although the text of the texts was not disclosed. Mr. Sweet said he never spoke to Mr. Sparks but was only trying to find out why the preacher was lying about the lawyer.
Hyundai redirected its fire toward the reverend's friend, Dell Cannon but to little avail. The friend became a poor man's Hillary as he couldn't seem to remember anything about any phone calls or conversations with his preacher friend even when evidence of phone calls and text messages were presented. Mr. Cannon also said he never spoke with his aunt about the trial although they speak all the time.
Remember the Sheriff? Hyundai finally deposed Mr. Thompson in 2018. The opinion states:
During their visit in Thompson’s office, Sparks told Thompson that he was “doing some jury work” for Plaintiffs’ counsel on the Applewhite trial. Sparks told Thompson that “he knew a family member of one of the jurors” and “that we’re [Plaintiffs] going to win the trial.” Sparks also told Thompson that he had preached at a Coahoma County church before the trial. Sparks discussed his relationship with Dell Cannon (whose aunt was on the jury), his preaching in the local community, and his confidence that Plaintiffs would prevail as they were connected. While Sparks never said that he had “actual contact” with a juror, Thompson assumed that Sparks meant that he had contacted a juror through a family member.
Other witnesses testified the good reverend said he was an investigator for Mr. Sweet and that he was helping "a lady get some money in Clarksdale, due to an accident or something."
The preacher denied at the 2018 hearing he was every paid by Mr. Sweet after a 2012 even only to change his tune when Hyundai presented a bunch of cancelled checks from the lawyer to the preacher. The preacher finally admitted he promoted his employer's law firm in the Delta through flyers and social media. Mr. Sparks admitted to conducting at least two "Back to School" events and a Gospel music festival in the area right before two separate trials. The preacher admitted to helping Mr. Sweet with the jury and appearing in the courtroom with the Sweet team.
This is a pretty long post and it should be wrapping up at this point but wait, there is more. Pastor Sparks truly has a love for the word, especially if the word is about himself.
Two attorneys, Hunter and Allison Horne, dined at the Bonefish Grill in Madison on July 12, 2018. None other than Carey Sparks was sitting at the next table and Sparks being Sparks, he couldn't help but brag about the case. Mississippi being Mississippi, Mrs. Horne once clerked for Justice Randolph. The preacher related the jury proceedings to his friends at dinner. The good reverend stated "the lawyers were asking me questions and I started lying like a mf*er." The plaintiffs never challenged the testimony and waited nearly five months after Mrs. Horne's deposition to seek the recusal of her former boss, long after the deadline.
Mr. Sweet bobbed and weaved through his deposition but no Smokin' Joe was he. The Jackson lawyer said he never hired the preacher for any jury consulting work. Mr. Sparks just happened to appear at the Hyundai trial and just happened to room with Mr. Sweet's team. He denied talking to the preacher about his friend or his aunt on the jury. He said the complaints made by other attorneys were sour grapes. He blamed the "consultant fee" notation on the back of the checks made payable to Mr. Sparks on an "inflexible" accounting program.
The jurors said at the 2018 hearing no one approached them during the 2014 trial. Two jurors recognized Mr. Sparks from the trial. Mr. Cannon's aunt said she discussed the case with no one, including her nephew.
The Mississippi Supreme Court ruled there was "actual impropriety, a taint of unfairness, real and perceived, all of which is fatal to affirming the verdict...". The Court said although the jurors said there was no bias or manipulation, they would not likely reveal it even if it did exist. The Court hammered the prominent Jackson attorney:
¶57. Sparks and Sweet created a false impression before the trial judge posttrial that they had no relationship and that Sparks had no role at trial. That actual deception successfully frustrated a timely investigation into Sparks’s alleged misconduct infecting this case. Based on the complete record before us, the taint and unfairness that permeated these proceedings is readily apparent.
¶58. The overwhelming evidence in today’s case supports a finding of both actual impropriety and the appearance of impropriety. Such conduct requires reversal.
The Court reversed the 2014 decision and ordered a new trial. (p.31)
Chief Justice Randolph wrote the opinion. Justices Beam, Ishee, Ishee, Coleman, and Griffis concurred. Justices King and Kitchens dissented.
* No, not that Applewhite. If you don't know, then you are not in the know and if you are not in the know, then you don't have a need to know.
81 comments:
If Mr. Sweet has a bar license this time next year Mississippi should just do away with the Rules of Professional Ethics altogether.
So how much does a juror's integrity go for these days? A plate of fried Buffalo fish and a side of turnip greens?
Man I don’t know about this one Fish. Some attorneys would consider this as simply working the crowd in your favor. You know the attorneys that have absolutely no morals. Like politicians.
Ethics, ethics, we don't need no stinking ethics.
Its pan trout for me, fried gaspergoo wont buy my vote...
Normal occurrence when a lawyer, a preacher, and a lot of money start holding hands.
Every case where Sweet III + Sparks were involved is now suspect.
America is lost
He's been doing this his entire career.
This ain’t Dennis sweet....this is his kid
The only thing worse than a democrat lawyer is a preacher cut from the same cloth...
Dennis C. Sweet III
Don't act like the fish fry is a new concept. Bennie has been pimping them his whole career. It's well known if you want to have some clout in the black community, host a fish fry or two.
An "Honest" lawyer told me one honest thing as he got in his BMW convertible. He said "You show me an honest Lawyer, and I'll show you a broke SOB"
Jim Kitchens: Let a 10.5m verdict stand despite jury tampering.
This is not his kid.
Is there anyone in the legal community surprised by this?
Another of Donner's 'Best of' and longtime Lumumba backer.
10:33 a.m. is incorrect, as pointed out by 10:52. This is the well-known attorney Dennis Sweet, not his son.
Not Sweetness! Sweetness would never be involved in shenanigans.
I have got to believe this is Dennis Sweet's son. I would think Dennis is too experienced to leave a paper trail of checks and leave himself open to a loudmouth hustler like this preacher. Paying "runners" and hustling "preachers" is nothing new for plaintiff's attorneys but you must always cover your ass and ole Dennis ain't new to the game.
This is not normal fare for lawyers, but when millions are involved expect those guys to use any tactic available. Too much money involved...too many loopholes.
Quad is his son and ran for city council.
Damn. It is the ole Dennis, not the kid. I'm really surprised, I thought he would know better than to leave such a trail to a loudmouth sleezeball preacher/runner. Arrogance will get you every time.
The old man is slipping in his senior years.
Waiting for him to throw in the race card.
@12:00p- It's pappy alright! You're right though, he's not new to the hustle or the game; hence, Sparks is DEAD! (killed 3/1/2021) Now, prove the connection between the driver that killed Sparks and Sweet, and put this hustler away for GOOD!!
Several years ago, I believe the same preacher came to a local county to help in a contested run off. I can't find the News article now, but the local News interviewed a representative of one of the losing candidate. They claimed the voters that attended the cookings/revivals were getting 10.00 per vote. Of course they had Van's & buses belonging to NGOs that took people to vote. The allegation said each person that went, received their $10.00 when they got back on the bus.
There's just no trust these days because they wouldn't pay unless you proved you went and voted.
The good reverend stated "the lawyers were asking me questions and I started lying like a mf*er."
That's all you need to know about these kinds of 'preachers'... and they're everywhere.
Can someone please post a link to the death of Carey Sparks?
I'm not sure I understand where the jury tampering was in this case. I admit I haven't read the whole opinion, but if the only thing he did was preach revivals and work as a jury consultant . . . where's the beef?
It sounds like there was a good head-start on the investigation, but they stopped investigating. Find a juror who was improperly influenced and have that juror testify. Just knowing somebody who works on the plaintiff's team is not jury tampering--no matter how much the plaintiff's team lies about that relationship later.
Having said that . . . I'll say the same thing about this lawyer that I did about Bill Clinton. Lying under oath should get you disbarred.
It's bad enough to engage in this type of conduct as a lawyer – add to that that you have lied under your oath at a deposition and under your officer of the court oath to a judge during a proceeding. It will be interesting to see the outcome of the third trial without the influence of Dennis Sweet
I think crooked preachers are a lot like crooked lawyers and crooked police officers. I doubt there are very many of them, but those that are really stand out and cause of lot of harm to a lot of people.
Why is it Civil Rights lawyers are always the scummiest?
This is nothing but a “hit job” on Dennis Sweet. Before Kingfish and others comment on the Supreme Court’s opinion, you should read and review the briefs filed by the parties and familiarize yourselves with the facts. What you should be asking yourselves, rather than writing half-cocked comments, is why Randolph, the author of the majority opinion, and Griffis refused to recuse themselves. Randolph’s law clerk, who recused herself from the appeal, purportedly overheard Sparks’ comments. Incredibly, she then waited 6 months to inform Randolph, her boss, of the alleged conversation. Griffis has familial ties to one of the witnesses who purportedly overheard Sparks’ conversation. Again, why did they refuse to recuse themselves? Then we have the jurors who were questioned by the trial court about any impropriety. Each juror adamantly testified that they were never approached or influenced by anyone. Again, before commenting or attempting to further a “hit job,” educate yourselves on the facts, rather than rely on gossip or innuendo. Crazy.
Defund the crooked preachers !
Dennis Sweet has been pulling these shenanigans for at least 30 years! He got sloppy because he’s gotten away with it so many times!!! I’d venture a guess that most every insurance defense lawyer in Mississippi has been victim to Sweet’s crooked ways!!
4:04 PM
Yes, yes, Jackson Civil Rights lawyers can do no wrong...
4:04 PM, is that you misdirecting again Jonathan? What is CRAZY is your belief that you are smarter than everyone else.
I'm reminded of the Blackmon law firm busting into the original Penn's fish house during the late 80s.
It was like watching a live version of Eddie Murphy's film,
"Coming to America".
Ed's paralegals were doing everything except throwing flower petals on the floor.
Sweet's squad has been just as bad.
I remember watching that firm make a similar entrance into the Madison County Court House.
Shakespeare was right....
If there were still questions if Kingfish is a racist, heres the proof.
Allies of equality dont do racist hit jobs.
This case is indicative of how we ended up with tort reform. If Dennis and Ralph could've tried this case in 1997, the verdict would've been $100 million.
This is an example why corporations analyze where they may be sued before they choose a location. A "jury of their peers" that can't read and write doesn't bode well for a fair outcome.
They just can't stand it Kingfish when they can't control the narrative. Then they come over here to question your decision making and admonish your readers to 'educate' themselves on 'the facts'. But they've got a blind spot. You see, what they don't realize is that by coming over here they're validating your readership, the size of your audience, your influence, your ability to generate ad revenue and the sheer power of Jackson Jambalaya in the Mississippi media marketplace.
How in the world is it that so many people come over to this little 'trash blog' when you publish news, stories, exhaustive investigative research or opinions that they so strenuously disagree with? Well, I'll tell you Kingfish in one word. Reach. That's right, reach. JJ has reach.
Keep up the great job.
By the way Knave and Ladd. $100 and $75 is the best you cheap asses can do to honor Ronni Mott? ROFLMAO
Reporting on a Supreme Court decision is a hit job? Y'all have half a brain?
The plaintiffs are the ultimate losers in this one. A seemingly strong case on liability and damages is upended due to lawyer misconduct. May eventually turn into a pretty decent legal malpractice case.
" gaspergoo"
LOL !
I haven't heard that term since I left Louisiana.
But not to worry, a gaspergoo will come out of the frying pan just fine.
Benny T could teach Chef John Folse about the art of a Bolton style fish fry.
Rarely do I comment on articles. However, I will in this case. The Court’s opinion and most of the comments stem from jealousy and the fact that many individuals enjoy trying to tear down those that are successful. I have litigated several cases against Dennis and have nothing but respect for him. Dennis is one of the best, brightest, and most successful trial lawyers in this State. I have known him to be honest, straightforward, and a stickler for the rules. Those posting negative comments about Dennis are naive and uninformed.
Facts do matter.
Question — how many large verdicts has the Supreme Court affirmed in the last ten years that involved a majority African-American county and an African-American lawyer? Answer — none that I am aware of. Perhaps, that should be the story.
What did Ralph know and when did he know it?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wmcactionnews5.com/2021/03/03/driver-charged-deadly-millbranch-pedestrian-crash/%3foutputType=amp
I wonder if the "allies of equality" referenced at 6:52 are the same as the "liberal do-gooders" of the Civil Rights era who get blamed for current problems in black communities by their more militant members
Preaching the prosperity gospel ! Pass that plate on Sunday !
Same as suing in Fayette, in the legal world this is a known phenomenon. Some black jurors will always vote to give another black a huge judgement because they feel like some of that money will come to them if they do. That is why so many of the civil pharmaceutical cases were tried in Fayette Mississippi. The airport and pharmacy did a brisk business there. An out of towner would be sent to Fayette to have a script filled so they could have the civil case there. I think national articles were written about this.
@9:57am Hey, when your starving, that channel garbage tastes pretty good.
Carey Sparks' Facebook page states other than a preacher he is a "Consultant".
Remind me how, when and where John Arthur, the younger, hit the jackpot. Yep...Gaspergoo central.
Gaspergoo is great on the grill - firm and meaty
@9:42p- So you, while claiming to be an attorney, are basically stating the Supreme Court is naive and uninformed? I mean, come on man, the ruling states he’s a liar and a crook, and we are all commenting on the ruling and things we know/have experienced. And how convenient is it that his partner in crime is recently murdered... like this month murdered!
Your attempt as a character witness failed. I know you attorneys feel it crucial and necessary to present one, and you failed!
@9:42 There is no way you litigated many cases against Dennis and came away with that opinion of him, unless you were complicit with him picking your clients' pockets. GTFOH.
Hit job because he is black? There are a few white attorneys and former attorneys who might disagree with you.
Michael J. Brown
Jason Zebert
Vann Leonard
Charles Evans
Butler Snow
Jon Seawright
Baker Donelson
The spirit of Eric Hamer
Alan Phillips
and others. Those are just the ones I remember off of the top of my head, not to mention the bar disciplinary actions I post.
Kingfish, you usually get it right and I agree with you. This time you missed the mark. News is about informing the public of facts and events. This piece is short on facts, but not opinion and speculation. READ THE BRIEFS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS as 4:04 suggested. They are available to the public on the Supreme Court’s website.
Opinion and speculation? Screw you. The Court ruled. That is the record. The opinion states the facts of the case and it is an official record.
I reported the opinion. The dissenting and concurring opinions are posted below. The dissent gives its own version of the case.
This article reports that 54 yo Carey Sparks was killed in a hit and run accident. Is it the same guy?
https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2021/03/02/police-pedestrian-dead-after-crash-millbranch-rd/
Please KF do not give ear to those nuts who think any reporting or broadcast of news which does not fit their narrative is a racist hit job. All you did was report the exact case exactly as it will appear in the official law books. (Southern Reporter etc.). Somehow that is a "hit job". Bullshit. Anything that does not turnout in their favor must be unfair since they have been so unfavored by history. They can't accept any report which reveals them to be just as greedy, conniving, and unethical as the next guy. They are not crusaders for truth or justice, just money. Own it.
I've been sitting back and reading all of the dumb hater comments over the last 2 days and laughin my ass off. You guys really don't have a clue what's goin on. I knew Sparks very well. He was nothing more than a liar, thief, and manipulator. Although he is now dead, it is what it is. He probably tried to steal the devil's pitchfork on the day of his passing. Guys do your homework.
@2:53p- Yes, he’s deceased. He was killed on March 1, 2021. Ironic timing, isn’t it? Hopefully, someone is working full time to connect the dots between the driver and Sweet/this case. There’s absolutely no way this was an accident.
Uh, briefs are actually argument of counsel. I'll accept the facts as found by the en banc Supreme Court, over arguments of counsel.
As I read them, the 3 dissenting justices, Kitchens, King, and Coleman, basically said the jury verdict should stand because of insufficient evidence that the jurors were actually biased by the actions of Sparks and Co.
NOBODY on the court questioned whether there was post-trial attorney misconduct, which warranted referral to the Bar.
Sparks was recently killed in a traffic accident in Memphis. The driver stayed on scene. Police arrested him. I'm not buying any conspiracy theories.
Where is the jury tampering? Did money pass from the preacher to a juror?
4:59 What are you talking about? I haven't read one single person who denies that Sparks was a liar, thief, and manipulator. Not one. However it does appear that he had some relationship with the Sweet law firm. They obviously had some use for a liar, thief, and manipulator. Your words.
What are you talking about?
I'm having trouble following along. Are you people defending the black preacher, the black lawyer, black justices, black jurors or just blacks in general.
As was asked above: What are you talking about?
8:41, I think you're having trouble following (most of) the comments because you seem to be expecting us to take a side based on race. Most of us aren't that simple-minded.
Best entertaining case scenario is that Sweet gets indicted for subornation of perjury and hires Carlos the clown to defend him. it could not get any better than that
For those who refuse to accept the connection between Sweet and Sparks,and more specifically, their intent to influence that jury, one question remains: WHY DID THEY LIE TO THE TRIAL JUDGE ABOUT THEIR RELATIONSHIP? It was only when the initial lie was uncovered did the scheme become more apparent.
Kilgore is scared of sweet because his old boss will appear. But will pursue anyone in his profession that is down on their luck but can't afford to buy their way out of it--not directly but through hiring his friends and former associates.
12:08 - Perhaps you hurried through the posts and failed to note all those that reference or insinuate a race angle. I'm not accusing you of being simple-minded, just of having poor reading comprehension skills.
The post from an attorney who professes his admiration of Sweet must be naive or very unskilled. Courtroom observers during the trial in 2014 commented that Sweet “got his butt kicked” by Hyundai’s witnesses and was simply a poorly prepared loudmouth. The fact that he was connected with someone like Sparks and illegal shenanigans were taking place with the jury reflects the fact that Sweet didn’t think he could win fairly. What a disgrace on the Mississippi legal system!
Yes, 6:01, I did note the "race angle" comments. That's why I included the qualifier "most of," not once, but twice. -12:08
This wasn't a good case for the plaintiffs. They crossed the interstate median at a high rate of speed and crashed straight into a Lincoln Continental. Their estate sued Hyundai claiming the car wasn't crashworthy. Sweet and his former partners would file these bullshit cases (example: drunk guy involved in a one car crash - sue Ford and claim a defective seat) and rely on the fact they were in "magic jurisdictions" in order to extort huge settlements or get jury verdicts. Often they used runners to get these cases. I can't believe it has taken this long to expose Sweet for what he really is.
Posting the decision on a blog was not the hit job. The "hit job," as it's been described, would have been carried out by any member of the Supreme Court who possessed a clear conflict of interest, refused to recuse him or herself, and instead played a role in putting together this decision (if any such members indeed exist). The majority opinion is extremely thin if you get right down to it, despite its painstaking length, and the trial judge went over and above to drill down with the jurors to determine whether the verdict truly was tainted (he also had the benefit of questioning the jurors face-to-face and making a judgment regarding any potential that the verdict was tainted using all of his senses). Mr. Sweet may not be perfect but neither are all of these ivory tower lawyers who love to throw stones, many of whom have had to report back to their INSURANCE COMPANY clients (the worst kind of folk, truly) after getting taken to the woodshed by Mr. Sweet in a jury trial. If this truly was what it has been presented to be, common sense tells me that this would have been carried out in a much, much different manner. We will see what happens in the end, but posters should strongly consider reading all the briefing submitted to the Court as well as scrutinizing the details of Judge Kitchen's dissent as closely as they did the majority opinion. It seems possible that there may well be much much more here than meets the eye at first glance.
Post a Comment