Later this week, Apple debuts its much anticipated iPhone. An interesting guided tour of how it works is now online...
... and so is this funny satire on YouTube.
As neat as the iPhone is, I'm not sure I'm up for changing carriers just yet. I'm also not sure about spending money that could go towards buying a new desktop computer soon. I'm trying to get more mileage out of the aging hard drive in my iMac, until the next Mac OS X--Leopard--is released this fall.
Click image to see Mac OS X Leopard features.
Leopard itself is promising some great new features and flashy graphics. The one thing I'm not sure I like is the new set of folder icons for music, movies, and other items in Leopard's Home Folder. I've only spotted a glimpse of them, but they strike me as subdued when compared with the eye candy of the new Dock, Cover Flow, and Quick Look.
Thank goodness for electronic filing. I'm not talking about tax returns, I'm talking about electronic filing of court documents in the Wecht case. The policy has saved many trees from sacrificial deaths as quintuplicate copies filed in Pittsburgh federal court.
The Wecht case may be eons from coming to trial, but the parties have already generated 488 court documents. That's documents--not pages. Each of the documents may be dozens of pages, some with attached exhibits running for many pages themselves.
I blogged about "Crouching Lawyer, Hidden Attorney" and "Wecht Defense Team Strikes Back". I sat out coverage of the government's response-to-the-response (Document 486), and the defense's request to file a response-to-the-response-to-the-response (also known as "motion to file sur-reply to motion for sanctions", Document 487).
That brings us to Document 488--the judge's response to the flurry over U.S. Attorney Buchanan's call for Wecht's attorneys to be punished.
Judge Arthur J. Schwab has filed a court order referring this side-dispute to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's disciplinary board.
The judge writes:
• the question of whether or not comments by Wecht's lawyers violate court rules "is also of significant interest to attorneys admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to the public."
If the disciplinary board agrees to take over refereeing the sanctions battle, the inevitable Document 489 may move on to other issues in the Wecht case.
Once again, a federal grand jury is looking into the activities of an Allegheny County official. This time, federal authorities are asking questions about Judge Jeffrey Manning.
The grand jury called at least one attorney--Robert Stewart--as a witness to answer questions under oath about Judge Manning. Stewart's lawyer Tom Ceraso says he believes that federal authorities have been asking questions concerning the judge for about a year. Ceraso says it appears one focus is on whether or not the judge gives favorable treatment to lawyer friends.
Here's a transcript of a portion of Ceraso's Q&A with reporters on the steps of the federal courthouse in downtown Pittsburgh.
Click the "read more" link to expand this post.
Q: "Explain what brings attorney Stewart here today, what your understanding is (of) what they're focusing on."
A: "That's a great question. You know, I have no idea, I have no insight as what the United States Attorney's office is looking for. I can tell you that with regard to my client--with regard to Bobby--the inquriy is, he did share Steeler tickets with Judge Manning and did what a lot of people in Pittsburgh do in regard to Steeler tickets. But over and above that, in terms of attempting to look at this, in terms of any illegality, I very frankly don't see any."
"Now, as I said before, the United States Attorney's Office may not like the way that business is conducted down the street. That doesn't make it a federal crime. And I'm very concerned that what they're doing is--they're looking at this from a very personal aspect, and not assessing what is occurring. Because, as I said, they're talking about a very, very good judge, they're talking about good attorneys, and I think they're putting them all in a very awkward position."
Q: "Is there any kind of quid pro quo?"
A; "There is no quid pro quo whatsoever. And if you get down and you take a look at Judge Manning's record, and if you take a look at what Judge Manning has done and what these attorneys have done, there simply is no quid pro quo in any of this."
Q: "What sort of items have they subpoenaed from Mr. Stewart?"
A: "Records, checkbooks, checks. Checks back and forth between he and the judge. Campaign material, that type of thing."
Q: "What is Pat Thomassey's involvement here? Because you represent him as well."
A: "Pat Thomassey has no involvement right now. He and the judge are friends. They've done things together. You know, for some reason, there seems to be the atmosphere that you cannot be friendly with a judge, being an attorney--and that is just wrong. That relationship has lasted for a long time. Pat is a very ethical and a very good attorney. He would not expect anything from the judge, and the judge wouldn't give him anything because of that friendship. It just isn't happening. It's an unfair assumption that because they know each other, there's something wrong with it. That's unfair."
Q: "Tell us a little bit about the trips that the two have taken."
A: "They took trips, with another judge, with other attorneys. They shared expenses. They did what people do that are friends. That doesn't make it wrong."
Q: "Is the thrust of their questions such that they are looking for some suggestion that in some way the judge's rulings are influenced by these personal relationships?"
A: "That apparently is what they're looking for. But if they take a look at how this judge has handled himself. I think that anybody that looks at the way Judge Manning has handled that courtroom knows that simply has not occurred. It hasn't occurred, and I don't believe that there's any evidence whatsoever that they're going to going to uncover that there's was ever any favoritism on the part of this judge with regard to any attorney. It just simply doesn't happen if you look at their records."
Q: "Based on their inquiries to Mr. Stewart, Mr. Thomassey, how long has this probe been going on?"
A: "It's been going on an awfully long time, with a lot of innuendo, and I see no end to it at this point. It's continuing to go on."
As covered in this earlier post, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is urging the judge presiding over former Coroner Cyril Wecht's public corruption trial to throw Wecht's lawyers into jail and suspend them from practicing law in federal court.
She's accusing Mark Rush and Jerry McDevitt of having "repeatedly lied to the court, lied to the media, breached their ethical obligations as lawyers and flaunted the orders of this court.
Wecht's lawyers argue that if their talking to the media deserves punishment by the court, that the U.S. Attorney's office could be subject to the same thing. In their response to Buchanan, McDevitt and Rush tell the judge:
• "The Motion is baseless. It is a hatchet job that is not worthy of the United States Attorneys office. We respectfully request that it be denied in its entirety. "
• "The prosecution's initial media blitz put Dr. Wecht in a devastatingly negative light..." "The Motion seems to be utterly blind to the fact that if defense counsel's statements are regarded as sanctionable, the Government and its representatives are surely subject to the same or greater sanctions in light of their own conduct" ... "and their eagerness to put this case in the media spotlight at the earliest possible moment." "...Dr. Wecht reserves the right to file a cross motion for sanctions as appropriate..."
They also write that the prosecutors:
• "...are not attempting to jail counsel for telling lies. They are attempting to do so because it is the truth they fear."
Former U.S. Attorney general Dick Thornburgh is a member of Wecht's defense team. He's filed an affidavit under oath backing up statements made by McDevitt and Rush to the PG that triggered Buchanan's motion. Thornburgh says Buchanan had wanted to have Wecht arrested because she claimed he was "a flight risk to Israel". He also swears he had to go over Buchanan's head to a Justice Department official in Washington in order to keep Wecht from facing a 'perp walk' before news cameras. Click the image below to read that page from his sworn statement.
Wecht's attorneys say their public comments are protected free speech. The U.S. Attorney's office had no comment Friday on the latest filing by Wecht's lawyers.
Update:Click here for my Channel 4 Action News story, "Ravenstahl Wants Department Heads To Resign". (I've also reposted this blog entry to repair some software-related missing text.)
When he launched his first multi-player shakeup, I blogged that "the mayor hints he's not done, saying there could be 'perhaps a reshuffling of the entire fifth floor.' "
Looking back, we now see that late April was an especially eventful week for Mayor Ravenstahl. That Monday, he made his much-discussed trip to Oakmont to meet Tiger Woods. That Friday, he removed then-Press-Secretary Dick Skrinjar from his role as the mayor's top communications advisor .
At the start of May, I noted that it was unusual to vacate such a high-ranking post without having someone waiting in the wings. Days after the change, the Mayor said Skrinjar's permanent replacement would be in place within four weeks. So far, it's been more than six weeks and the mayor says he's more than a hundred resumes have crossed his desk. The city website now lists December 31st, 2007 as the last day to apply.
Councilman Jim Motznik tells me: "I've heard the rumor of the street that I wanted to be the public works director and the mayor has offered me the position, and that's not correct. I haven't been offered the public works director job, and I'm not interested in it."
Last night, after 7 pm, the mayor's office issued this news release:
Mayor to Conduct National Search for City Director Candidates
Ravenstahl Asks For Resignation of All Directors Not Appointed on His Watch
[PITTSBURGH] June 14, 2007 Mayor Luke Ravenstahl asked for resignation letters from current City of Pittsburgh departmental directors and board chairs of the Pennsylvania Water and Sewer Authority, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Pittsburgh Parking Authority today in an effort to take a new look at how our city departments and authorities can better serve Pittsburgh. All directors not appointed by Mayor Ravenstahl have been asked to serve the City in an acting capacity and are encouraged to reapply for the position in order to prove they are the best person for the job.
“All Directors are admirable colleagues of mine who have been working very hard,” said Mayor Ravenstahl. “However, I am not satisfied with the condition of City government. As Mayor, I owe it to the people of Pittsburgh to build our government with the best people who are capable of doing the best job. Leadership may need to change, but I am making a tough decision in order to ensure that this City is heading in the right direction.”
A national candidate search will take place effective today in order to put the best possible team in place to serve the city. The process will take a period of time. The market will dictate the level and scope of applicants and in turn create the timeline.
The following directors were already appointed by the mayor: City Planning Director Noor Ismail; Fire Chief and Public Safety Director Michael Huss; Police Chief Nathan Harper; Personnel Director Barbara Trant; Budget Director Scott Kunka."
Here's a YouTube link to the entire video of Mayor Ravenstahl answering my questions about his encounter with Tiger Woods. You can check out a transcript later in this post. The mayor insists he didn't know he was heading for a $900-a-ticket private event when set out on his quest to meet Tiger. When pressed, he acknowledges that he called ahead asking for a chance to see Woods but that no one returned his phone call. Ravenstahl says he just wanted to meet him--both as a golf fan and in his capacity as mayor--and that he now wants to put the matter behind him.
Note: During my interview, the mayor criticizes KDKA's coverage of the story. Those comments weren't included in my broadcast report, which focuses on the mayor's direct account of what happened. Because they appear in the unedited interview, I should note that Jon Delano reports he did offer the mayor the opportunity to comment and that the mayor declined.
Click on the "Read More" link below to read a transcript of my Q&A with the mayor. Bob Mayo: "..The flap over the visit to Oakmont for that pre-U.S. Open event with Tiger Woods. What's your answer to what exactly happened that day?"
Mayor Luke Ravenstahl: "Well, I wish to put this matter behind me, first of all. And my recollection of the situation, being that I was there, is much different than what has been reported from KDKA."
"I was there. I was invited to have lunch. I was invited and given a T-Shirt. I was invited and given a badge to walk along. At no point did I, as was suggested, crash any party, sneak in to any event."
"(I) had discussions with everybody. The only thing that I was asked not to do was ask Tiger Woods for an autograph, which I certainly didn't."
"The sources that are referenced, I think the fact that they are anonymous at this point is troubling to me."
"For example, Gerry Dulac from the Post-Gazette, he was quoted as saying that he was there with me. I spent time with him that day. The events that took place that day are nothing as was reported by KDKA."
"So, it's been frustrating in many ways. And you know, when you're the mayor of the city, and you live your life under the microscope, you understand that type of activity is going to happen."
"I just wish I would have had the opportunity to discuss the issue prior to the story being run, so I could have given my side of the story. But KDKA chose to go in a different direction and I think that's unfortunate."
Mayo: "The Trib reported this back in early May, so KDKA apparently wasn't alone in this. Just to clarify, some people said, oh, you invited yourself. Did you invite yourself, or did the U.S. Open invite you, or did American Express invite you?"
Mayor Ravenstahl: "I went to Oakmont that day in an attempt to meet Tiger Woods. At the time I got there, I didn't know that he was going to golf and American Express people were going to be invited. So I simply went there to say hello, welcome him to Pittsburgh, spend five minutes with him. Didn't know that he'd be golfing in the afternoon with the people."
"Once I found that out, and once I was invited, certainly I accepted. But I did not go out there knowing that American Express had the opportunity to go with him that afternoon. That was never my intention. My intention was simply to say hello, welcome him, and spend, you, know, a minute or two with him."
Mayo: "You had called ahead, but hadn't heard back--you showed up?"
Mayor Ravenstahl: "Yeah, I called personally and hadn't heard back, and so I went out and showed up, in the hopes of spending a couple of minutes with him. At which time I was asked to park here, and come on in and have lunch, and it really went from there."
Mayo: "So that's the point at which you were invited, after you showed up?...
Mayor Ravenstahl: "Absolutely, right...."
Mayo: "...They said, stay, come in?"
Mayor Ravenstahl: "...Yep, absolutely."
Mayo: "The other thing would be, were you there as the mayor, were you there as an individual fan?"
Mayor Ravenstahl: "Probably a little bit of both. You know, I'm certainly a big golf fan, and I there as the mayor, as well, to welcome him to the city. And when I had the brief opportunity for a minute or two, I did welcome him as the Mayor of Pittsburgh. And so, I guess I was there as a golf fan, certainly, but as the mayor as well."
I use this site to experiment with blogging, podcasting, and other online projects.
While I may draw on observations made in my work, this site is a personal hobby and not affiliated with my employer.
Click image to check out the iPhone tour page.
Click image to see Mac OS X Leopard features.
Posts
