The reason I can't provide my readers with the Rabbi Baruch Lanner Appellate Court Decision: The record has been impounded by the court.
posted by jewishwhistleblower @ 4:15 AM
7 comments
Jewish Whistleblower
Accountability and transparency within our institutions and leadership.
Friday, February 11, 2005
Previous Posts
- Appellate Court drops one of 4 charges Rabbi Baruc...
- Violent crimes in the Bukharian Jewish community
- Rabbi Shlomo Erez Elbarnes AKA Rabbi Shlomo Helbra...
- Rabbi Baruch Lanner update courtesy of jewishsurvi...
- Rockland Health Commissioner, has ordered Rabbi Fi...
- Israeli foreign affairs:refuse extradition of pedo...
- Jewish Week: Should Mohelim Be Supervised? - JWB: ...
- Marvid Kosher:violations of Labor Code, firing for...
- Aryeh Scher, the new appointee to the Israeli cons...
- Sex for Food Scandal: Meir David Malka, the head o...
7 Comments:
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/feb05.htm
OPINION NOTICES RELEASED FOR FEBRUARY 2005
...
2/10/05
...
APPELLATE COURT
...
A-0664-02T3 STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. BARUCH LANNER
(MONMOUTH COUNTY) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
...
What exactly does "impounded" mean? Will the records be made public later? Why would the records have been impounded?
I'm amused. You are for "transparency" and yet you hide behind a rather dramatic nom de plume?
Hmmm. Cognitive dissonance?
Self righteous hypocritical prick.
THE LANNER OPINION IS AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE AND MAY BE UPLOADED AT THIS SITE.
I AM A LAWYER. THE ONLY THING "IMPOUNDED" MEANS IS THAT THE CASE FILE IS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC. THIS IS OFTEN DONE IN CASES SUCH AS THIS ONE WHERE THERE ARE MINOR VICTIMS OF A SEX CRIME.
I UNDERSTAND THAT FOR ABOUT 25 BUCKS ANYBODY CAN CALL THE APPELLATE DIVISION IN TRENTON AT
(609)-292-4822 AND ORDER A COPY OF THE OPINION IN STATE V. LANNER --DOCKET NUMBER A-664-02T3
i wouldn't be surprised if lanner's dream team gets his case to be heard by the supreme court.
he has six or seven sharks working for him, including unbelivably a orthodox jewish brother and sister.
I wonder if they would trust their young blossoming daughter to be alone in a room with lanner for five minutes.
>Anonymous said...
>I'm amused. You are for
>"transparency" and yet you hide
>behind a rather dramatic nom de
>plume?
>Hmmm. Cognitive dissonance?
>Self righteous hypocritical
>prick.
1) Read please
"Accountability and transparency within our institutions and leadership"
I am neither an institutions nor in leadership.
2) And your name is...anonymous?
It sickens me that the judge over turned the conviction on the count that mattered to most. We all need to show our support to the young women he sexually assaulted.
Post a Comment
<< Home