#Los Angeles California Personal Injury Attorney

[golden-lemon]

If you are curious about how much your lemon law claim could be worth, the best way to get an accurate estimate is to get in touch with a lemon lawyer.

[sunsetwestlgca]

Los Angeles Dog Bite Attorney - Sunset West Legal Group - Century City

Approximately, 1,000 people need medical treatment for dog bites. Did you know? There is a law regarding the case of a dog bitten. If you have been attacked by a dog, and get injured. Then, you can file a case against the dog owner and get medical treatment with compensation. You can visit one of the Best Los Angeles Dog Bite attorneys, i.e. Sage Law Group LLP or follow this link: https://www.sunsetwestlg.com/dog-bites/.

[thelawofficeofpablogpinasco]

Bus Accident Attorney In Los Angeles

Looking for a reliable bus accident attorney in Los Angeles? Contact The Law Office of Pablo G Pinasco for expert legal assistance. Our experienced team is dedicated to helping you navigate the complexities of bus accident cases. We specialize in advocating for injury victims and ensuring they receive the compensation they deserve. Don't wait, schedule a consultation with our dedicated team to protect your rights and pursue justice. Trust The Law Office of Pablo G Pinasco for skilled representation in your bus accident claim.

[amslaw]

Navigating a bus accident case can be complex, but our seasoned California attorney knows the ins and outs and will fight to get you the justice you deserve.

Learn more about our Los Angeles Bus Accident Attorney

*Advertisement

[themlgteamsd]

If you have had an accident or suffer from a personal injury, Our experienced Los Angeles injury attorneys have a reputation for investigating and successfully pursuing at-fault party(s) – ensuring accident victims are given the resources they need to get better. Visit us: https://www.socalpersonalinjurylawyer.com/

[lajusticiaabogados]

Abogado de Accidente de Motocicleta

Un accidente de motocicleta puede cambiar tu vida en un instante. En La Justicia Abogados, nuestro equipo de abogados especializados en accidentes de motocicleta está comprometido a proporcionarte la representación legal que necesitas para enfrentar estos desafíos. Entendemos las complejidades de los accidentes de motocicleta y luchamos por obtener la máxima compensación para nuestros clientes. Desde gastos médicos hasta pérdidas salariales, trabajamos arduamente para asegurar tu recuperación. Llámanos hoy para una consulta gratuita y descubre cómo podemos ayudarte.

[jmlawfirm]

Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorney

Hire Los Angeles Personal Injury Attorney. JM Law Firm, located in Los Angeles, is your trusted destination for hiring highly skilled and dedicated personal injury attorneys. Led by the accomplished founder, Jasmine Motazedi, who possesses more than 20 years of experience in the field of personal injury law, the firm provides top-notch legal representation to individuals seeking justice and compensation for their injuries. If you’re in need of legal representation for a personal injury matter in Los Angeles, look no further than JM Law Firm. Contact us now to schedule a consultation and take the first step towards obtaining the justice and compensation you deserve. Know more about us at: https://www.jmpilawfirm.com/

[point-law-group]

Why Is It Important For Personal Injury Attorneys To Have Negotiation Skills?

A personal injury attorney in Los Angeles is helping their clients in getting the best settlement amount possible. It is because they have the most important skill that every personal injury attorney must have. Negotiation skills are of paramount importance when it comes to personal injury cases. Visit the website for more about why is it important for personal injury attorneys to have negotiation skills.

[beardedmrbean]

Two Los Angeles mothers are at odds on opposite sides of California's embattled criminal justice system: one grieving the loss of her two sons and the other trying to get her conviction for killing them overturned.

Rebecca Grossman, a rich and powerful Los Angeles socialite, sped her Mercedes through a crosswalk and killed Mark Iskander, 11, and his 8-year-old brother, Jacob, as they were crossing the street with their mother and younger brother.

Nancy Iskander, a biotech executive, grabbed her son, Zachary, who was 5 at the time, and dove out of the way. But she and her youngest son witnessed the crash.

"We will continue to speak up until we see justice and see her pay for the murder of two little boys, because they could be anyone's kids," she told Fox News Digital. "They're not just my boys. They're just [an] innocent 11-year-old, an innocent 8-year-old in a crosswalk."

Grossman, 60, had prescription drugs and alcohol in her system at the time of the 2020 crash, prosecutors told Fox News Digital. Although she was married to a prominent Los Angeles surgeon, Dr. Peter Grossman, she was racing her boyfriend, former MLB pitcher Scott Erickson, home from a restaurant. Each of them were driving Mercedes-Benz SUVs above 70 mph.

Jurors found her guilty in February, but she has not yet been sentenced. Not only has she never expressed remorse, her "games" in court and from behind bars have antagonized the grieving family for years, Iskander said.

"She had many opportunities to show mercy, and she did not show any mercy on my family," Iskander told Fox News Digital. "In fact, she only showed hate – all sorts of hate in many, many ways – as if we're her No. 1 enemy in the world."

The Iskander family has accused Grossman of toying with the justice system throughout the process, appealing her charges to the state Supreme Court before trial and then in March attempting to tamper with the jury.

Deputy District Attorneys Ryan Gould and Jamie Castro sent jailhouse phone call transcripts to the court in March that allegedly showed Grossman violating a gag order on the case and openly discussing attempts to interfere with witnesses and influence the judge, FOX 11 Los Angeles reported at the time.

"It feels so unfair not only to lose the kids but also to find yourself in the middle of a fight and with a person who wants to hurt you as much as possible in the middle of it," Iskander said.

Adding insult to injury, Grossman hired defense attorney James Spertus to handle her post-conviction matters – another "game" that the Iskanders say is an attempt to sway the scales of justice in Grossman's favor. Spertus is a friend of the judge's, they say, and he is also representing the disgraced former deputy district attorney, Diana Teran, who is under indictment on 11 unrelated felony charges. She happens to be the former supervisor of the unit that prosecuted Grossman.

Rather than seek Spertus' removal from the case, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon's office briefly removed the lead prosecutors instead, a move that caused widespread public backlash.

"It was heart-wrenching for us," Iskander told Fox News Digital. "It felt we were punished, or we were the victim of another one of her games."

Gascon's top deputy, Joseph Iniguez, backtracked on the move days later and said Gould and Castro would remain on the case, although the chain of command was transferred out of their division to one that hadn't been overseen by Teran.

Iskander said the family is very thankful for the move and believes the duo will do the best job in court.

"Them being not only familiar with the evidence but also the circumstances, and Mrs. Grossman's strategies into getting more delays or causing a conflict of interest, they are familiar with that," she told Fox News Digital. "And then they got to know Mark and Jacob through the years. It's been four years that we've been together. So, I feel like to hand it to someone who never worked on it before, at this point, it doesn't make any sense."

Grossman is due back in court Friday as part of a bid for a new trial. She faces up to 34 years in prison for her conviction on two counts of second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter and hit-and-run resulting in death.

While Spertus has alleged prosecutorial misconduct and is seeking a new trial, prosecutors are vying to have him removed from Grossman's defense due to his attorney-client relationship with Teran.

Spertus denied having any conflict of interest involving his representation of either party. He told Fox News Digital he expects the state attorney general's case against Teran to fail.

As for Iskander, she is hoping the case finally comes to a conclusion so she and her family can heal. As part of the process, she and her husband have become devoted to charity by founding an orphanage and a foster care nonprofit while raising money for scholarships for local children through the Mark and Jacob Iskander Foundation.

"A person killed two children. They didn't do anything wrong. She's a murderer," Iskander said. "It should be a straightforward process, right? And I mean, for society, it has to be a straightforward process."

[themenendezbrothers]

Correction/Clarification: The information I posted about the Habeas may be wrong. ("it may have changed the outcome"). See 2nd trial transcripts for Feb 16th for the Judge's ruling on imminent peril and imperfect self-defense.

ETA excerpts below. Link.

In disallowing this evidence, the trial judge explained:

The relevance of the expert testimony of these experts that we've referred to in the hearing, the relevance of that testimony was to and is to corroborate the testimony of the defendants regarding their mental state at the time of the killing, and to dispel certain misconceptions regarding the conduct of an individual faced with a situation or circumstances as described by the defendants.

The issue, as I looked at it and look at it now, is the state of mind of the defendants at the time of the killing as to whether there was an actual belief of imminent danger of death or great bodily injury and a need to act. Obviously, if that actual belief is not presented to the jury, then the experts have nothing to corroborate. . . .

Since the relevance of the expert testimony is related to the state of mind of the defendants at the time of the killing, the purpose of the experts' testimony that they had — that the defendants fit a certain diagnosis; that they are, whatever the expert says, a battered person — they fit the — or fit the diagnosis of a post-traumatic stress disorder, that is only to corroborate the defendants' testimony as to their mental state at the time of the crime.

. . . . .

It's really irrelevant, and it would be totally irrelevant to any trial, that the defendants had been abused or that they fit a particular diagnosis of being abused. That's totally irrelevant, unless it corroborates their testimony as to their mental state at the time of the crime. If it doesn't do that, then the fact that they happen to be abused or happen to fit a particular diagnosis is irrelevant.

Not only is resentencing being recommended, but the courts are also reviewing the Habeas Petition. The Habeas has to do with the discovery of the new evidence. Had this information been presented by the Defense and for the jury to consider in the first trial, it may have changed the outcome. Sadly it didn't come to light until years later. And despite the new evidence, six women on the 1st jury still believed there was molestation.

Source: District Attorney's Office Los Angeles County website.

"This year, the brothers’ defense attorneys sent our office a request to resentence the brothers. While the habeas petition raises questions about the evidence at trial, the resentencing request focuses on rehabilitation and behavior during time served."

The "parole" information below was found online.

From the Board of Parole Hearings The California Parole Hearing Process Handbook

Section 3 CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING PAROLE SUITABILITY.

Section 3 of the handbook excerpt:

"The California Supreme Court has held that a hearing panel’s primary concern is public safety and the incarcerated person’s current risk to society. Hearing panels weigh factors relevant to predicting whether the person can live in society without committing antisocial acts, such as crimes of violence, causing personal or financial harm to others, or failing on parole through noncompliance with the reasonable restrictions imposed by their parole agent. Hearing panels use a Structured Decision-Making Framework (SDMF) to analyze a person’s risk factors and determine whether they can live in society without committing more crimes. Hearing panels generally focus on how the incarcerated person has changed since coming to prison."

From another website:

FACTORS FOR DETERMINING PAROLE SUITABILITY

The governing statute for determining whether a person shall be found suitable for parole states: “The Board shall set a release date unless it determines that the gravity of the current convicted offense or offenses, or the timing and gravity of current or past convicted offense or offenses, is such that consideration of the public safety requires a more lengthy period of incarceration for this individual.”

The BPH regulations similarly state that a person will be found unsuitable if the BPH finds they would “pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society if released from prison.” A decision regarding parole suitability shall take into account all relevant and reliable information.

The BPH regulations also set forth factors that it must consider in determining whether a person is likely to posea danger to society if released from prison.

Factors that tend to indicate unsuitability for parole include:

 The person committed the offense in an especially heinous, atrocious or cruel manner.

Examples include attacking multiple victims, carrying out the offense in a dispassionate or calculated manner, demonstrating an exceptionally callous disregard for human suffering, or committing a crime for a motive that is inexplicable or very trivial in relation to the offense.

 The person has a previous record of violence.

 The person has a history of unstable or tumultuous relationships with others.

 The person has previously sexually assaulted someone in a manner to inflict unusual pain or fear.

 The person has a history of severe mental problems related to the offense.

 The person has committed serious misconduct in prison or jail.

Factors that tend to show suitability for parole include:

 The person does not have a juvenile record of assault or crimes with the potential of causing personal harm to the victims.  The person has a history of reasonably stable relationships with others.  The person has demonstrated remorse and understanding of the magnitude of the offense  The person committed the crime as a result of significant life stress.  The crime appears to be the result of victimization that caused the person to suffer from Intimate Partner Battering.  The person lacks any significant history of violent crime.  The person’s current age reduces the probability of recidivism.

The person has realistic plans for release or has developed job skills that can be put to use upon release.

The person’s behavior in prison demonstrates an ability to comply with the laws upon release.  If the crime was committed before the person turned age 26, the BPH must consider the diminished culpability of youth, the hallmark features of youth, and any subsequent growth and increased maturity of the person.

Erik and Lyle will be home soon!

[angrybell]

What we are seeing this past week with the campus takeovers by terror supporters is the fruit of the Left’s obsession with equitable enforcement of the law. The Left has evolved over the years to fundamentally disagree with the idea that the rule of law should enforced evenly. Instead, they choose to enforce the law “equitably”.

How has this manifested itself? Well in San Francisco, former DA Chesa Boudin only wanted to charge certain groups of people with crimes based on an arbitrary and capricious basis. If you were a person of color and committed a violence assault that put a person in the hospital, you could be facing on “restorative” justice, meaning no jail time and lighter penalties. It doesn’t matter that the person put in the hospital was also a person of color, or elderly, if Boudin felt the criminal was oppressed, they got out of trouble with barely a slap on the wrist. Other District Attorneys, like Gascon in Los Angeles and Alvin Bragg in New York, have had similar, arbitrary ways of excusing those from criminal culpability that they deem to be part of right demographic group.

So now we have the campus protests which have morphed into takeovers by groups of terror supporters (don’t pretend they are just “pro Palestinians”). The administrators did nothing. They did nothing when Jewish students started getting attacked. They did nothing when Jewish students were being denied entry to university facilities on the basis of their religion. They did nothing when Jewish students were beaten and sent to the hospital (as happened yesterday at UCLA where five keffiyeh pro-terror protesters decided that the Jewish girl with the flag dancing around posed an existential threat to them. They attacked her, pummeled her to the ground and then continued to kick her, sending her to the hospital with head injuries.)

Did the police intervene? No. Did the administration intervene? No, they capitulated over and over and over again. They set deadlines and then rescinded those deadlines because the terrorists that they had indoctrinated did not go along with their orders.

Back in the 19th century, the city of San Francisco was out of control. This was by design. The city government was incredibly corrupt and refused to do anything that was not in the interests of the corrupt politicians at CIty Hall. So in 1851 and 1856, committees of vigilance were formed. In 1851 they took matters into their own hands executed 4 criminals, forced 28 to leave California (apparently deporting 14 to Australia), and whipping 1 publicly. In 1856, when it was clear that the first go-round had not put enough fear into the corrupt San Francisco government, the committees reformed, and was the driving force to rid San Francisco of Democrats who had been in power.

Fortunately, a group of counter-protesters at UCLA last night decided enough was enough and emulated the old committees of vigilance. I am not sure how it started, but it appears that they broke into the occupation meted out some street justice to the terrorists, who now are complaining they weren’t protected.

When you refuse to administer the laws on the books fairly, evenly, and justly, reasonable people will become unreasonable and turn to vigilantism. It doesn’t seem that the administration or the police or the DA have changed their tune as they continue to make no progress in reasserting control over the situation. If they don’t, hopefully, the vigilantes will return and finish the job.

[sunsetwestlgca]

What Does A Personal Injury Lawyer Do - Sunset West Legal Group

Sunset West Legal Group is a personal injury law firm based in Los Angeles, servicing clients in Southern California. Founded by federal and state-licensed attorney Payton Kashani, its mission is not only in providing the compensation and justice victims deserve after their accidents, but also providing victims a path to get their lives back from traumatic events.

[thelawofficeofpablogpinasco]

Personal Injury Lawyers

The Law Office of Pablo G Pinasco is here to help you if you've been injured due to someone else's mistake. Our team of friendly and experienced lawyers knows how tough it can be, and we'll work hard to make sure you get the money you deserve. We care about getting you justice and peace of mind, so you can focus on healing. Think of us as your personal injury lawyers, fighting for you every step of the way.

[amslaw]

Ridesharing services have transformed the way we travel, offering convenience and accessibility to millions of passengers across California.

However, with the increasing popularity of these services comes the risk of an Uber or Lyft car accident and injuries.

If you’ve sustained injuries in an Uber or Lyft accident, it’s crucial to understand your rights and seek rideshare and Uber accident lawyers to ensure you receive the compensation you deserve.