Leaderboard 728 X 90

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Robert Vance Jr. Is Neither Honest Nor Competent--And He Does Not Deserve Your Vote

Robert Vance Jr.

In a race between two seriously flawed candidates, the Democrat is more likely than the Republican to at least be moderately honest and semi competent.

That maxim has guided my voting for the past 20 years or so, and I intend to apply it in today's presidential election by voting for Barack Obama. The general rule, unfortunately, does not always apply--and that's why I will vote against another Democrat, Robert Vance Jr., for chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.

As regular readers know, I am deeply disappointed in Barack Obama's performance during his first term. As recently as August 9, I wrote that I probably was going to stay home on election day, mainly as a protest against Obama's dreadful performance on justice issues.

But that was before I took a serious look at Mitt Romney's background in the private-equity world and heard the disdain in his voice for regular Americans at the infamous "47 percent" fundraiser in Florida. It also was before I saw Romney up close in three presidential debates and realized that he might be the most fundamentally dishonest candidate to ever run for our nation's highest office.

Obama undoubtedly has made false and misleading statements in the course of the campaign. But by Romney's prodigious standards, the president is a minor leaguer in the world of deceit. To Obama's credit, he never said he was going to make justice issues a high priority in his first term; in fact, he said two weeks before taking office that he intended to "look forward, not backwards" on the rampant criminality in the George W. Bush administration. That stance made me unhappy, but I can't say that Obama was dishonest about it. So I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Obama.

I will not, however, pull the lever for the Democrat in Alabama's most-watched statewide race today. That would be the race for chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, matching Democrat Robert Vance Jr. against Republican Roy Moore.

Moore's mix of right-wing rhetoric and old-time religion makes me extremely uncomfortable. But I do give him credit for honestly stating what he believes. And I have seen signs that he might apply the law correctly for everyday Alabamians and stand up to the legal elites who have turned our courts into their personal playground.

Vance, on the other hand, definitely will not apply the law correctly for everyday Alabamians--and I know because I've had a case before him. Vance also is the favored son of the Alabama state bar and large law firms that have done so much to corrupt our courts. They support Vance because they know he will look out for their interests. That's exactly what he did in the case I had before him--and it's the No. 1 reason Roy Moore will get my vote today.

Am I just the classic "disgruntled litigant" who is unhappy only because Vance ruled against me? No, I'm not; my concerns about Vance go much deeper than that. He left a substantial paper trail that proves he does not respect the law. I have presented that paper trail in a series of posts that proves beyond doubt that Vance ruled contrary to law in a legal-malpractice case that I had before him. Even worse, the record shows that Vance not only cheated me, but he went out of his way to protect two lawyers from a large downtown Birmingham firm--unlawfully dismissing my case in a way that meant his legal brethren would not even have to go through discovery.

No wonder every lawyer who crawls out from under a rock seems to support Robert Vance. You can check out Vance's unlawful actions, complete with public documents that prove his chicanery, at the following links:

Robert Vance Jr. Is Not Fit To Serve On The Alabama Supreme Court, And Here's Why (9/28/12)

Robert Vance Jr. Does Not Deserve Democrats' Support For Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice (10/30/12)

How big a fraud is Robert Vance Jr.? It was revealed in a recent campaign speech that Glynn Wilson, of The Locust Fork News-Journal, covered. Consider this from Wilson's article:

[Vance] acknowledge that people in Alabama are suffering just like people all over the country after going through a bad recession. But “we have no hope of solving those problems if we are at one another’s throats,” he said. “While my opponent seeks to make political hay out of our worst emotions, my campaign seeks to touch the better angels in our nature, as Lincoln once said.” 
“My opponent has proven that he is only driven by his personal beliefs, rather than by the law,” Vance said. “He will put himself above the law and he’s willing to ignore the law for his own personal benefit. For such a man to run as chief justice, the highest law official in this state, is simply unbelievable.”

Vance himself has proven that he is willing to ignore the law for his own personal agenda, which is to protect crooked members of the bar. How does Vance seek to "touch the better angels in our nature" by ruling unlawfully in my legal-malpractice case--or in any other case that comes before him?

What truly is "unbelievable"? That Robert Vance Jr. could make such statements with a straight face, without a trace of irony in his voice.

Vance has proven in recent days that he is not just a liar; he's a coward. I sent him an e-mail, asking for an interview about issues connected to his race for the highest judicial office in Alabama. When Vance cheated me in 2003-04, that was in the days before blogs were a common communications tool. I'm certain that, in the days before the Web press evolved, Vance felt safe in knowing he could screw me over, and it never would see the light of day.

But Robert Vance has been proven wrong about that. Since starting Legal Schnauzer in June 2007, I have used the power of the blogosphere to write extensively about the cheat job Vance administered in Jefferson County Circuit Court. I have published documents and relevant law, proving that he is a legal hack who has little, if any, respect for the actual law.

I know that Robert Vance is aware of my reporting because he recused himself in a matter that Mrs. Schnauzer and I have pending before the Jefferson County Court. Vance clearly knows that I have built a case against him that cannot be refuted. So what did he do when I sent him an interview request? He failed to respond, seemingly afraid to take questions about his own bogus rulings.

That's the kind of man who is asking for your vote today. I'm not a big fan of Roy Moore, but Alabamians would be well advised to reject Robert Vance Jr. in resounding fashion.

Here is a copy of the e-mail that Robert Vance Jr. chose to ignore:

from: Roger Shuler rshuler3156@gmail.com 
to: robert.vance@alacourt.gov 
date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:35 AM 
subject: Interview Request Re: Supreme Court Race 
mailed-by: gmail.com 
Judge Vance: 
I am a journalist in Birmingham, reporting on justice issues at the blog Legal Schnauzer and a number of national Web sites. 
I would like to conduct an interview with you on issues connected to the race for chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. Could you please let me know of a convenient time for you, so that we can schedule the interview. I would be glad to do the interview via phone or in person. My schedule is flexible, but with the election coming up next Tuesday, time is a factor--so I ask that we schedule the interview for a time between now and end of business on Friday. 
Thank you.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

But you're going to vote Obama where if he wins, will keep judges, lawyers and bankers at the top of the food chain? That will give you lots to blog about then!

Robby Scott Hill said...

I also voted for Barack Obama & Roy Moore for Chief Justice today. On a side note, when I saw frequent subject of this blog, Judge Joiner, on the ballot, I did a write-in for Bob Vance, but only because I couldn't think of another Democrat. Save Roy Moore, none of the GOP candidates for appeals courts got my vote. Most notably, Tracey S. McCooey (ruled against ExxonMobil in Dept. of Conservation, et al.) got one of my write in votes for associate justice of the supreme court.

Anonymous said...

"... By 2012 the follower- less peace leaders repeat the same mantra to support Obama; but dare not repeat the past lie (in the name of ‘peace’) rather they claim in order ‘to defeat Romney’....

James Petras @ voltairnet.org/en

I agree to either (1) NO vote, or (2) vote for Romney.

Why? Because the so called liberals in the U.S. need the Bush, et als, to get the old fashioned egg beaters up their arses to get real about the truth.

In Las Vegas, the deck stacked, cards marked, and courts? PLEASE, there is only gaming in the U.S.A. and culture or higher intelligence get behind "multi" whatever the label pastes as consume more of lesser than what our reality should be in 2012.

South Florida is already filing a lawsuit against the same ole story, gee the elections are rigged.

Gaming is the name of the play in America, just watch as the liberals get up again and scream about how horrible the Republicans?! are, and the difference between Democrats?

Not one thin tin dime. No more silver other than the mint tint on the outer tin.

Obama is a disgrace. Romney is too. America is fucked ....

A trial proving that there is a witch hunt ongoing in the U.S., in LV-NV, OMG, how unbelievable the Sheldon Gary Adelson bizarro ghetto hell world: destroy any and all other than the lust for more degradation.

The "United States of America" is not other than gone, Romney-Ryan is the perfect match made in ghetto hell, for the process to be at long last, complete: United multicultural factions and no such idea, "America!"

James Greek said...

I told my grandmother that I would be voting for Roy Moore and she gave me grief. I did defend her and all. You know more about the legal system than she does. Might as well hold our noses and vote for him.

jeffrey spruill said...

In my personal evolution dealing with lawyers has taught me that there's a mass of these creeps that are either taught-- or it's learned behavior - but they'll say & write what's diametrically opposed to the truth.

seeks to touch the better angels in our nature, he’s willing to ignore the law for his own personal benefit

David Bouchard calls himself a humanitarian when in reality he's a hatchet man for the legal profession.(LS-note the devious/devilish grin on David Bouchard's face)

http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/06/06/heretick-v-bouchard-in-the-13th/

Anonymous said...

He has a serious thyroid issue if you ask me. No eyebrows and no hair. He looks scary like that bald person that kept following Jesus around in The Passion. The one they portrayed at the devil. You did not know if it was man or woman it was just creepy.x

legalschnauzer said...

My apologies for being slow moderating comments today. Been out of pocket for much of the day. Thanks for patience.

legalschnauzer said...

Rob:

Like you, I had to write in somebody to oppose all of those unopposed Republicans on the ballot. Wound up writing in the names of various friends, neighbors and pets.

legalschnauzer said...

Anon at 7:26--

I share your concern about judges, lawyers and bankers being at the top of the food chain. But I disagree that Obama put them there. I'm 55 years old, and they've been there all of my life. I have no doubt they will remain there if Romney is elected. If you have ideas for putting such elites in their places, I would love to hear them. Our country would be much stronger if judges, lawyers, and bankers were knocked down a few pegs.

Anonymous said...

It was depressing today to look at my ballot and see all those Republicans running unopposed for statewide judicial races. That's inexcusable. Democrats have done a terrible job of explaining to the public what is wrong with our court system and how it can be improved.

Anonymous said...

I am wide awake in the middle of the night. I am so excited about some of the local judicial races in Jefferson County. Little Brian Huff was voted out of an office that he was not big enough to handle. Suzanne Childers was replaced by Pat Stephens, who is more qualified for that position. Last, but not least, Don Blankenship is replacing Scott Vowell.
Now for the bad news. Craig Pittman was re-elected to his position as appellate court judge. Why? Because nobody opposed this -------. Not even in the primary.
I was pleased that Roy Moore won. He's a real man. I mean like badass. He was a pioneer of ultimate fighting..NO LIE.
What the hell is Vance? A nerd?

Anonymous said...

i'm in agreement with an activist that says what i feel, when the voters continue to vote for the least of the worst, there is only the changing of the bad puppets.

we do not have a better majority for voting for obama.

done with activism, letters to the names of the backers for the women who sue goldman sachs.

gs is the 1% of the 10%, that is the BLOB, does not get time on your BLOG and this is too damn bad since the "elite" as you say them are, are them, those that do not get blogged at the top journalists' thus, why expect the low journalism to move energy when the top cannot mathematically deductively reason the domino was pushed again and it is voting for the least of the worst and in America there is actually no challenge, OTHER, than to fool all the fools all the time.

Game over. Israel is laughing at the production of Romney vs. Obama and Obama? Drones are bombing in Yeman, what did we expect from a truely very seriously addicted poly "white druggie" in black wool clothing.

Robby Scott Hill said...

Legal Schnauzer is beginning to make a difference. Bob Vance didn't lose to Moore by a huge margin. As the anonymous commenter observed, Huff & Vowell who were regulars on this blog for violating our sense of justice are out. I'd like to think that Roger's reporting was a contributing factor in these races.

Even Suzanne Childers, who was mentioned many moons ago for toting a gun under her robe, is out. I'm not aware of any issues with Justice Childers. I've got plenty of enemies too & if she ever works in my office, I hope she's still packing heat!