[quote=ucodegen][quote=bearishgurl][quote=ucodegen]…To get to Arizona, you can also go through Nevada then to Arizona..[/quote]
This is US 93, a mostly two-laner along the rim of the Hoover Dam, 35 mi SE of Las Vegas. A slow, comm’l truck-filled border crossing, this area is highly patrolled at ALL times. It would be only too easy to spot his vehicle there …[/quote]BTW, I forgot to mention.. it is no longer a two laner, and it no longer goes across the dam. The dam is now closed to cross traffic. [/quote]
[img_assist|nid=17140|title=Hover Dam from new Bypass Bridge|desc=|link=popup|align=center|width=199|height=133]
WOW, uco, I haven’t been on that road in a few years! How did they build that? It’s absolutely amazing ….
[quote=ucodegen][quote=bearishgurl]Since one of Dorner’s victims was the daughter of the attorney who, by his statement, “botched” his disciplinary hearing against the LAPD, I’m just wondering why he didn’t instead file a claim against the City and then sue for damages (and his job back) when the judge hearing his mandamus petition rubber-stamped the hearing officer’s decision (as they often do, to get the case off their docket). In doing so, the judge hearing his petition left it wide open for Dorner to take legal action against the City and LAPD.[/quote]True.. but look at it from his side. He is military trained, not legal. He is unfamiliar with the process of using the courts and after the last ‘judge’ issue.. he probably feels that he can not get justice through the courts. He probably thinks that after this last one, there is no more recourse through the courts. He is probably taking the only course of action that he feels that he can.[/quote]
I disagree. CA isn’t the “wild west.” The wheel was invented long ago.
The sole reason for filing the writ petition was to remand the case back to an administrative hearing with instructions or obtain a right to sue.
No aggrieved public employee or ex-employee would go through the time and expense of the writ without realizing they had a right to file a claim and sue if it was denied.
His lawyer would have fully explained all this to him. He wouldn’t have had to keep that lawyer for the trial.
I’ve watched aggrieved-public-employee court trials and can tell you that the “system” works.
But the employee must not be afraid to use it. They have to “stay on task” long after their termination.
Heads have rolled in organizations where the corrupt conduct of public officials and employees have cost them a small fortune in jury awards and settlement monies.
It is VERY difficult to overcome a jury award on appeal as … even though the justices have the trial transcript, they weren’t there and didn’t personally see the conduct of the witnesses and the expressions on jurors faces. They won’t nullify jury awards but may reduce them if they are excessive.
This doesn’t preclude the organization from appealing an adverse (to them) decision or verdict, however, and they often (frivolously) spend YOUR money to to do so. Meanwhile, the clock is running on back pay and interest after a jury reinstated the (still-unemployed) employee over a frivolous, corrupt and/or politically-motivated discharge.
These lengthy “skirmishes” happen more often than the general public (read: taxpayers) are likely aware of :=0
