DUI in TN --- ..

Being bedevilled of active beneath the access in Tennessee could advance to a difficult life. From the start, prosecutors would stop at annihilation to get you abaft bars, and bang you with added punishments added than bastille time such as cloister fines, abandoning of your license, booze counseling, and association service.

Even back you accept served your book and aggregate abroad that comes with it, you may alike feel the effects. Award assignment is difficult as it is; what added if you accept a bent record?

This is why it is so important to acquisition the best advocate you can. You should attending for a advocate that has acquaintance in administration DUI cases in Tennessee. The acumen for this is that he would apperceive the ins and outs of the acknowledged arrangement of the state, and would apperceive added or beneath how the prosecutor argues his cases. A DUI advocate Knoxville can be begin in altered law firms. It would be a acceptable advantage to attending for a law close that specializes in DUI cases. They would apperceive how to handle your case and would accept the strategies to abbreviate the consequences, or alike absolutely annihilate them.

The aboriginal footfall to award the appropriate advocate is accepting a acceptable law firm. You can attending through a lot of abstract to acquisition out the law close that is best for you. You can additionally ask bodies you assurance that accept had the acquaintance of activity through a balloon before. Make abiding that back you accept a law close you abstraction and analysis on them. Apperceive their accomplishments and the cases that they accept handled in the past. With this knowledge, you will be able to adjudicator for yourself whether they are competent abundant to handle your case. A acclaimed law close is the way to go.

Once you accept begin the law firms that specialize in DUI cases, you should be able to accept from them. Make abiding that you apprehend all abstract accessible apropos their close so that you are able-bodied acquainted of how they accomplish and how they accept won in the past.

Grand Theft Auto - Not the video game.

Thefts and robberies action in all societies. People appetite article that is contrarily difficult for them to obtain, so they abduct it. Some robberies are small, such as burglary bonbon from a store. Others are worse, such as breaking into someone's home and burglary stuff. Others are alike added severe, like burglary computers and televisions. Amid this aftermost category, annexation of automobiles is additionally included. Automobile annexation is alleged admirable annexation auto. Admirable annexation auto, admitting accepted belief, does not accommodate on car annexation but additionally of trucks, buses, motorcycles, snowmobiles, and trailers, amid added motor vehicles.

Grand annexation auto can action for a cardinal of reasons. The thieves may appetite artlessly appetite to booty the car for joyriding. Or, they may appetite to annihilate the car or abolish assorted genitalia from the car and resell those parts. Addition acumen why admirable annexation auto occurs is artlessly to advertise the car to addition else. Also, some thieves may artlessly appetite to carriage themselves about and may carelessness the car already they are done application it.

It can action in a cardinal of ways. A bandit may aloof breach into a anchored car and alpha it up after the charge of any keys. Or, a bandit may accept acquired keys about and somehow after the car owner's ability and/or permission. Then, all the bandit has to do is actually accessible the aperture and drive away. Next, there is additionally a blazon alleged 'opportunistic theft," which occurs back an buyer of a car abounding it accessible and abandoned and addition aloof drives abroad in it. Furthermore, a affected acquittal to a car's buyer for the car is additionally a blazon of admirable annexation auto. If addition gives a analysis that will bounce, that is admirable annexation auto as well. Finally, the best accepted acumen of admirable annexation auto: angrily demography control of car from someone. For example, if addition is sitting in a car and addition alone comes and credibility a gun at the disciplinarian to force the disciplinarian out, or uses added concrete abandon to force the disciplinarian out, again that is admirable annexation auto.

New jersey to increase toll prices by 100%

In recent news today Corzine is trying to smoothly pass a proposal to increase the tolls by 100%. This meeting today is happening in Woodbridge, NJ and will only be holding 1 meeting to determine whether or not this proposal actually does go into effect. So far it looks as if it is a go, but we will stay tuned to see where we stand.

In other news we think you should check out: http://www.igotuglygreent-shirtpocketfullofmiracles.co.nr/

The Federal Reserve Cuts Interests Rates!

The Federal Reserve Cuts the Interests rates today 10/8/2008. What does that mean for the "six-pack joe".

Well if Six-Pack Joe has a ARM or Adjustable Rate Mortgage he can see his mortgage start to lessen once the mortgage rates reset itself. What will see for Fixed Rate Mortgages? Not much. Not much at all, but through my analysis and market research I can anticipate seeing a drop by -.20 bring the national mortgage rate to around 5.6-5.7%.

Does this mean home buyers should start locking in the rates? No - but if you got an ARM on a new home purchase you are in luck my friend. You-are-in-luck.

Yeroc from Legal Newspapers - Signing Out!

FactCheck.Org has all the Facts on the Presidential Debate!!!!

Summary

Biden and Palin debated, and both mangled some facts.

• Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

• Biden incorrectly said “John McCain voted the exact same way” as Obama on a controversial troop funding bill. The two were actually on opposite sides.
  
  
• Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

• Biden wrongly claimed that McCain “voted the exact same way” as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn't address taxes at that income level.

• Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.
  
  
• Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said "he wouldn't even sit down" with the president of Spain. Actually, McCain didn't reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.
  

• Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.
  

For full details on these misstatements, and on additional factual disputes and dubious claims, please read on to the Analysis section.

Analysis

Vice presidential candidates Joe Biden and Sarah Palin met for their one and only debate Oct. 2 in St. Louis, Missouri. The event was broadcast nationally. Gwen Ifill of PBS was the debate moderator.

We noted the following:

Palin Trips Up on Troop Levels

Palin got her numbers wrong on troop levels when she said "and with the surge that has worked, we're now down to pre-surge numbers in Iraq."

The surge was announced in January 2007, at which point there were 132,000 troops in Iraq, according to the Brookings Institute Iraq Index. As of September 2008, that number was 146,000. President Bush recently announced that another 8,000 would be coming home by February of next year. But even then, there still would be 6,000 more troops in Iraq than there were when the surge began.

Biden Fudges on Troop Funding

Biden defended Obama's vote against a troop-funding bill, claiming that McCain voted "the exact same way."

Palin: Barack Obama voted against funding troops there after promising that he would not do so…He turned around under political pressure and he voted against funding the troops. ...

Biden: John McCain voted the exact same way. John McCain voted against
funding the troops because of an amendment he voted against had a timeline
in it to draw down American troops. And John said I'm not going to fund
the troops if in fact there's a time line.

As we've pointed out before, the squabble refers to a pair of 2007 votes on war funding. Obama voted for a version of the bill that included language calling for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Biden is simply wrong to say that McCain voted against that bill; he was absent and didn’t vote at all. McCain did oppose the bill, and he urged President Bush to veto it. Bush did. Obama then voted against the same bill without withdrawal language. He had voted yes on at least 10 other war funding bills prior to that single 2007 no vote.

Palin's False Tax Claims

Palin repeated a false claim about Barack Obama's tax proposal:

Palin: Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year. That's a lot of middle income average American families to increase taxes on them. I think that is the way to kill jobs and to continue to harm our economy.

Obama did not in fact vote to increase taxes on "families" making as little as $42,000 per year. What Obama actually voted for was a budget resolution that called for returning the 25 percent tax bracket to its pre-Bush tax cut level of 28 percent. That could have affected an individual with no children making as little as $42,000. But a couple would have had to earn $83,000 to be affected and a family of four at least $90,000. The resolution would not have raised taxes on its own, without additional legislation, and, as we've noted before, there is no such tax increase in Obama's tax plan. (The vote took place on March 14 of this year, not last year as Palin said.)

Palin also repeated the exaggeration that Obama voted 94 times to increase taxes. That number includes seven votes that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on corporations or affluent individuals; 23 votes that were against tax cuts; and 17 that came on just 7 different bills. She also claimed that Biden and Obama voted for "the largest tax increase in history." Palin is referring here to the Democrats' 2008 budget proposal, which would indeed have resulted in about $217 billion in higher taxes over two years. That's a significant increase. But measured as a percentage of the nation's economic output, or gross domestic product, the yardstick that most economists prefer, the 2008 budget proposal would have been the third-largest since 1968, and it's not even in the top 10 since 1940.

Biden's False Defense

Biden denied that Obama supported increasing taxes for families making $42,000 a year – but then falsely claimed that McCain had cast an identical vote.

Biden: Barack Obama did not vote to raise taxes. The vote she's referring to, John McCain voted the exact same way. It was a budget procedural vote. John McCain voted the same way. It did not raise taxes.

Biden was correct only to the extent that the resolution Obama supported would not by itself have increased taxes; it was a vote on a budget resolution that set revenue and spending targets. But he's wrong to say McCain voted the same way. The Obama campaign attempted to justify Biden's remark by pointing to a different vote, on a Senate amendment, that took place March 13. The amendment passed 99-1, with only Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold dissenting. It would have preserved some of Bush's tax cuts for lower-income people. The vote on the budget resolution in question, however, came in the wee hours of March 14 and was a mostly party-line tally, 51-44, with Obama in favor and McCain not voting.

Palin's Health Care Hooey

Palin claimed that McCain's health care plan would be "budget-neutral," costing the government nothing.

Palin: He's proposing a $5,000 tax credit for families so that they can get out there and they can purchase their own health care coverage. That's a smart thing to do. That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything ... a $5,000 health care credit through our income tax, that's budget neutral.

The McCain campaign hasn't released an estimate of how much the plan would cost, but independent experts contradict Palin's claim of a cost-free program.

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain's plan, which at its peak would cover 5 million of the uninsured, would increase the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 10 years. Obama's plan, which would cover 34 million of the uninsured, would cost $1.6 trillion over that time period.

The nonpartisan U.S. Budget Watch's fiscal voter guide estimates that McCain's tax credit would increase the deficit by somewhere between $288 billion to $364 billion by the year 2013, and that making employer health benefits taxable would bring in between $201 billion to $274 billion in revenue. That nets out to a shortfall of somewhere between $14 billion to $163 billion – for that year alone.

Palin also said that Obama’s plan would be "universal government run" health care and that health care would be "taken over by the feds." That's not the case at all. As we’ve said before, Obama’s plan would not replace or remove private insurance, or require people to enroll in a public plan. It would increase the offerings of publicly funded health care.

McCain in Spain?

Biden said that McCain had refused to meet with the president of Spain,
but McCain made no such definite statement.

Biden: The last point I'll make, John McCain said as recently as a couple of weeks ago he wouldn't even sit down with the government of Spain, a NATO ally that has troops in Afghanistan with us now. I find that incredible.

In a September 17 interview on Radio Caracol Miami, McCain appeared confused when asked whether he would meet with President Zapatero of Spain. He responded that "I would be willing to meet with those leaders who are our friends and want to work with us in a cooperative fashion," but then started talking about leaders in Latin America. He did not commit to meeting with Zapatero, but it wasn't clear he'd understood the question.

But the McCain campaign denied that their candidate was confused.
According to our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, campaign adviser Randy Scheunemann e-mailed CNN and the Washington Post the next day, saying that McCain's reluctance to commit to a meeting with Zapatero was a policy decision.

Scheunemann, September 2008: The questioner asked several times about Senator McCain's willingness to meet Zapatero — and id'd him in the question so there is no doubt Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred. Senator McCain refused to commit to a White House meeting with President Zapatero in this interview.

That's not a refusal to meet with Zapatero, as Biden said. It's simply a refusal to commit himself one way or the other.

Palin's Small Business Balderdash

Palin repeated a falsehood that the McCain campaign has peddled, off and on, for some time:

Palin: But when you talk about Barack's plan to tax increase affecting only those making $250,000 a year or more, you're forgetting millions of small businesses that are going to fit into that category. So they're going to be the ones paying higher taxes thus resulting in fewer jobs being created and less productivity.

As we reported June 23, it's simply untrue that "millions" of small business owners will pay higher federal income taxes under Obama's proposal. According to an analysis by the independent Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, several hundred thousand small business owners, at most, would have incomes high enough to be affected by the higher rates on income, capital gains and dividends that Obama proposes. That counts as "small business owners" even those who merely have some sideline income from such endeavors as freelance writing, speaking or running rental properties, and who get the bulk of their income from employment elsewhere.

Defense Disagreements

Biden and Palin got into a tussle about military recommendations in Afghanistan:

Biden: The fact is that our commanding general in Afghanistan said today that a surge – the surge principles used in Iraq will not – well, let me say this again now – our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan, not Joe Biden, our commanding general in Afghanistan. He said we need more troops. We need government-building. We need to spend more money on the infrastructure in Afghanistan.

Palin: Well, first, McClellan did not say definitively the surge principles would not work in Afghanistan. Certainly, accounting for different conditions in that different country and conditions are certainly different. We have NATO allies helping us for one, and even the geographic differences are huge but the counterinsurgency principles could work in Afghanistan. McClellan didn't say anything opposite of that. The counterinsurgency strategy going into Afghanistan, clearing, holding, rebuilding, the civil society and the infrastructure can work in Afghanistan.

Point Biden. To start, Palin got newly appointed Gen. David D. McKiernan's name wrong when she called him McClellan. And, more important, Gen. McKiernan clearly did say that surge principles would not work in Afghanistan. As the Washington Post reported:

Washington Post: "The word I don't use for Afghanistan is 'surge,' " McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a "sustained commitment" to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.

However, it is worth noting that McKiernan also said that Afghanistan would need an infusion of American troops "as quickly as possible."

Killing Afghan Civilians?

Palin said that Obama had accused American troops of doing nothing but killing civilians, a claim she called "reckless" and "untrue."

Palin: Now, Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians. And such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause.

Obama did say that troops in Afghanistan were killing civilians. Here’s the whole quote, from a campaign stop in New Hampshire:

Obama (August 2007): We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there.

The Associated Press fact-checked this one, and found that in fact U.S troops were killing more civilians at the time than insurgents: "As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can’t be attributed to one party." Afghan President Hamid Karzai had expressed concern about these civilian killings, a concern President Bush said he shared.

Whether Obama said that this was "all we're doing" is debatable. He said that we need to have enough troops so that we're "not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians," but did not say that troops are doing nothing else.

Out of Context?

Biden claimed a comment he made about "clean coal" was taken out of context:

Biden: My record for 25 years has supported clean coal technology. A comment made in a rope line was taken out of context. I was talking about exporting that technology to China so when they burn their dirty coal, it won't be as dirty, it will be clean.

Was it really taken out of context? Here’s the full exchange, which took place while Biden was shaking hands with voters along a rope line in Ohio.

Woman: Wind and solar are flourishing here in Ohio, why are you supporting clean coal?
Biden: We’re not supporting clean coal. Guess what? China’s building two every week, two dirty coal plants, and it’s polluting the United States. It’s causing people to die.

Obama-Biden campaign spokesman David Wade later said that “Biden’s point is that China is building coal plants with outdated technology every day, and the United States needs to lead by developing clean coal technologies.”

Whatever Biden meant or didn’t mean to say on the rope line, he has supported clean coal in the past. When the McCain camp used this one remark from Biden as the basis for a TV ad saying that Obama-Biden oppose clean coal, we said the claim was false. Obama’s position in favor of clean coal has been clear, and pushing for the technology has been part of his energy policy.

McCain in the Vanguard of Mortgage Reform?

Palin said that McCain had sounded the alarm on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago.

Palin: We need to look back, even two years ago, and we need to be appreciative of John McCain's call for reform with Fannie Mae, with Freddie Mac, with the mortgage-lenders, too, who were starting to really kind of rear that head of abuse.

Palin is referring to a bill that would have increased oversight on Fannie and Freddie. In our recent article about assigning blame for the crisis, we found that by the time McCain added his name to the bill as a cosponsor, the collapse was well underway. Home prices began falling only two months later. Our colleagues at PolitiFact also questioned this claim.

And There's More...

A few other misleads of note:

• Palin said, "We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries" for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.
  
  
• Biden claimed that McCain said in a magazine article that he wanted to deregulate the health care industry as the banking industry had been. That’s taking McCain’s words out of context. As we’ve said before, he was talking specifically about his proposal to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines.
  
  
• Biden said five times that McCain's tax plan would give oil companies a "$4 billion tax cut." As we’ve noted previously, McCain’s plan would cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent — for ALL corporations, not just oil companies. Biden uses a Democratic think tank's estimate for what the rate change is worth to the five largest U.S. oil companies.
  
  
• Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.
  
  
• Biden said that Iraq had an "$80 billion surplus." The country was once projected to have as much as a $79 billion surplus, but no more. The Iraqis have $29 billion in the bank, and could have $47 billion to $59 billion by the end of the year, as we noted when Obama used the incorrect figure. A $21 billion supplemental spending bill, passed by the Iraqi legislature in August, knocked down the old projection.
  
  
• Biden said four times that McCain had voted 20 times against funding alternative energy. However, in analyzing the Obama campaign's list of votes after the first presidential debate, we found the number was actually 11. In the other instances the Obama-Biden campaign cites, McCain voted not against alternative energy but against mandatory use of alternative energy, or he voted in favor of allowing exemptions from these mandates.
  

-by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson, Joe Miller, Jessica Henig and Justin Bank

Sources

Belasco, Amy. "The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11." 14 July 2008. Congressional Research Service. Accessed 2 October 2008.

Pickler, Nedra. "Fact Check: Obama on Afghanistan." The Associated Press. 14 Aug. 2007.

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. "Promises, Promises: A Fiscal Voter Guide to the 2008 Election." U.S. Budget Watch. 29 Aug. 2008.

Williams, Roberton and Howard Gleckman. "An Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates' Tax Plans." Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. 15 Sep. 2008.

"Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf." 2007. Energy Information Administration. 8 Aug. 2008.

Petroleum Basic Statistics. The Energy Information Administration, 3 Oct. 2008.

NPC Global Oil & Gas Study. “Topic Paper #7, Global Access to Oil and Gas,” 18 July 2007.

Clarke, David and Liriel Higa, "Blueprints Gain Narrow Adoption," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 15 March 2008.

"Iraq Index," Brookings Iraq Index.

Baldor, Lolita C, "General: Urgent need for troops in Afghanistan now," Associated Press. 2 Oct 2008.

"Bush: 8,000 Troops Coming Home By Feb," CBS/AP. 9 Sept 2008.

Tyson, Ann Scott, "Commander in Afghanistan Wants More Troops," Washington Post. 2 Oct 2008.

Barnes, Julian N., "More U.S. troops needed in Afghanistan 'quickly,' general says," Los Angeles Times. 2 Oct 2008.

Table T08-0164 "Distribution of Tax Units with Business Income by Statutory Marginal Tax Rate, Assuming Extension and Indexation of the 2007 AMT Patch, 2009" Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, 20 May 2008.

Vice Presidential Debate - Palin is green

The very green Sarah Palin debated last night and held her own. She slipped up a few times, mispronounced some names but overall she wasn't dead weight. In the up and coming days the democrats are starting to recognize her as a possible threat.

Does she swing the Independent voters to start voting for her now? I don't think so. Her fake appeal to "Joe" six-pack won't hold up. Shes a hockey mom, not a politician. Shes not cut throat and for sure isn't Washington. In a times that cry for a leader with Foreign politics knowledge she is not even competing in the same arena with the democrats.

I'd like to see her come up with her own solutions for foreign affairs then spitting out John McCains opinions that he had prior to her selection as Vice President Candidate.

$700,000,000,000 New Bailout Passes

Has anybody seen it written out like that, because that's what it looks like.

A website called Stop The Housing Bailout.com claims the new bailout that just passed :"tax breaks broad enough to save 20 million people an average $2,000 a year in higher taxes and narrow enough to help a makers of wooden toy bow-and-arrow sets".

The one thing I wanted to point out in this bill is:

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

Interesting no?

Ban on execution of child rapists stands. ARE YOU KIDDING?

Has anyone read the legal newspapers yet? In Washington the Supreme Court has refused to reconsider its June ruling banning capital punishment for child rapists, rejecting Louisiana officials' argument that a "significant error" led to its conclusion that there is a "national consensus" against executing non-murderers.

Are we joking here folks? CHILD RAPE. These people take advantage of innocent precious children and they don't get the death penalty. These people should be put to DEATH. What kind of lawyers are fighting the Supreme Court here - obviously ones who have no idea what the consensus is. Obviously these people are tree hugging hippies. These people need to be put to DEATH DEATH DEATH. These people should be considered LUCKY that they are not being stoned to death, or worse, having the same crime they committed, committed against themselves.

Anyone here? These people need a CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER and should be tried as murderers. No questions asked!

Defense rests without calling O.J. Simpson

As per the CNN News Network in LAS VEGAS, Nevada (AP) -- O.J. Simpson's defense has rested after calling one witness on the former football star's behalf in his armed robbery and kidnapping trial in Las Vegas.

Simpson himself didn't testify. His only defense witness was his close friend Thomas Scotto.

Lawyers for co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart say they intend to call three or four witnesses and haven't decided whether Stewart will testify.

Scotto testified Wednesday that two key prosecution witnesses tried to extort $50,000 from him, and that one of them offered to change his testimony if he was paid.

Prosecutor David Roger accused Scotto of threatening to take out a contract on the life of one of the witnesses. Scotto called that "ridiculous."

The prosecutor briefly referred to allegations that Scotto, 46, a North Miami Beach, Florida, auto repair shop owner, told Simpson co-defendant Clarence "C.J." Stewart in January that he wanted Alexander dead. But he was not permitted to dwell on the issue.

Alexander, 47, of Mesa, Arizona, testified last week that OJ told him and another friend to carry guns when they went with Simpson to take back allegedly stolen items from two sports memorabilia dealers in a Las Vegas casino hotel room.

Simpson and Stewart have pleaded not guilty to 12 criminal charges, including armed robbery and kidnapping. Each man could face five years to life in prison if convicted in the September 13, 2007, confrontation.

Charles Jones, a lawyer for Stewart, began questioning Scotto about allegations that a "couple of state witnesses" tried to extort payments from him in return for favorable testimony in the case.

Simpson came to Las Vegas to serve as a best man in Scotto's September 15, 2007, wedding.

Scotto did not accompany Simpson from the Palms resort pool to the alleged armed robbery in a Palace Station casino hotel room; he was preparing for his wedding at the time. But Scotto's name was heard on audio recordings played for the jury during the first 11 days of testimony in the case.

Scotto also served as go-between and banker for Simpson after Simpson's September 16, 2007, arrest, and following his re-arrest in January when he was accused of violating terms of his bail release.

The prosecution rested Monday, and the courtroom was dark Tuesday for a scheduled day off. The jury will begin deliberating after closing arguments that Glass said could come as early as Thursday.

Simpson's lawyers said Scotto could be their last witness. Outside court, defense lawyers said no decisions had been made whether Simpson or Stewart would testify.

Stewart's lawyers said they expect to call several witnesses, including Simpson's daughter, Arnelle Simpson, 39. Arnelle Simpson was with O.J. Simpson when he met with Alexander and acknowledged gunman Michael McClinton in Simpson's room at the Palms resort before the alleged armed robbery at Palace Station, several miles away.

Alexander and McClinton were among four men who accompanied Simpson and Stewart to the confrontation and later took plea deals to plead guilty to lesser charges and testify against Simpson.

McClinton, 50, of Las Vegas, was the last prosecution witness Monday. He told the jury he brought a gun at Simpson's request and displayed it near his chest during the six-minute confrontation with memorabilia dealers Alfred Beardsley and Bruce Fromong.

Simpson claims he never asked anyone to bring guns and never saw guns in the room. Stewart maintains he relied on Simpson's assertions that he was going to the Palace Station to retrieve personal items that had been stolen from him.

Bail continues to stick at $5 million for triple-homicide unconvicted suspect

I find the fact of bail remaining at $5 million dollars excessive especially as he had a 100 signature petition claiming he was not a flight risk.


As per the Asbury Park Press in HACKENSACK, NJ — Bail remains at $5 million for the man accused of stabbing three family members to death in Tenafly.

Kang-Hyuk Choi's lawyer tried to persuade a judge to reduce the amount to $3 million. The attorney presented letters from the Korean community and a 100-signature petition claiming Choi didn't pose a flight risk.

But the judge was unmoved Tuesday.

The 33-year-old Long Island resident was arrested in California two days after the slayings in May.

The bodies of 27-year-old Han Il "Sean'' Kim; his mother, Yoo Bok Kim and her brother-in-law Doo Soo Seo were found in their home.

Authorities say the killings arose from a dispute over money.