OK, so you want judges to be, what? Plumbers?
Uh,** squeegee**, excuse you if you sound a bit elitist. Of course we should want our judges to be plumbers, honest plumbers, plumbers who are part of the american experiment. Plumbers, farmers, ditch-diggers, even left-wing pinkco teachers. What we should want is to re-take our legal system from the grubbing hands of those who extort money from we good americans who have been told that the law is the property of a caste of hoo-dooers who sell justice to the highest bidders. These robbers of the poor are low-life and must be purged from our wonderful system of equal treatment under law.
Why? You think different?
I just thought perhaps Judges should be at least passingly familiar with, you know, law.
Perhaps I should demand an accountant tune up my engine as well? Shall we take back the Precision-Tunes from the grubby hands of the mechanics? Do you wish for airline pilot to be an elected position?
I rejoice that these people are not my neighbors.
Milum and squeegee or the Hornstine’s? 
The Philadelphia Inquirer has a more in-depth version of the story here, including some of the judge’s comments.
In my humble non-lawyer/non-judge (although I do have some experience unclogging toilets) opinion, she’s more likely to be seen as “the disabled valedictorian” by virtue of having a GPA that was unattainable by a non-disabled student.
Why hadn’t they looked at the curriculum before? Because nobody had taken advantage of the special-ed curriculum before. This is the first time it came up and the principal made a judgement call. I’d really like to know what the “great concerns” about the motivations of school officals that the judge had- from everything I’ve seen it seems that it was fair play.
lol!
This girl is a waste of oxygen. Where is a vengeful God to zap people with lightning when you need him?
I don’t think she’s a popular girl - http://www.petitiononline.com/blairadm/petition.html at the moment.
Actually, yes, most lawyers are pretty decent, good people, who serve in public office when they choose to do so because they enjoy the position, like the work, and are willing to give up the money.
Why do you assume that lawyers get along with each other to the extant that they automatically form a good old-boy’s club?
I should point out that you are assuming that lawyers are dishonest. I suppose they are no more or less dishonest as a class than any other group, plumbers included. But dishonest or unethical lawyers can sue people for a lot more than a plumber can bilk a customer.
Lawyers live here, too.
I should probably point out that ditch-diggers are usually machines now.
Granted, this is the forum for witnessing…
Cite?
[quote]
These robbers of the poor are low-life and must be purged from our wonderful system of equal treatment under law.
Where does this assumption that a law decree is a Baptism in Evil stem from?
Yes, I think you are paranoid and must be kept from any public office, ever.
That petitiononline is nectar! Milk and honey!
Just hope she gets to read it.
(Doubtless she’ll sue).
Hmm. I wasn’t expecting another sequel to the Blair Witch Project!
The wacky adventures of non lawyer judge
attorney 1: So, what did the victim say to you?
witness: Right before losing consciousness, she told me that Mr. Evans told her that he had poisoned her.
attorney 2: Objection, your non-lawyer honor. Hearsay.
attorney 1: The statement is a dying declaration subject to a hearsay exception under Rule 804 (b)(2), your non-lawyer honor.
attorney 2: That’s preposterous, non-lawyer judge. The victim did not die.
attorney 1: That’s not required under the rules, your non-laywer honor. All that is required is that the statement was made in belief of impending death and that the declarant be unavailable.
attorney 2: Even if that’s true, your non-lawyer honor, which we do not concede, the statement is double hearsay.
attorney 1: We admit that it is double hearsay, your honor; however, the hearsay within hearsay is also subject to an exclusion under 801 (d)(2) as a party admission against interest, and as such the entire statement is admissible. Your ruling, your non-lawyer honor?
non-lawyer judge: Hey, how the heck should I know? I’m not a lawyer! Now, if you gentlemen will excuse me, I’ve got a date with a couple of stewardesses! Yowza!
Also from the article:
Hmmmm…so she’ll be attending Harvard with this guy?
Sheesh. She thinks SHE’S the victim? Her classmates are embarassed and ashamed.
I hope it’s worth all this to her.
Actually, since she is studying to be a snake …er lawyer, this is pretty good experience for her. It helps her keep her emotions in, shows her that she can screw her classmates and act professional and still get rewards, She already has courtroom experience and she won. To a budding lawyer, thats invalueable. Given her goals, I think she deserves the valedictorian title. Once she sheds her skin, she’d make a fine litigator.
I live within a 20-minute drive of the school. I’m sure I can find wherever she’s living…so, how many slaps will that be? 
Has anyone confirmed (disproved?) the OP statement that her “tutors” providing the A+s were, or included, her mom or other possibly-partial part(ies)?
Most of the news accounts that describe her “immune condition” in any detail characterize it as “similar to CFS.” Has anyone seen a more-specific description, i.e., a name for the diagnosis? Does she drop dead if she gets a cold?
Is this truly a girl-in-the-bubble “disease” or a too-delicate-to-live neurasthenic “disease?”
Good questions. I was wondering that myself. In addition, I wonder what accomadations will need to be made for her at Harvard. Will we see a repeat of this type of action in 4 years?
You realize how this stupid case would have been settled in New Zealand.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_758851.html
I bet she would have lost, too, if the other valedictorians weren’t complete pansies. At least they took gym class.
My idea of justice:
The school arranges for Mr. Mirkin to be the one who introduces the valedictorian at the commencement. He stands up, says that he lost out on being the co-valedictorian because of the actions of Ms. Hornstine, but harbors no ill will towards her. However, he goes on to say that in the spirit of free speech, he would like to read some differing opinions, then goes on to read some of the comments from the petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/blairadm/petition.html
After a few dozen of the choicest of those are heard, Ms. Hornstine has to get up and give her speech.
Even if the petition somehow makes it to the Harvard admissions staff, they wouldn’t act on it. Given Ms. Hornstine’s response to on the current issue, Harvard would have to assume that if they reversed her admission, she’d sue the pants off them.
I must say, she certainly has what it takes to be a lawyer: The attitude that the appropriate response to every little disappointment that life hands you is to sue for millions of dollars.
I can just see this little debacle screwing over kids who need special testing situations because they have learning disabilities or kids who take the “adapted” P.E. classes because they can’t participate in the regular ones. Oy…