sigh wrote on November 09, 2007 04:58 PM: "He has displayed a bias against prosecutors," Roger said Friday. "Therefore, I do not feel the state of Nevada would get a fair shake by him."
Oh and everyone else does

Clock wrote on September 14, 2007 07:56 AM: We once were blind but now we see. Too much power in a man's hand.

myrna wrote on September 04, 2007 11:38 PM: Re: Judge (pro tem) MacArthur

I happen to agree that some prosecutors are only out to inflict as much punishment as they are able. The more convictions, the harsher the sentence, the better thier record.

Also, "My Space" seems like a rather odd place for the DA to be browsing. I was under the impression that the site was more for displays of juvenile angst and displays of "attitude" and a juvenile's idea of sexual content.

John D. wrote on September 01, 2007 12:42 PM: Notfooled......GET A LIFE!!!! This issue is not about black and white. And I'm not in agreement with what they have done to Mcarthur.

This is just another attempt by an overzealous District Attorney to attempt to stifle anyone that may be a threat to him and his lynch mob possee prosecutors from using the law to crush people (some of who are innocent) and destroy their familes just so they can get another notch on their belt and look as though they are tough on crime. Does the name MIKE NIFONG ring a bell to anybody????

I welcome any Judge who will be willing to keep any one of these renegade prosecutors in line.

Winty wrote on September 01, 2007 01:18 AM: RE: "Breaking your foot off in someone's ass means to soundly defeat somebody or to overwhelm someone with enthusiasm or competence," MacArthur said,"It's most often used "among blacks, people who associate with blacks or in a sports context..."

This judge is ignorant and should be taken off the bench. He is better suited to the streets of North Las Vegas, not the bench. He has nothing to offer as a leader--and is furthering predjudice against Blacks. A Change Gon Come!

Uptown wrote on August 29, 2007 09:38 PM: Today is August 29, 2007, and Jonathan MacArthur got his butt kicked in trial last week, the one he challenged David Roger to do against him. I heard the Prosecutors were Sandy Digiacomo and Ravi Bawa. The Judge was Lee Gates.

Chalk up another loss for Jonathan MacArthur.

Dad wrote on August 24, 2007 08:50 AM: This is BULLSHIT! This is just another indication and example of how the Media is in a uniform attempt to eradicate successful African Americans from all aspects of professional life; especially in the law. Reading articles like this make my blood warm. The legal system has so much more to deal with than worrying about a free black man's MySpace page?

James Carville Wannabe wrote on August 15, 2007 01:45 PM: Erin and JT make some perceptive observations. Jonathan's a tenacious lawyer. What both Erin and JT miss is a crucial point, however. When Erin says, "be careful, David Roger and others, we the voters are watching YOU," she has aligned herself with those who are philosophically and temperamentally against PROSECUTORS. Such people are painted by the police and prosecutors as soft on crime. That is a sure way to LOSE an election. So, to say Jonathan will come out of this spat with David unscathed is, simply, wrong. Jonathan will get alot more clients, because his clients will love hearing that he enjoys "breaking his foot of in the DA's ass." Joe Citizen won't like hearing that, however. Law abiding people don't like hearing that prosecutors, those sending criminal defendants such as home invaders, rapists, child molesters, and murderers, to prison for life, where they can no longer harm us or our children, are getting some ass-pain from Jonathan MacArthur. Of course, Jonathan could run for Mayor, but that job requires buffonery, not even-handedness.

Even criminal defense attorneys run for office on a "tough on crime" platform. Steve Wolfson, a prominent and excellent criminal defense attorney, actively coveted and sought the endorsement of the many police agencies in the State. You don't get elected saying "I get criminals off, so they can rob stores and homes to pay their legal bills."

JT says Rogers has "outed" himself, and now the public "knows." Knows what? It was the "public" that ELECTED David Roger, and you think he will not do what it takes to get his friend elected?

Chris Lee will use this Myspace information to crucify MacArthur. That is reality. Politics 101.

erin broker wrote on August 15, 2007 09:44 AM: JT is right. There will be more. These people do not quit until someone is destroyed. They do their dirty poltics. Then they try to get the public to buy into their games with a big smear campaign. They did it to Halverson and are getting away with it. Now, MacArthur. Keep your eyes open folks. You will see the pattern. Whoever the courts deem "unsuitable" is their target. They use court employees, Commissions, newpapers to reach their goal. Judges they can control and who will be part of the good ole girls and boys network.

If only Halverson were given the support needed to fight back. But then again, we all know fat and disabled people have no value. It's easy to believe the lies printed about them.

Are we going to let them do that to another good judge?

It's time court administrators be put under the mircoscope. It's time we start pulling out their skeltons.

Rodgers, Hardcastle, Short, Sommermeyer, Commission game players.. We the public are now watching YOU.

We see your games and are NOT amused.

JT wrote on August 15, 2007 12:10 AM: While I'm heartened that most folks who've commented seem to "get it," I'm a bit surprised by the level to which most people fail to "get it." This revelation is a good thing. Roger has outed himself early as to his goals, as well as the levels to which he will sink and the extent to which he will use his position and name to promote the career and candidacy of Chris Lee. It's a smear campaign without the benefit of cleverness or even the courtesy of the proverbial thin veil. MacArthur, be proud that the best they could do was to show that you're passionate about your duties as a defense attorney. How hard they must have had to look to find that! But the fact that they were able to spin it so effectively that they were able to get you removed should let you know what you're in for. Be prepared, but be diligent. There will be more, but these things show the voter as much -- if not more -- about the character of the character-assasin. And the voters are smarter than Roger thinks. This will likely not come up once campaign time rolls around, because it has fallen a bit short of the public scandal they were hoping for, and only succeeded in being a scandal in the courthouse itself. Once beyond those walls, you don't have to deal with their politics, you have to deal with us, the voters. And once the campaign starts, even bringing up that you were removed from duty as pro tem puts them at risk of discussing why. And that can only hurt them.

Read All Comments