Josh Dubin

Neither of these purported reasons to opine on this litigation are persuasive or necessary to aid the court. First, the AG argues that the current prosecutor will be leaving office shortly, referring to J.D. Within the next two weeks, in fact, and any ruling should be delayed in order to allow the incoming prosecutor to evaluate the matter and weigh in on the issues.

Neither of these purported reasons to opine on this litigation are persuasive or necessary to aid the court. First, the AG argues that the current prosecutor will be leaving office shortly, referring to J.D. Within the next two weeks, in fact, and any ruling should be delayed in order to allow the incoming prosecutor to evaluate the matter and weigh in on the issues.

Neither of these purported reasons to opine on this litigation are persuasive or necessary to aid the court. First, the AG argues that the current prosecutor will be leaving office shortly, referring to J.D. Within the next two weeks, in fact, and any ruling should be delayed in order to allow the incoming prosecutor to evaluate the matter and weigh in on the issues.

But this reason is hardly compelling. After all, all elected officials eventually leave office and to suggest that simply because a newly elected prosecutor is taking over, a pending matter should be delayed for the incoming official to review is unwieldy, inconvenient, invites delay, and not how the system operates.

But this reason is hardly compelling. After all, all elected officials eventually leave office and to suggest that simply because a newly elected prosecutor is taking over, a pending matter should be delayed for the incoming official to review is unwieldy, inconvenient, invites delay, and not how the system operates.

But this reason is hardly compelling. After all, all elected officials eventually leave office and to suggest that simply because a newly elected prosecutor is taking over, a pending matter should be delayed for the incoming official to review is unwieldy, inconvenient, invites delay, and not how the system operates.

Moreover, why should rulings or evaluation of this case be singled out and subject to delay in favor of the new administration, but not the other 150 pending criminal cases on this court's docket?

Moreover, why should rulings or evaluation of this case be singled out and subject to delay in favor of the new administration, but not the other 150 pending criminal cases on this court's docket?

Moreover, why should rulings or evaluation of this case be singled out and subject to delay in favor of the new administration, but not the other 150 pending criminal cases on this court's docket?

At the end of the day, the concept that a court or any government entity, for that matter, should come to a grinding halt because a newly elected official will be taking over is not how government should or does work.

At the end of the day, the concept that a court or any government entity, for that matter, should come to a grinding halt because a newly elected official will be taking over is not how government should or does work.

At the end of the day, the concept that a court or any government entity, for that matter, should come to a grinding halt because a newly elected official will be taking over is not how government should or does work.

Yeah. Put that thought on hold because three days later, three days later. Now, this is curious. What changes in three days? Well, I don't know if it happened during these three days, but this is the prosecutor. I mean, this is the judge that swears in the new prosecuting attorney. Three days later. There is another another order filed by the same judge. And.

Yeah. Put that thought on hold because three days later, three days later. Now, this is curious. What changes in three days? Well, I don't know if it happened during these three days, but this is the prosecutor. I mean, this is the judge that swears in the new prosecuting attorney. Three days later. There is another another order filed by the same judge. And.

Yeah. Put that thought on hold because three days later, three days later. Now, this is curious. What changes in three days? Well, I don't know if it happened during these three days, but this is the prosecutor. I mean, this is the judge that swears in the new prosecuting attorney. Three days later. There is another another order filed by the same judge. And.

Because we had moved for an emergency hearing. Because in our mind, this incoming prosecutor opines on the case in the paper, had worked at that prosecutor's office and obviously had some feeling about the case. And if he had taken such an interest in talking to the press, we were concerned and filed an emergency motion not to let these men suffer any longer.

Because we had moved for an emergency hearing. Because in our mind, this incoming prosecutor opines on the case in the paper, had worked at that prosecutor's office and obviously had some feeling about the case. And if he had taken such an interest in talking to the press, we were concerned and filed an emergency motion not to let these men suffer any longer.

Because we had moved for an emergency hearing. Because in our mind, this incoming prosecutor opines on the case in the paper, had worked at that prosecutor's office and obviously had some feeling about the case. And if he had taken such an interest in talking to the press, we were concerned and filed an emergency motion not to let these men suffer any longer.

So the same judge that you just said, shout out, which was exactly my sentiment, issues another order. You could not get a more stark 180 degree turn than this. I'm going to quote from that order.

So the same judge that you just said, shout out, which was exactly my sentiment, issues another order. You could not get a more stark 180 degree turn than this. I'm going to quote from that order.