Audio: Rubashkin Attorney Nathan Lewin Says Judge Lied, Equates Her To Biblical Arch Enemy Of Jews

Before a large gathering of haredi Jewish community leaders broadcast tonight, Rubashkin Attorney Nathan Lewin again misrepresents sections of the FOIA documents he released Thursday, as he accuses the prosecutors and Chief Judge Linda Reade of misconduct.

If you want to see the actual documents and not rely on Lewin's misrepresentations, you can read them on Thursday's post.

You'll see examples of Lewin's misrepresentations, some of which are egregious. Below that all the documents are posted as PDF files.

You can also see a brief summary of Lewin's misrepresentations here.

That Lewin would equate a sitting federal judge in charge of a case he is the lawyer of record on with Haman, the biblical arch enemy of the Jewish people and the paradigm for all future enemies of the Jewish people and antisemites, is simply atrocious. If this is not gross misconduct on Lewin's part then I'm sad to say nothing is.

Lewin also said Chief Judge Linda Reade "lied," and he said that the "mid-level bureaucrat" who complied the FOIA documents didn't realize the significance of what he left in, that Judge Reade was "part of it."

He also quotes Judge Reade as saying in the FOIA documents, "I support this operation entirely," even though there is no such quote from Judge Reade in those documents.

Rabbi Menachem Genack, the CEO of OU Kosher, also spoke.

And, while I did not get this on tape, the Deputy Mayor of New Square, Moshe Spitzer, mentioned in his speech that he isn't too good at math, because he only graduated 6th grade at the New Square Yeshiva.

Indeed.

The audio quality of the recordings is often poor. It was a large Kol Mevaser conference call with all the usual problems associated with such things.

Expect gaps of silence and sound volume dropping off and then picking up.

Please click on the gray bars to listen or right click on them to download:

Lewin

Genack

Related Posts: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Photo above left: Nathan Lewin speaking to haredi leaders 8-8-10 and on a telephone conference call organized by Kol Mevaser. Credit: ÜberTwitter. [Hat Tip: Burich.]

Comments

[OMG]

Good job Shmarya, all the criticizing will not change the fact, that the system worked fairly, and the only problem with the system, is the sentencing guidelines. It is harsh because constituents put pressure on their representatives, to throw the book at white collar crimes. That is why some of us believe that the sentence was harsh.

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

Funny how this event went from a briefing of a "select group" of community leaders to a conference call that anyone knowing the number could listen in to.

[A. Nuran]

Only Haman? Really? Isn't she Amalek? How long before we're obliged to kill judges who rule against yidden?

(And how long after that before these nebech-shouting blackhats find out what happens when the government gets out the Big Hammer?)

[Dr. Dave]

A. Nuran -

Haman was an Amalekite. He was put to death.

[danny]

The Rubashkin's need to fire this ass and hire a real attorney who respects the court and the law. Someone who could have provided a real defense and gotten him a reasonable sentence.

Instead this dipshit rings the "haman" alarm bell, and all of us good jews are supposed to react by giving this crooked cause more money.

[danny]

And let me add... DON'T EFF WITH A FEDERAL JUDGE.

Calling her "Haman" and equating her to an arch-enemy is a threat. You NEVER make even the most veiled threat to a Judge. The full weight of the law will come down hard on your head. Just Google up the case of neo-Nazi Matthew Hale to see what threatening a judge will do to you.

[Bill]

Err.... 'scuse me your honor.... meant to say "human"... Your honor is simply human.

That's all.

[Wankele]

Lawyers don't lie.
Lawyers don't distort.
Lawyers just polish the truth a little.
Anything wrong with that? What's a shyster for?

[Abracadabra]

OFF TOPIC:

Does anyone know what denomination the "Romemu" shul/synagogue is? (It's the one that is advertising at the top right on this site for it's High Holy Days on the Upper West Side.)

Thanks!

[mayer]

new age music davening in a church nice tfila

[Mr. Apikoros]

Danny the Red, the comment Lewin made about Judge Reade is perfectly legal and well within the bounds of the First Amendment, although odious, as long as he doesn't say it in her courtroom.

Mathew Hale went far beyond this.

[seymour]

he is sounding like Sharpton

[WoolSilkCotton]

Seymour, it is indeed ironic how the hasidim hate Sharpton (and rightfully so, for all his antisemitic incitements over the years), and yet he is their role model.

[sage]

Lewin seems not to know when to stop, with his ever increasing attacks on the DOJ and a sitting Federal Judge.

The DOJ and Judge Reade are, presently watching this circus of the insane.

However, there may be a time in the future, when they've had enough of Lewin and his ass will be dragged into Federal Court to face charges.

The sooner, the better.

[effie]

I'm curious how long Cook is going to stay on board.

[the lord]

I am sure the judge Reade knows this already, but I was considering writing her a letter letting her know that 99.9% of the rreal Jewish American population do not in any way think she is an anti-semite and that the people slinging mud are just radical nuts. the mud slingers should be careful, threatening a federal judge is a very serious crime.

[seymour]

people like Lewis create antisemitism. And I think they like it that way. since they fell if there is no antisemitism assimilation will increase.

maybe they really should move back to the ghetto I think they are more comfortable there

[effie]

the lord: You're right, she knows it already. However, everyone appreciates a nice letter...

[Mr. Apikoros]

He's not going to face charges. However, he will have to appear before her as an attorney, and judges have ways of getting back.

Look how Mark Levin insulted the judge who ruled on Prop. 8 in California, on the air. Called him a homosexual, among many other insults. Do you seriously believe Levin's going to jail?

In Germany, btw, it's against the law to publicly insult a public official, including a cop. But we're not in Das Vaterland.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Furthermore:

If anyone has a case against Lewin for misconduct, it would be the defendant. Insulting the trial judge outside of court, while perfectly legal, is an idiotic tactical move on Lewin's part.

Rubashkin can forget about catching any breaks from the judge, or from her brethren, as long as Lewin represents him. So Rubashkin can conceivably sue his attorney for poorly representing his client.

[WoolSilkCotton]

++maybe they really should move back to the ghetto I think they are more comfortable there

Posted by: seymour | August 09, 2010 at 08:31 AM++

Seymour, they bring the ghetto with them, mentally and physically, wherever they go.

[A. Nuran]

Danny the Red, the comment Lewin made about Judge Reade is perfectly legal and well within the bounds of the First Amendment, although odious, as long as he doesn't say it in her courtroom.

Maybe, maybe not. A friend of my father's made nasty, allegedly threatening remarks about a judge during a nasty divorce. They weren't made in the courtroom, but they ended up earning him a two year prison sentence.

[seymour]

++maybe they really should move back to the ghetto I think they are more comfortable there

Posted by: seymour | August 09, 2010 at 08:31 AM++

Seymour, they bring the ghetto with them, mentally and physically, wherever they go.

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton | August 09, 2010 at 09:10 AM

I think you are right and that is why they steal and do fraud since that is what they needed to do in the ghetto to survive

[Catcher50]

Threatening and insulting a judge (Fed or not) are two different things.

The former will get you in all of deep doo doo (maybe into the greybar hotel).

The latter is constitutionally protected free speech, without consequence...sort of. I spent many years as a sports official. Trust me, you may try and be impartial, but somewhere in the back of your mind, the dorks who are in your face, or the faces of your colleagues, almost always are on the wrong end of close plays.

[itchiemayer]

Shoshanas Ya'akov, tzahala v'samecha, bir'osam yachad tcheiles (Sholom) Mordechai....

[effie]

Posted by: Mr. Apikoros: Called him a homosexual, among many other insults. Do you seriously believe Levin's going to jail?

Walker is gay. That is a fact.

[effie]

Uh oh. I forgot to close the tag. Does that mean everything will now be bold?

[Menachem Mendel lll]

Nathan (Naftuleh) Lewis ESQ. is a Jewish Johnny Cochran Z'L.

Both were paid huge sums of money and the only difference is OJ is a shvartz criminal while Rubashkin is weis criminal.

Same race card.
Same glove don't fit you must acquit.
Same game plan.
Same grandstanding.

Lady Justice wore a blindfold with this mumzer and ganef who committed crimes knowing his 10 children need him, he didn't give a fuck because he was so wealthy he was above the law knowing he will be home for dinner every night because he was "untochable".

The cries of Rubaskin and of his lawyer will fall on Ha'Shem's deaf ears similar to Sodom's cries and the children of Yisrooel cries when Adoni did many in at Har Sinai.

How beautiful it is to reference the Torah and gain inspiration from it knowing that The Abishter is mercyful, knows all and doesn't let the criminal win in the end.

Goyish, Jewish or Otherwise.

MOSHIACH.............we are waiting.

[Shmarya]

Uh oh. I forgot to close the tag. Does that mean everything will now be bold?

Yes. But I fixed it.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Effie: The argument Levin made was that since Walker is gay, he should have recused himself from the case.

Now, if Walker were heterosexual, does that mean he should have recused himself from the case as well?

[itchiemayer]

Mr. A. - However, being gay means he is directly impacted by his own ruling. That is not the case with a heterosexual, so I do believe you can argue that there was reason for recusal which would not exist for a hetero.

[A E ANDERSON]

What Lewin could really use is a link between this blog, its authors, and the government's dramatis personæ (directly, or indirectly by the route PETA, labour, etc.). That could add yet another ring to this circus, online and in the courtroom. I am a bit surprised he hasn't found a way to toss this into his soup already.

Did everybody catch how prominently the PETA video featured in the DHS PowerPoint presentation? Could anybody imagine the FBI running around shamelessly admitting that their investigations take their lead from extreme animal rights activists?! I can see the signs in ICE reception area already: "VISA OVERSTAYERS AND FURRY ANIMAL COMPLAINTS, LINE 3."

[effie]

Shmarya: Thanks!

[Critical minya]

Shmarya, I have been speaking to a number of chabadskers and they are under the false impression that nat lewin has just joined the case for the appeal.
The Chabad have a blind faith in nat lewin's ability because supposEdly he helped the rebbe a long time ago.

[Shmarya]

Did everybody catch how prominently the PETA video featured in the DHS PowerPoint presentation? Could anybody imagine the FBI running around shamelessly admitting that their investigations take their lead from extreme animal rights activists?! I can see the signs in ICE reception area already: "VISA OVERSTAYERS AND FURRY ANIMAL COMPLAINTS, LINE 3."

The PETA video is central to the USDA report that found Agriprocessors liable for inhumane slaughter.

Apparently USDA inspectors had tried to shut down the slaughter line but their boss would not allow it (apparently because the new USDA directive, allegedly drafted ny Nathan Lewin, made it seem as if throat ripping was allowed), and the throat-ripping continued.

Eventually, an Agriprocessors employee called PETA to complain about animal treatment.

PETA tried to negotiate with Rubashkin and Lewin, urging them to use Dr. Temple Grandin to deal with the issues.

Lewin and Rubashkin refused and refused to make any changes at all.

PETA then went undercover and made that video.

The video was an embarrassment for the USDA and the furor around it eventually revealed that USDA inspectors had, in essence, given up enforcing the law.

All that said, it is no surprise the company's background would be presented to raid planners, just as the background of any other company would be presented.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Itch: Wrong.

Those who were in favor of Prop. 8, and opposed to this ruling, were presumably heterosexual. Therefore, a heterosexual judge, by this viewpoint, would favor the pro-Prop. 8 side, and therefore could be assumed to be biased.

Sotomayor and Kagan are unmarried, and there's speculation that they are gay. This case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court. Should both those justices recuse themselves?

[itchiemayer]

Mr. A - I asked an attorney this question because I didn't see a reason for recusal either. However, he felt as though since there was a direct impact to a homosexual judge, he should have recused himself. I think an argument can be made, but it is marginal.
As far as Sotomayor and Kagan recusing themselves, I wish they would! While they are at it, they can take Breyer and Ginsburg along for the ride.

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

Mr. A wrote:
"He's not going to face charges. However, he will have to appear before her as an attorney, and judges have ways of getting back."
Does anyone know if Mr. Lewin is going to appear before Judge Reade?
I say that because the motion for a new trial is signed by Messrs. Cook and Brown as attorneys for Mr. Rubashkin.

The other thing I find interesting is that in their affidavits, both Messrs. Cook and Brown do not indicate they read the FOIA documents, though the documents were sent to Guy Cook. Both attorneys rely on the findings of Mr. Lewin.

In their affidavits, both Messrs. Cook and Brown indicate they are aware that another motion to get Judge Reade to recuse herself (the De La Rosa-Loera motion) was unsuccessful.

[Cheskel]

Shmarya,

Was there anything discovered at all through the FOIA?

Also,the judge needed to know in advance because of scheduling and to issue a warrant.,but why was she involved in all the meetings?

The reason for the raid was immigration. Why was it necessary to mention Peta,and its owned be hassidic Jews? If owned by black people would it have been mentioned too?

[harold]

Linda Reade, yech, what a monster! I always thought that she was a creep.

[Shmarya]

Was there anything discovered at all through the FOIA?

Nothing important that I saw.

Also,the judge needed to know in advance because of scheduling and to issue a warrant.,but why was she involved in all the meetings?

She didn't issue the warrant. A magistrate judge did that.

The court had to arraign as many as 700 people within 24 hours of arrest.

It also had to be sure those defendants had counsel, a place to sleep, sanitation, food, translators, etc.

And it had ensure the court had computers, bailiffs, etc., and rooms to work.

The attorneys for the defense also needed a place to work and IT support. So did the prosecution.

And she had to make sure all this was arranged and in place before the raid.

The reason for the raid was immigration. Why was it necessary to mention Peta,and its owned be hassidic Jews? If owned by black people would it have been mentioned too?

If the plant had been black-owned, the PowerPoint presentation would have noted that.

Agents needed to know what they would see when entering the plant.

I would think saying the non-Hispanic employees are almost all hasidic Jews told the agents they did not need to focus on the hasidim, because presumably the hasidim were either American citizens of legal immigrants.

[Cheskel]

""Was there anything discovered at all through the FOIA?

Nothing important that I saw."""

Is Lewin just playing a game on emotions?

""She didn't issue the warrant. A magistrate judge did that"""

Was my mistake. I meant that A judge needs to know in advance in order to issue a warrant. Which leads to my question that you didn't answer.

Besides making sure that everything is in place,why was she involved in meetings that had nothing to do with making sure all that you mentioned?

"""I would think saying the non-Hispanic employees are almost all hasidic Jews told the agents they did not need to focus on the hasidim, because presumably the hasidim were either American citizens of legal immigrants"""

Nathan Lewin thinks differently.And with his way of thinking he became of the most note lawyers in the country.

[Shmarya]

Is Lewin just playing a game on emotions?

I think so.

Besides making sure that everything is in place,why was she involved in meetings that had nothing to do with making sure all that you mentioned?

She wasn't.

Nathan Lewin thinks differently.And with his way of thinking he became of the most note lawyers in the country.

1. Nathan Lewin himself said he does not know whether or not he judge saw the PowerPoint presentation.

2. Past that, Lewin is making stuff up as he goes along. Have you ever heard a police briefing before a planned arrest? They're very much like that PowerPoint presentation.

[Cheskel]

""Past that, Lewin is making stuff up as he goes along"""



Per your claim,shouldn't he disbarred because of his outrages lies? Where is the bar association and national law journal?

[Cheskel]

Be disbarred,it is.

[Shmarya]

Per your claim,shouldn't he disbarred because of his outrages lies? Where is the bar association and national law journal?

A formal complaint must be made to the Bar. The Bar then holds a hearing and renders it's decision.

In practice, attorneys get away with far more than the code allows, because other attorneys don't like to sanction them.

The National Law Journal is a newspaper, not a governing body.

[Cheskel]

"""A formal complaint must be made to the Bar. The Bar then holds a hearing and renders it's decision"""

Can anyone file a complaint?

""The National Law Journal is a newspaper, not a governing body.""

I know. But usually they highlight noted cases.I suppose they should make mention on this case

[Shmarya]

Can anyone file a complaint?

Yes – if you know how to do it.

""The National Law Journal is a newspaper, not a governing body.""

I know. But usually they highlight noted cases.I suppose they should make mention on this case

They covered Lewin's press release but had not read the documents.

[A. Nuran]

During the last Administration Justice Scalia refused to recuse himself on a case involving Vice President Cheney even though the VP had just taken the Justice on a hunting trip at his own expense. The Judge who blocked the Gulf oil drilling moratorium owns tens of thousands of dollars in stock in oil companies drilling on the Gulf of Mexico. By that standard there's no reason for him to recuse himself.

And the parties defending Prop 8 in court knew the judge was homosexual. They did not ask that he step aside. FOF, AFA and many other political groups which were not parties to the lawsuit have been screaming. They are irrelevant.

[yitzy]

In the words of the immortal Glenn Reynolds (instapundit.com) who knows a thing or two about the law "FEDERAL JUDGE COLLUDES? If this report is accurate, impeachment is warranted."

[Catcher50]

@itch...

There is an interesting piece in the WaPo, today, about recusing & the SCOTUS. It is certainly not limited to those that you see as evil (Kagan, Sotomayor, etc.), but conservative justices (some of whom ruled on the 2000 election, despite the fact that they had direct relationships with Dick Cheney), also.

The proposition is made that, with three retired members of the SC still around and active, one of them could be used to prevent a 4/4 split. BTW, all of them are currently active, often sitting in with various lower courts (but, there is no provision for "pinch hitters" on the Supreme Court.

[Cheskel]

""Can anyone file a complaint?

Yes – if you know how to do it.""

I'm almost certain that some posters on this blog who seem to be a bit familiar will file a complaint. But i guess nothing will come from it because as you said before "In practice, attorneys get away with far more than the code allows, because other attorneys don't like to sanction them" so why bother filing.

[Shmarya]

In the words of the immortal Glenn Reynolds (instapundit.com) who knows a thing or two about the law "FEDERAL JUDGE COLLUDES? If this report is accurate, impeachment is warranted."

Please.

Glenn Reynolds wrote based on Lewin's press release, not on the documents.

[effie]

Shame on Glenn Reynolds!

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

Glenn Reynolds merely put up a link to that unsigned story on Big Government. That story used the word "conspired".

[Dovid]

"As one who often writes about courts and prosecutorial misconduct, I must admit to having no confidence anymore in American judges having any integrity at all. One of the defining moments for me came in the Tonya Craft case in North Georgia when the judge, Brian House, literally took cues from the prosecutors during the trial, as they gave him hand signals and other indications of what he needed to do in certain situations."

"...However, new documents released now demonstrate that Reade was far more involved in this case than I could have imagine, and that there is no way humanly possible for her to have done what supposedly is her job: be an impartial jurist"

"...New documents show Linda Reade, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, was involved in the planning of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement raid on the Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant at least six months before it occurred in May 2008. She asked for briefings from law enforcement and went as far as to ensure the raid was conducted around her vacation schedule.

"But the judge never said a word of this to the defense lawyers for Sholom Rubashkin, the Agriprocessors manager, when she presided over his trial on bank fraud. She didn’t recuse herself from the case, either...."

See full article by: William L. Anderson

http://williamlanderson.blogspot.com/2010/08/rubashkins-appeal.html

[Robert Wisler]

Just a question (not an editorial)....

What happens when a lawyer for an already sentenced defendent puts in a plea for a new trial? Who decides whether they get a new trial or not? Is a different judge assigned to the case? Do they call a new jury? Is the defendent let out of the pokey until the new trial? How long does the process of asking for a new trial last?

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

Prof. Anderson got his information from that unsigned story on Big Government. That story used the word "conspired".

[Cheskel]

At the count of 1-2-3

Get to work Shamarya and rip apart Anderson start digging up dirt on him and make sure he says anything good about rubashakin and for sure nothing bad on the Judge.

[Shmarya]

Prof. Anderson got his information from that unsigned story on Big Government. That story used the word "conspired".

And he did not work from the documents at all.

Isn't it amazing? Rubashkin supporters keep repeating the same lies and misstatements. They have NO proof for any of it. But they just keep on doing it, even ignoring what the documents Lewin released actually say.

[Cheskel]

Besides this blog which has an agenda,where is the outcry from the Justice dept,media about the lies that Lewin and the rest of Rubashkin supporters are spreading?

[Shmarya]

Besides this blog which has an agenda,where is the outcry from the Justice dept,media about the lies that Lewin and the rest of Rubashkin supporters are spreading?

Do you think Lewin has an agenda? He's nogeiah b'davar, yet you rely on everything he says. But halakha tells you not to do that, and instead to check his facts – but you don't.

Past that, the Justice Department will respond – via the US Attorney's reply to Lewin's motion, which will be filed in about a week or so. That is how it works.

As for the media, very few reporters will take the time to read 170 pages of documents – especially when they have no comment yet from the US Attorney.

That's why Lewin did what he did. He knew he could get away with it.

But I did read the documents, and I posted all of them, and I pointed out Lewin's misrepresentations and misquotes.

[Cheskel]

""Do you think Lewin has an agenda?""

Lewins agenda is Rubashkin and trying to bring it to the public at large the injustice that can happen in this country.

"""He's nogeiah b'davar, yet you rely on everything he says. But halakha tells you not to do that, and instead to check his facts – but you don't"".

This blog is created for the sole purpose to show the world the "corruption among observant Jews" so don't even mention the WORD halacha. And BTW according to the halacha every observant Jew has a chaskes kashrus(the burdened of honesty)even when found guilty in a secular court. And i wont even sight it for the reason a site like this doesn't deserve halachcik discussions.

[Riverdale Hocker]

Rubashkin screwed up Lewin's whole svara on what happened with the judge and the feds by being a shyster goniff. Therein lies Nat Lewin's biggest challenge. His client is a crook.

[Riverdale Hocker]

With Elul upon us honesty is in order. Let me say that I will vomit in shul on the the bima if I hear one more frummock bitch and moan in a whiny shylock voice about how we aren't dan lekaf zchus the martyr sholom ben whatthefuck. I'm sick of it. He whose name sounds like his ancestors put their mouths on asses never says Rubashkin he always calls him by his name like he has cancer or a real disease instead of just being a gonif. VOMIT. Here is the real halacha and Menachem Mendel the third or Jesus H T Christ can back me up on this. You don't have to be dan lekaf zchus a crook. Just like you don't have to be dan lekaf zchus some rabbi fag raping a ten year old. Hell was created for a reason and some people gotta go there to rot. So be it. This Elul let's dediacate ourselves to being honest and not a people who twist the torah into a personal agenda.

[effie]

Lewin's agenda is to make money and line his own pockets. That's it!

[ELUL]

RH - Generally agree, but perhaps we can also work on reducing nivul peh. God bless!

[state of disgust]

What is most interesting is that Lewin does not deny Rubashkin committed fraud. Rather he takes issue with how the evidence of fraud was obtained (the raid) and the role of the Judge he falsely alleges was involved in the planning of the raid. Thus the fraud has been admitted by Lewin.

[OMG]

Posted by: Cheskel | August 09, 2010 at 12:11 PM

Actually, if you look closely at the date on the power point presentation you will noticed that it was used in a meeting on March 12, 2008 there is no indication who and where this presentation was actually even used, and if it was used, who was at that meeting, was it a department meeting? Additionally it has been said at least a hundred times, so what if Judge Reade was at the meeting were this power point presentation was shown. Please explain us idiots, so what is the issue.

Finally Lewin is arguing a point, which according his view has merits, but so what, every criminal defense lawyer, believes that their argument has merit, and their client should be free. Can you point to one trial, in the history of American Jurisprudence, where a defense lawyer didn’t argue for his clients benefit, and commonly uses questionable and tactless arguments. But the jails are still full of criminals, so rest assured that SMR will be in jail for a long time.

[Shmarya]

What is most interesting is that Lewin does not deny Rubashkin committed fraud. Rather he takes issue with how the evidence of fraud was obtained (the raid) and the role of the Judge he falsely alleges was involved in the planning of the raid. Thus the fraud has been admitted by Lewin.

This is a motion about a specific issue, not an appeal.

He doesn't need to deny his client committed crimes. All he as to do is show judicial error.

[Shmarya]

""Do you think Lewin has an agenda?""

Lewins agenda is Rubashkin and trying to bring it to the public at large the injustice that can happen in this country.

So you decide that Rubashkin is persecuted and innocent, despite reams of evidence to the contrary, and you take everything his attorney says at face value.

That says little for your intellectual honesty.

"""He's nogeiah b'davar, yet you rely on everything he says. But halakha tells you not to do that, and instead to check his facts – but you don't"".

This blog is created for the sole purpose to show the world the "corruption among observant Jews" so don't even mention the WORD halacha.

Yes, in other words, when halakha is not on your side, you ignore the halakha.

And your defense for this is that I am not frum?!

And BTW according to the halacha every observant Jew has a chaskes kashrus(the burdened of honesty)even when found guilty in a secular court.

No, that is not what halakha says. A person's hezkat kashrut disappears when there is a preponderance of evidence against him.

There is far more than that against Rubashkin.

And i wont even sight it for the reason a site like this doesn't deserve halachcik discussions.

I think you won't cite it because you cannot cite it.

You may be able to bring an aberrant opinion like Rabbi Menashe Klein, but you cannot cite either rov poskim or major poskim to support you.

[Menachem Mendel lll]

When will the courts released Rubashkin and provide him a written apology which will allow him to sue The State.

The prosecutors and Judge must be petrified after such a powerful and riviting speech.

[Critical minya]

If rubashkin was being tried by a Beis din in boro park he would get off with a light slap on the tuchis. Unfortunately, he is fucking with us justice system that's better worked behind the scenes than openly manipulated.
I feel bad for rubashkin. He hired nat lewin, who peacocked all over town, mKing his client a target. Rubashkin had blind faith that the rebbe would protect him. The rebbe works in mysterious ways. This time he is working at keeping smr behind bars for 27 years.

[A E ANDERSON]

Going back to the PETA incident...

If people were finding problems with aspects of the ritual slaughter operation, I would think the first person to be trotted out would be the Rav HaMachshir, followed by the Rosh Hashochtim. The schochet is a highly trained, skilled rabbinic professional who exercises control over the manner of his work product. An abattoir does not tell a schochet how to perform the shechitah: that is a function of the schochet and the rabbinical staff. Why, then, wasn't the blame falling on those professionals responsible for the offensive shecitah? Rubashkin was merely a representative of the abattoir owner, not the shochet, rosh hashochtim, or rav hamachshir?!

Does't the severing of most of the kaneh and veshet constitute a valid shechitah for a bahamah gasa? That's what I remember from Yoreh Deah. What, halachically, was going wrong?

Are we saying that Rubashkin lost his business over the trivial issue of avoiding waiting a few minutes for the shechitah to become fully effective? I had always understood that the severing of the two simonim automatically causes such a loss of blood that the animal is immediately rendered insensate. For this reason, shechitah was traditionally promoted specifically as humane. The experience at Agri said otherwise. Why?

I am a bit skeptical of the Temple Grandin person because I saw web pages where she is promoting her own designs for adoption. With all the more mainstream academics in animal science, why did Agriprocessors find itself suddenly saddled with the very unique Dr Grandin as its chief critique and consultant, and faulted for not, in essence, buying her (presumably proprietary) methods and equipment? What's more, how have the Jewish people performed shechitah for generations, humanely, without Dr Grandin?

As to Rubashkin's culpability for animal cruelty, were there no discussions on his part with the rabbinical staff on the problem that PETA seemingly identified and how it might be solved? Why were no witnesses ever presented with respect to this? I would think his trial lawyer would have gone to great lengths to show how he, from his (and not PETA or Grandin's ) perspective made efforts to address the issue. I would venture that Rubashkin's first reaction to news of this problem would be to consult the rabbinical staff and ask them what's amiss. It would seem to me that if he disagreed with the manner in which shechitah was being performed, he would have to take the matter up with his rav hamachshir to instruct the shochetim to do differently as a rabbinical matter. Why no cruelty charges against shochtim who performed what appears to be faulty shechitah?

[A E ANDERSON]

I must confess that I probably committed the same error as Rubashkin: I didn't pay attention to the PETA stuff because I had always lumped them in with the lunatic fringe. Now, we're saying that PETA, far from being a bunch of fruitcakes, was a respected, legitimate voice to which American business should heed. I think SMR did what any normal businessman confronted by tree-huggers and their ilk might do: hire a PR firm to get them to go away.

Does PETA still have naked models?

[Abracadabra]

AE Anderson,

I am pretty sure that Dr Temple Grandin's methods and equipment are NOT proprietary where she personally receives benefit, but rather belong to the university which she is affiliated with.

My understanding is that the Jewish people historically performed shechitah for thousands of year without chaining, lifting, and hoisting the cows with certain machinery to an upsidedown position via the method that Rubashkin was using. Just avoiding this method of chaining up the animal and turning it upside down in the cruel and painful way this machine does it, makes the process more humane.

That is how the Jewish people managed to perform shechitah more humanely over the millenium - without using animal-torture-machinery - which was created with warehouse efficiency in mind, but without consideration to the pain caused to the animals.

Dr Temple Gradin, incidently, has an autistic spectrum disorder, and is a fascinating person. You might want to read up on her and her work.

[Shmarya]

If people were finding problems with aspects of the ritual slaughter operation, I would think the first person to be trotted out would be the Rav HaMachshir, followed by the Rosh Hashochtim. The schochet is a highly trained, skilled rabbinic professional who exercises control over the manner of his work product. An abattoir does not tell a schochet how to perform the shechitah: that is a function of the schochet and the rabbinical staff. Why, then, wasn't the blame falling on those professionals responsible for the offensive shecitah? Rubashkin was merely a representative of the abattoir owner, not the shochet, rosh hashochtim, or rav hamachshir?!

Please.

WTF are you smoking?

1. The shechita company (or, in this case, plant owner) control the schochet.

2. The pace of slaughter, how the animals are restrained, and how they are handled pre-and immediately post-slaughter is determined by them, not the schochet.

3. Bucking the shechita company (or, in this case, Rubashkin), gets shcitim fired and even blacklisted.

4. The problems PETA found at Agriprocessors – and which were confirmed by the USDA – concerned use of the rotating pen, animals not unconscious after shechita but dumped on the floor anyway, and related things, and the notorious throat-ripping done immediately post-shechita on live fully conscious animals.

5. All of those issues are completely controlled by Rubashkin. The only role a schochet had was not cutting deep enough – but that is because of the design of the rotating pen and the risk of damage to the shechita knife that it causes. Ultimately, this, too was Rubashkin's fault, because he refused to properly maintain the rotating pen, and he reacted poorly, it is said, when schochtim damaged their knives.

I must confess that I probably committed the same error as Rubashkin: I didn't pay attention to the PETA stuff because I had always lumped them in with the lunatic fringe. Now, we're saying that PETA, far from being a bunch of fruitcakes, was a respected, legitimate voice to which American business should heed. I think SMR did what any normal businessman confronted by tree-huggers and their ilk might do: hire a PR firm to get them to go away.

He did not hire a PR firm – he set Nathan Lewin on PETA.

It was Lewin's belligerence that caused PETA to send in undercover investigators.

Past that, all PETA asked Rubashkin for was to use the industry's leading expert on humane slaughter – a woman widely known in even haredi circles as a friend of shechita.

[Shmarya]

My understanding is that the Jewish people historically performed shechitah for thousands of year without chaining, lifting, and hoisting the cows with certain machinery to an upsidedown position via the method that Rubashkin was using.

Rubashkin used a rotating pen, not shackle and hoist. S ¶ H has been illegal in the US for large animals for years.

What Jews did before shackle and hoist was called casting, essentially tying the animals legs, tripping it, and then restraining it by the ropes or chains on its legs and by holding its snout.

While not as cruel as shackle and hoist, it wasn't perfect or painless.

Non-Jewish slaughter was often a mallet blow to the head, followed by a throat stick, or a gunshot to the head followed by a throat stick, if necessary.

It had it's problems, to be sure, but the handling during slaughter was less traumatic for the animal.

[Cheskel]

""""So you decide that Rubashkin is persecuted and innocent, despite reams of evidence to the contrary, and you take everything his attorney says at face value.That says little for your intellectual honesty."""""

Rubashkin was found guilty because the evidence was there and that's not what Lewin is arguing about. and you know that.

Its how it was done and motive.The whole process was a persecution.

""""Yes, in other words, when halakha is not on your side, you ignore the halakha.

And your defense for this is that I am not frum?!

And BTW according to the halacha every observant Jew has a chaskes kashrus(the burdened of honesty)even when found guilty in a secular court.

No, that is not what halakha says. A person's hezkat kashrut disappears when there is a preponderance of evidence against him.

There is far more than that against Rubashkin""""

I suppose you didn't read or understand what i wrote.

This site is not like any other Jewish site. Because that you made it as your goal and breath day in day out to defame observant Jews,many secular Jew's who have nothing to do with Judaism and some are married to gentiles,follow this blog.

It is said that you not suppose to learn halaca with a gentile. That's why i cant go into to much details more then i mentioned "secular courts"

""You may be able to bring an aberrant opinion like Rabbi Menashe Klein, but you cannot cite either rov poskim or major poskim to support you."""

I have no idea what you meant

[Shmarya]

Rubashkin was found guilty because the evidence was there and that's not what Lewin is arguing about. and you know that.

Its how it was done and motive.The whole process was a persecution.

Please.

If the evidence is against Rubashkin and Rubashkin is guilty then he deserves to be sitting in jail.

And, because the law of land says that anyone – Jew, gentile, atheist – should be incarcerated for 23 to 30 years for what Sholom Rubashkin did, then you have no grounds to complain.

It is said that you not suppose to learn halaca with a gentile. That's why i cant go into to much details more then i mentioned "secular courts"

No, Cheskel. You can't go into details because you do not have any details.

""You may be able to bring an aberrant opinion like Rabbi Menashe Klein, but you cannot cite either rov poskim or major poskim to support you."""

I have no idea what you meant

Clearly.

That's because you are ignorant.

[Cheskel]

"""Please.

If the evidence is against Rubashkin and Rubashkin is guilty then he deserves to be sitting in jail.

And, because the law of land says that anyone – Jew, gentile, atheist – should be incarcerated for 23 to 30 years for what Sholom Rubashkin did, then you have no grounds to complain."""""

John kills Joe was caught arrested put on trial with evidence against him. He has to be found guilty without a reasonable doubt. The evidence was so strong but because of some prosecution error he was found not guilty.

Rubashkin was found guilty,its a fact and you cant change it. Its how and if the judge revealed everything and sometimes a mistrial is called for whatever reason.

"""No, Cheskel. You can't go into details because you do not have any details."""

I made my point

[Shmarya]

John kills Joe was caught arrested put on trial with evidence against him. He has to be found guilty without a reasonable doubt. The evidence was so strong but because of some prosecution error he was found not guilty.

Rubashkin was found guilty,its a fact and you cant change it. Its how and if the judge revealed everything and sometimes a mistrial is called for whatever reason.

The problem, Cheskel, is that Nat Lewin has found no evidence to support his motion – unless you count his intentional misquote of the documents.

"""No, Cheskel. You can't go into details because you do not have any details."""

I made my point

And your point is that you have not details.

[Cheskel]

I think the prosecution team has asked for some time to answer and the judge gave in so lets wait and see what a big liar Lewin is.

[Shmarya]

I think the prosecution team has asked for some time to answer and the judge gave in so lets wait and see what a big liar Lewin is.

We already know that the documents do not support his claims.

The documents clearly show the judge limited her cooperation to logistical issues, which is completely legal.

Past that, the law sets the amount of time for response to a motion.

Neither the prosecution or the judge has asked for an extension of that time.

Their replies should be filed withing about 10 days.

[Cheskel]

""We already know that the documents do not support his claims."""

We, as in?

""""The documents clearly show the judge limited her cooperation to logistical issues, which is completely legal"""

Lewin claims differently then you. Whom are we suppose to believe?

"""Past that, the law sets the amount of time for response to a motion.Neither the prosecution or the judge has asked for an extension of that time.""'

I'm not sure but i think that they were suppose to respond by Aug. 16 and asked for Aug. 23 and the good Judge granted it.Again,i think

.

[AGRI-vated Angel]

In light of the likelihood that this site is monitored on a regular basis by people assigned to gather information regarding this drama, I find myself baffled. I will never understand why the legal team/Chabadnik continues to tighten the noose a bit more snugly around Sholom's neck with each passing 'gesture of support'. They must think less of Sholom than the people whose lives were adversely affected/effected by his actions/inactions.

I don't understand.

? ? ? ? ?

[Shmarya]

""We already know that the documents do not support his claims."""

We, as in?

""""The documents clearly show the judge limited her cooperation to logistical issues, which is completely legal"""

Lewin claims differently then you. Whom are we suppose to believe?

I posted the documents and I showed where Lewin misquotes and misrepresents them.

Those were his main pieces of evidence, and they do not hold up.

"""Past that, the law sets the amount of time for response to a motion.Neither the prosecution or the judge has asked for an extension of that time.""'

I'm not sure but i think that they were suppose to respond by Aug. 16 and asked for Aug. 23 and the good Judge granted it.Again,i think

Generally attorneys have 2 weeks to respond to motions.

So you think wrong.

[Abracadabra]

Thanks Shmarya for the clarification on the method Rubashkin used to slaughter the animals, and how they used to do it in the days of yore.

It is now clear what people mean when they say that someone is "having a cow".

Ouch.

[Abracadabra]

Shmarya, is there any way for the layman to find out which slaughterhouse their kosher meat is coming from, and what methods that slaughterhouse uses to kill their animals.

I remember hearing that much of the meat is now slaughtered in Argentina, or elsewhere out of the country, where laws of humane animal treatment are not applicable nor practiced.

I'd like to patronize kosher meat sellers who are supplied by slaughterhouses using humane slaughter/treatment of the animals, and avoid those who aren't using humane slaughter or treatment of the animals.

How can we the people find this information?

Thanks.

[Shmarya]

Hebrew National gets high marks for humane animal handling and slaughter.

I've not heard anything bad about Aurora.

Past that, there isn't much out there.

As for where your met comes from, the box the meat is shipped in to the store has a label with a code. You can Google the code and find the plant that way.

[Abracadabra]

Thanks.