Sholom Rubashkin's Reply To The Government's Motion Against His Appeal Contains A Small Surprise

Rubashkin's brief was filed with the court on Monday, April 18, and made public during the first two days of Passover – and it contains a small surprise.

 

As you can see, Rubashkin had his attorneys add a "B"H," the English transliteration of the Hebrew beit heh, or Baruch HaShem (Blessed is God in English translation), at the upper right of the first page of the appeal:

Here is the entire reply brief as a PDF file:

Download Rubashkin Appeal Reply Brief filed 4-18-11

Comments

[Ali]

Blessed are all the humans responsible for putting Rubashkin in Jail. Blessed is God too, if Rubashkin thinks he had a hand in that.

[ruthie]

very cute
the guy is crazy....
if he really believed that he would never have treated his young workers or some of the women in the plant as he did.
rubashkin family...if you're reading this.....be REAL JEWS!
and you're very lucky there is a wealthy baal tshuvah family in monsey that supports you....you know...makes them feel frum!!!

[sage]

If the Appeals Court is smart enough, it will throw this appeal into the sh-t can, as placing the noted Hebrew inscription into it, violates the Constitutional separation of Chuch and State.

[Shmarya]

If the Appeals Court is smart enough, it will throw this appeal into the sh-t can, as placing the noted Hebrew inscription into it, violates the Constitutional separation of Chuch and State.

Posted by: sage | April 21, 2011 at 07:38 AM

WTF are you smoking?

How does that violate the Separation Clause?

[sage]

I don't smoke, but since the noted Hebrew addition was so ridiculous, I groped in finding how to respond.

Having time to think more about it, it seems to ask G-d's Blessing for criminal behavior, possibly another Hillul HaShem to add to the RCF list.

You're probably correct, but one does not know when to laugh or when to cry.

[OMG]

Shmarya, my understanding that each circuit has its rules, which govern the size and fonts and first page layout, in particular, the first page layout, without any research I could state that any appellant who files must follow the circuit rules and there is no special privilege for Rubashkin to put down B’H.
Finally, to put BH on court documents is an indication how Rubashkin perceives himself, as a believer he has the right to break the law of the land and because he glorifies Hashem, and therefore he will succeed in overturning the verdict. In other words, I might be guilty in your law of the land but in God’s eyes, I am righteous person. Treating workers as chattel, and using the banks money as his piggy bank, is acceptable as long he profess B’H.

[effie]

Rubashkin did not do this, his attys did. They are solely responsible.

[Shmarya]

Rubashkin did not do this, his attys did. They are solely responsible.

Posted by: effie | April 21, 2011 at 08:46 AM

I think Rubashkin insisted on it being done.

[sage]

Hi OMG and Effie,

Great remarks!!!

If placing the B'H on the first page violates the document standards of the appeals court, we could wonder if there are any legal remedies or penalties for doing so.

[state of disgust]

Lets follow Lewin's logic:
If he puts a B"H on the appeal, the court could throw it out and tell him to resubmit according to court guidelines. Lewin could then claim religious discrimination which would give the RCF followers another excuse to donate money.
ONTOH, if the court accepts the document, Lewin can claim that the Rubashkin case brought about a major change in the court's behavior toward frum Jews.
He wins either way.
Finally, he will have succeeded in drawing attention away from the facts of the case and whether or not SMR's appeal has merit and that is probably his real goal here.

[sage]

Another possibility is that the court could throw it out, as you mention and, in addition, hold Lewin and the others in contempt of court.

[Isa]

Sarcastically

Why place 'bh' on this document as it will be read by 'subhumans' as defined by the Tanya

/Sacastically

Bring the Rebbe's picture to the trial didn't help Rubashkin either

[effie]

I think Rubashkin insisted on it being done.

Oh, I'm sure he did. But the client is not the atty and the atty is obligated to follow the rules.

Sage: I had a friend file a writ in federal court where he inadvertently put his footnotes in 11 point instead of 12 point font. He had to redo the briefs and refile which was a big expense and time consuming. Here, the worse that could happen is that they would be ordered to conform the cover to the rules and refile.

Frankly, I think no one will object. It's just too small to worry about. In fact, if anyone notices, they will probably just find it interesting.

[effie]

Uh, oh. I forgot to close my bold. Sorry. [sneaks away]

[sage]

Hi Effie,

Your points are well taken but, IHMO, putting the B"H at the top of the first page is a much more serious matter than improper font size.

The court may interpret this as an attempt to say that the "law of the land" has to yield to religious criminality.

If it does, then far more serious sanctions may follow.

[Shmarya]

The court may interpret this as an attempt to say that the "law of the land" has to yield to religious criminality.

If it does, then far more serious sanctions may follow.

Posted by: sage | April 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM

???

Are you insane?

The court can in theory sanction Rubashkin for not following court guidelines. But that's it.

If Rubashkin wants to argue the court has to defer to religious law, he can argue that.

He would be wrong, but it's a free country.

[sage]

I would be insane if I stated:

"The court WILL interpret this ...."
"Then far more serious sanctions WILL follow."

Instead, I used the word "MAY".

Makes a whole world of difference.

[Shmarya]

No it doesn't.

[sage]

I beg to respectfully differ.

[Shmarya]

You can differ all you want, but you do not understand the law.

[against people who don't study law but talk about it anyway]

neither do you

[against people who don't practice law but talk about it anyway]

neither do you

[Yonah]

Fuck all of you, I can't wait till he's free

[OMG]

Fuck all of you, I can't wait till he's free
Posted by: Yonah | April 21, 2011 at 01:55 PM

Who though you to use fitly curse words, just because we see SMR as a convict who abused his employees and fraudulently took loans from the bank. Why don’t you go and auto manual manipulate yourself, on SMR photo.

[state of disgust]

" ...I can't wait till he's free."

G-d willing, you will have a long wait.

[Isa]

"""" ...I can't wait till he's free.""""

Neither can I ...~26 years from now

[Peace]

Judge Linda Reade never sentenced Sholom Rubashkin to prison for 27 years for any child labor or Abuse of 1 Employee, he got the 27 year sentence for Bank Fraud, almost like Alan Hevesi who will sit for less then 3 years.

[DF]

Headline is inaccurate. It should read: BREAKING NEWS!: Sholom Rubashkin's Reply To The Government's Motion Against His Appeal Contains A Small Surprise

[Jon]

Posted by: Peace | April 21, 2011 at 05:15 PM

Bank fraud AND perjury

[state of disgust]

Peace:
Unlike Hevesi SMR never said he was sorry. Unlike Hevesi, SMR denied his guilt. Unlike Hevesi, SMR never made restitution. Unlike Hevesi, SMR committed perjury ... want me to go on?
Charges against SMR for Child labor law violations were withdrawn with the possibility of reinstatement at a later date. Most people in Postville were angry that he was allowed to walk away from those charges.
But my guess is that when Hosam Amara sings, SMR, Aaron and Heshy will face the music.
The whole story has yet to be heard. And by the way, the plant is still being run by the Rubashkin clan with Hershey serving as a figurehead owner and Aaron Rubashkin distributing Agristar meat in NY/NJ.
Wait for it. The hammer is still to fall.

[Anon]

Not sure I understand why everyone hates Rubashkin so much

[The Real Joe]

I am 100% that when the appeals court rules a lot of people on this site won't be happy I don't know how far they will go but I am sure its gonna be a good ruling for the defense

[wow]

Not sure I understand why everyone hates Rubashkin so much

Posted by: Anon | April 21, 2011 at 09:20 PM

Are you kidding???

[sage]

+++I am 100% that when the appeals court rules a lot of people on this site won't be happy I don't know how far they will go but I am sure its gonna be a good ruling for the defense

Posted by: The Real Joe | April 21, 2011 at 11:52 PM+++

The truth be told:

I am 100% that when the appeals court rules, all crooks in the RCF and their mindless supporters won't be happy. I don't know how far they will go but I am sure it's gonna be a good ruling for the DOJ.

[Barry]

Apparently the governments reply has 'BSD' at the top corner for B[esyateh] D[e] S[hmarya]

Judge Reid also wrote BSD at the top of her judgment for B[ull] S[hit] D[efense]

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

I took a quick look through the 2010 version of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and didn't see anything covering WordPerfect file names seen on many legal documents, or any religious notations, like Bishop Sheen writing JMJ on the blackboard in his television shows.

It makes we wonder if someone who knows most Americans are not very familiar with Jewish religious customs are trying to start up a big stink. Remember the big stink about no "correct" Kosher food available when Mr Rubashkin was being billeted at various jails en route? Just a reason to hollar.

I note no one here yet provided evidence that a court must reject an appeal with any religious references.

Anyway, looking through the reply brief, all I see is a lot of nit picking. IANAL, so don't know if Judge Reade screwed up to any real degree.

[Office of the Chief Rabbi]

Judge Reid also wrote BSD at the top of her judgment for B[ull] S[hit] D[efense]

Posted by: Barry | April 22, 2011 at 12:06 PM

LOL.
Amen.

[Peace]

Judge Reid also wrote BSD at the top of her judgment for B[ull] S[hit] D[efense]

Very Correct Judge Linda Reade wrote that even before she heard the case, while she was planing the raid together with ICE!

[Sparky the Wonder Dog]

this is effing crazy.

yet there is a precedent:

"Every jot and tittle of Rashi's commentary in the Talmud and Rambam's Mishneh Torah allude to heaps and heaps of halachot. The word 've-ayen'--that is 'cf.'--in the Gaon's commentary on the Shulchan Aruch contains treasure-houses of thought. Each and every sentence in the writings of R. Chaim constitutes a flowing spring of creative insight and cognition" (R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Halakhic Man, pp. 86, 87)

It's good Rubashkin stopped with two letters or this commentariat would have shorted out completely.

[Seraphya Berrin]

Any hope attorneys could be found in contempt and eventually disbarred?

But, as mentioned earlier this is more likely a plot to garner sympathy in crown heights (et al.) by portraying the Rubashkin's as good frum yidden being oppressed by an antisemitic government.