#Criminal #Defense #Attorney #Trial #Jury #Selection #IRS #Agents #Prison #Jonathan #Einhorn
Ian Bick’s attorney, Jonathan Einhorn, brings his invaluable perspective to the podcast, offering a unique insight into Ian’s story and unveiling the truths of the criminal justice system. A seasoned legal professional renowned for his prowess in criminal defense and civil litigation, Einhorn’s extensive career spanning decades speaks volumes about his expertise and dedication. With a reputation for navigating intricate legal terrains with unwavering precision and resolve, Einhorn has earned the trust of his clients by relentlessly advocating for their rights. From complex white-collar cases to high-stakes litigation, Einhorn’s strategic approach and steadfast commitment to justice have consistently delivered favorable outcomes, making him a trusted ally in the pursuit of fairness and truth.
Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick:
Connect with Jonathan Einhorn:
Creative direction, design, assets, support by FWRD:
Buy Merch:
Use code lockedin at checkout to get 20% off your order
Timestamps:
00:00:00 – The Importance of Trials and Keeping the Government Honest
00:04:40 – The Reality of Prison Life
00:09:19 – The Beginning of Legal Troubles
00:14:07 – Lack of Complaint from So-called Victims
00:18:59 – The Importance of Going to Trial
00:23:43 – The Government’s Intentions and the State Bond System
00:28:41 – Reverse Profer and the Misconception of Snitching
00:33:13 – Arrested by IRS
00:37:55 – The Right of Police to Lie
00:42:45 – Jury Consultants and Prison Consultants
00:47:40 – Throwing Mom under the bus
00:52:10 – Outdated Jury Rules
00:56:44 – Unfair Pre-Sentence Reports and Self-Surrender in the Federal System
01:01:22 – Judicial system and sentencing dynamics
01:06:07 – Making a Positive Impact with Legal Practice
01:10:45 – Lessons from 50 Years of Practice in Law
01:15:36 – Trial Observations
criminal lawyer , Criminal Defense Attorney On Going To Trial, Jury Selection, IRS Agents & Prison | Jonathan Einhorn, podcast,ianbick,prison,crime,show,interview,entertainment
I love this attorney! what a wise man! his voice is so soothing!
Expect an invoice for 'attendances'…
Even sits like a lawyer he legit lol
Homie seems like a good dude. And he helped give you another chance, and you’re a good testimony for him
Thanks @Ian Bick for posting this video about affirmative action / supreme court. Here are the viewpoints expressed by Supreme Court justices regarding affirmative action.
1) This case is about a group called Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) who sued Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC). They said that these schools were not fair in their admissions process because they were using race as a factor, which they believed was against the law. The law they referred to is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment*.
2) The SFFA argued that considering race in admissions did not treat all applicants equally under the Equal Protection Clause.
3) The Court found that the admissions systems at Harvard and UNC did not pass strict scrutiny and did not have a clear end point.
4) In the end, the Court decided that the admissions systems at Harvard and UNC were not fair and did not follow the law. They said that the schools' use of race in admissions was not allowed because it was not clear, specific, or fair enough.
5) However, the Court noted that schools can consider the impact of race on an applicant’s life experiences.
6) So, the Court decided that the SFFA was right. They said that Harvard and UNC were not treating all applicants equally in their admissions process, which is against the law. They said that the schools needed to change their admissions systems to be fair to all applicants, no matter their race.
*The Equal Protection Clause is a part of the Fourteenth Amendment that says that every person should be treated equally by the law, no matter their race, color, or nationality.
*Strict scrutiny is a way for the courts to look at laws to see if they are fair and necessary. If a law or policy is found to be unfair or unnecessary, it may not pass strict scrutiny and could be considered unconstitutional.
My tour packages always got paid when we played Ian’s club!
What a fed attorney should tell you, but never do:
5k1 Cooperate = 50% reduction.
Rule 35 Cooperation = 40% reduction.
Interesting. Thanks Ian. Also thought you might like Smiles for Miles. A RN Trauma Nurse in the ER addicted to drugs & goes to prison for selling drugs.
The one and only Jon Einhorn! So excited for this one, a great guy and outstanding attorney.
Nice, always take it to the hoop!!!
hi