As a couple, Al and Tipper Gore battled the campaign trail, the record industry, the tabloids -- even global warming. Yet it appears they were fighting a private battle that they just can't win: After 40 years of marriage, former vice president and presidential candidate Al Gore and his loyal wife Tipper have announced they are separating.
On Monday, the couple stated via email that their long marriage was over.
"We are announcing today that after a great deal of thought we have decided to separate, " the email said. "This is very much a mutual decision and a mutually supportive process of long and careful consideration. We ask for respect of our privacy and that of our family and we do not intend to comment further." Website Politico broke the news of the email and soon after spokespeople for the couple confirmed the sad and shocking news.
The split comes as a big surprise to pundits and celebrity couple watchers alike. After all, the Gore's marriage has never been wrought with scandal like John and Elizabeth Edwards' or subject to tongue wagging speculation like that of Bill and Hillary Clinton's. Furthermore, the Gores appeared to be one of Washington's most stable and loving couples. Their devotion was immortalized by a famous passionate kiss at the podium of the 2000 Democratic National Convention.
Since losing the election in 2000, Al Gore has devoted himself to environmental causes surrounding the issue of global warming. This work spawned a best-selling book and an Oscar-winning film, both entitled An Inconvenient Truth. Gore also filled his time with entrepreneurial endeavors and business ventures like Generation Investment Management, a sustainable investment program, and the co-founding of Current TV, a cable network in which he also serves as chairman. Additionally, Gore works as a director for both Apple and Google. Tipper is a photographer and briefly considered running for Senate in her home state of Tennessee when the the couple returned after living in Washington.
Al and Tipper Gore have four adult children and three grandchildren.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 10:03 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
November 15, 2009
Donald Schweitzer Elected to PBA Board
The Pasadena Bar Association has announced the election of Donald P. Schweitzer as a board member for their organization. Mr. Schweitzer will begin serving on the board January 1, 2010.
Mr. Schweitzer will attend all of the board meetings, participate in the PBA's planning and events, and will vote on various propositions that are brought up at the Pasadena Bar Association meetings.
Mr. Schweitzer received this position by attending numerous Pasadena Bar Association events, helping out the board members, and his identifying himself as having a sincere desire to be an active participant.
According to Mr. Schweitzer, "At this stage of my career, I realize more than ever the contributions the local bar association makes to the community, to our legal systems, and to the individual private attorney, and I believe the work we do on behalf of the association is very important. I also enjoy the camaraderie I have with the other attorneys who serve on the board."
In addition to serving as the Secretary of the PBA, Mr. Schweitzer also holds the position of Chairman of the PBA family law section.
"I would like the Pasadena Bar Association to continue to create benefits to the private attorneys in our local community. I would also like to work with the Pasadena Bar Association in bridging the gap with our local courts."
Mr. Schweitzer is a Certified Family Law Specialist with over 15 years of trial experience. Prior to going into private practice, Mr. Schweitzer served as a Deputy District Attorney in Orange County for 8 years. Mr. Schweitzer worked in numerous units within the District Attorney's office including, Writs and Appeals, Family Support, Municipal Court, Felony Panel, Gang Target, Felony Filing, and the Sexual Assault Unit. He is a member of the American Bar Association, the California State Bar, Los Angeles Bar Association, and the Pasadena Bar Association.
Posted by: Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 10:05 AM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
January 5, 2009
Secretary of State Refuses to Certify Roland Burns as Senator
The politicians are supposedly up in arms about Governor Blagojevich's appointment of Roland Burris to the vacant Senate seat. Illinois' Secretary of State - Jesse White, for example, has declared that he will not sign papers to certify the appointment. From their dramatic speeches and press conferences, it would appear these political types have taken the high ground. Think again...
This is not the first time our country has seen a politician with pending legal problems appoint someone to office. Remember when Richard Nixon appointed and fired numerous Attorney Generals while facing his problems with the law?
Unless specific legal authority exists that grants Mr. White the power to block Burris's appointment, he needs to do what he had been elected to do, which is to sign the papers.
The political process will take care of Burris and any cloud hanging over his appointment. The citizens of Illinois will decide if Burris should be their Senator, so his time and influence within the Senate is very tenable. If the citizens decide that Burris is unworthly of the position, he will be gone in a New York minute.
The real concern that people should have is that there are elected officials like Mr. White, who are openly declaring that they do not intend to follow the law. Apparently Illinois' politicians are so backwards, that even when crusading for justice, they end up committing crime. Mr. White's willful refusal to sign the certification papers is grounds for impeachment, as he would be refusing to carry out the laws he was elected to uphold.
Imagine that, another Illinois politician brought up on charges . . . .
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 11:14 AM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 5:20 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
May 16, 2007
Sanctuary Movement For Illegal Aliens
A coalition of U.S. religious groups is launching a sanctuary movement to harbor illegal immigrants. Apparently, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim groups are opening churches and synagogues to shelter families of illegal immigrants. Proponents of the Sanctuary Movement speak of the immigration system that is broken and argue that the recent raids by the U.S. immigration authorities are immoral because they split families.
The arguments made by representatives of the Sanctuary Movement have many flaws, including:
If the immigration system is “broken” it is because the laws have not been enforced vigorously, not because the existing immigration laws are flawed. The only flaw within our system that needs to be fixed, it that our government needs to become serious about enforcing our current laws and needs to devote adequate resources to the problem.
The most important thing we can do to deter people from coming here illegally, is to send a message that there is no safe harbor once you have arrived. It is a well known fact that enforcement of the law deters crime. Conversely, when we fail to enforce the law, crime flourishes. The problem with the Sanctuary Movement is that it sends a message to all of those would be illegal immigrants, that if you manage to get to this country, you will be safe since the laws here are not enforced.
It is wrong for the Catholic Church or any other religious group to conspire with millions of people to violate our laws. If the church was protecting people from going back to face dangerous political oppression I may have a different view. But this is not the case. Instead, the church seems to have adopted this “Sanctuary Movement” because it will disturb “good people” and/or split families. In truth, the Catholic Church is taking a political position out of fear that it will lose members of the church.
There is nothing new about our country refusing to allow immigrants to remain here, even when it means that families will be split. Go to Ellis Island and hear the stories of men and women being sent back while their family members were allowed to enter our country. Our country has always been about allowing immigrants into our country. However, we have always reserved the right to be selective of who allow into our country and the number of people we want at a given period of time.
We already have a track record of giving people amnesty and we can now see how it did not work in curbing the massive inflow of illegal immigrants. Remember the 1980’s? In the 1980’s our country granted millions of people amnesty, with the promise that from that point on we would enforce our immigration laws. When we fast forward twenty years and see the 12 million new illegal immigrants who are taking residency within our communities, it is easy to see that being soft on immigration does not work. Instead we should try the simple and most proven approach . . . , the enforcement of our existing laws!
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 10:29 AM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
January 12, 2007
New California Laws Against Child Abuse
Last year the California legislature was very busy enacting new laws designed to prevent child abuse. The new laws that went into effect January 1, 2007, were designed to address some of the problems we have seen with the high profile cases over the past couple of years. However, the actual effectiveness of these new laws in preventing child abuse is questionable.
1) Employment restrictions on registered sex offenders
An amendment to Penal Code Section 290.95 requires disclosure of sex offender status when the person would be working in an accompanied setting and the work would require touching the children “on more then an incidental and occasional basis.”
In addition, Penal Code Section 290.95(c) was amended to add that someone convicted of a crime against a child under 16 may not work as an employer or an independent contractor in a setting that involves direct, unaccompanied contact with minors “on more than an incidental and occasional basis.”
Comments: These new laws are not likely to deter child molesters from obtaining jobs that require them to touch children. After all, child molesters are very manipulative and are known to go to great lengths to fulfill their fantasies. Remember John Mark Karr, the strange man who the police suspected may have killed Jon Benet Ramsey? After being charged with child pornography, Mr. Karr reportedly fled the jurisdiction to take on multiple teaching assignments with various schools. Would this new legislation have had any impact on Mr. Karr's behavior?
2) Confidential settlement agreements in civil actions based on sex offenses.
Civil Code of Procedure, Section 1002 was added to our law, which precludes confidential settlement agreements in civil cases based on actions that could be prosecuted as felony sex offenses.
However, the new statute does not affect the ability of the parties to enter into an agreement barring disclosure of the amount of money paid in a settlement, nor does it preclude an agreement to keep the defendant from disclosing medical or identifying information about the victim.
Comments: The Michael Jackson civil case must have been in the minds of the legislators who created this new law. Unfortunately, it is difficult to imagine how this new law will deter individuals from preying on children or assist the District Attorney's office in prosecuting child molestation cases. In most settlement agreements that I am familiar with, the defendant does not make admissions of wrongdoing. Thus, preventing these settlement agreements from being confidential would appear to have no value to prosecutors.
3) Sex offenses against children
Penal Code, Section 288.3 was added, which makes it a crime to arrange a meeting with a minor (or with someone the offender believes is a minor) for the purpose of lewd or lascivious behavior, or the exposure of either person’s genital or rectal areas, if the perpetrator was “motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in children.” The punishment varies depending on prior convictions and whether the perpetrator actually went to the meeting.
Penal Code, Section 647.6 was amended to add that it is also a violation of the statute to engage in sexual conduct (as specified) with an adult if the perpetrator was motivated by sexual interest in children and believed that the adult was actually under 18; the amendment also raised the fine for violations, and added that the statute doesn’t bar prosecution under any other law.
Penal Code, Section 269 was amended to change the definition for aggravated sexual assault of a child by narrowing the age difference between the perpetrator and the victim (seven rather then ten years) and adding certain violations; the amended statute requires a consecutive sentence for each conviction if the crimes involved separate victims or the same victim on separate occasions.
Finally, Penal Code, Section 288.7 was added, which imposes a prison sentence of 25 years to life for an adult who engages in sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child who is 10 years of age or younger; the statute imposes a 15-years-to-life sentence for oral copulation or sexual penetration (as defined) with such a child.
Comments: These new laws appear to be influenced by the MSNBC show, "To Catch A Predator," where child molesters are seen attempting to meet minors over the internet, and subsequently arrested in sting operations.
Obviously, these new laws will be very helpful to the police and prosecutors in obtaining convictions and keeping child molesters away from children once they are arrested.
However, none of the above-mentioned laws are proactive in nature. As we have seen on the "To Catch A Predator" shows, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to catch a child molester. Law enforcement is capable of capturing child molesters with little effort. Child molesters are compulsive and leave evidence of their crimes lying around within their homes and workplace. Indeed, because child molesters are so compulsive they are the easiest types of criminals to catch. Nevertheless, we are always hearing about cases where a child molester has molested scores of children before getting caught.
Obviously we are not committing enough money or manpower to go after these criminals before they offend. What we really need to attack this problem are more sting operations and an army of cops searching the internet for these offenders. After all, wouldn't our society benefit immensely if there was a significant reduction of child molesters roaming our streets?
Remember, it is always easy to pass tough new laws that punish perpetrators severely once they have been caught. But until our legislatures have passed new laws that create special task forces to arrest child molesters before they touch children, we are not seriously addressing this problem.
DISCLAIMER - Using this website does not create an attorney client relationship between you and the Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer or any individual attorney. None of the materials available at this site constitute legal advice. This site has been designed to provide you with general information regarding our firm, our attorneys, and the types of services we provide. If you need legal advice, or desire to establish an attorney client relationship with any of the firm's attorneys, please contact us.
