Multiple outlets (AP, RTD) are reporting that Governor Tim Kaine will call a special session of the General Assembly to deal with the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Melendez-Diaz. According to The Jaded JD, who has covered this ruling from the beginning:
…no legislative solution to cure the constitutional defect in Virginia’s forensic evidence statute is going to completely avoid the choice between hiring more forensic analysts or creating a backlog in forensic cases because the Supreme Court has said the analysts must testify when defendants demand they do so, and their time on the stand is time they’re not spending doing forensic analyses.
We shall see if the reports are accurate. According to his public schedule, the Governor will be making several stops in Hampton Roads today.
Hey – since there might be a special session, think you guys can come up with the money to reopen the rest stops?
UPDATE: In case you haven’t heard, the Governor did announce a special session this morning. It will be held August 19. I just left a visit with Kaine and asked about them taking up the rest stops issue – ain’t happening 😦
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
how bout getting the money for the unemployed.
What money?
the stimulus bill had $125 million to help the unemployed get training for a new job.
the repubs turned it down.
What stimulus money? Where would the feds get the money?
They turned it down because the money would run out after this year and the state would be left footing the bill. We can’t afford to keep rest stops open and you want the state to commit 125 million more in benefits each year? Do your homework before you talk about the issues.
That’s only partially true, Max. The money was for two years and there was nothing to stop the General Assembly from eliminating the expansion of the benefits after the money ran out.
Max is another typical GnOP shill, uninformed and blind to the truth. VJP is correct, The Commonwealth needs the money today and is not obliged to continue the additional benefits once gone. Stupid and shorsighted are the mose favorable things one con say about our reight wingers running the HOD.
The rest stops will be a campaign issue this fall, tangentially to the failure of the GnOP to step up and provide a basic service, a 21at Century transportation system. They have turned the Commonwealth into what would appears to be a backward hick state to those visiting or passing through when they can’t stop to take a leak….. except along the side of the road!
I think the rest stops are going to be a campaign issue as well – and I pointed that out to one of the members of the GA that was with Gov Kaine this afternoon.
Any idea why Kaine is sitting on this issue as well as the expanded benefits issue?
Well, I guess I can figure out why he’s sitting on expanded benefits, but its not helping the unemployed to do so.
Newport News Dem,
If you could only begin to comprehend the paradoxes of debt based money and fractional reserve banking, you would not speak as such.
If after two years the general assembly tried to stop the benefits, which it wouldn’t if it were in democratic hands, then would it not go against a federal mandate and bring up a state’s rights issue? Not that that’s a bad thing…
The Melendez-Diaz case seems to deal with implied consent and certificates being entered as evidence. What about the business records exception to the hearsay rule that allows medical records from the hospital to be admitted as evidence and doesn’t require testimony or even identification of the person who drew the blood or performed the test? Should a hospital lab report be allowed as evidence without knowing who drew the blood or performed the test? Shouldn’t they have to testify? What about chain of custody? The code section (below), in my opinion, circumvents the implied consent law and without chain of custody and live testimony should be considered unconstitutional.
Virginia Code Section 19.2-187.02. Admissibility of written reports or records of blood alcohol tests conducted in the regular course of providing emergency medical treatment.
A. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the written reports or records of blood alcohol tests conducted upon persons receiving medical treatment in a hospital or emergency room are admissible in evidence as a business records exception to the hearsay rule in prosecutions for any violation of § 18.2-266 (driving while intoxicated) or a substantially similar local ordinance, § 18.2-36.1 (involuntary manslaughter resulting from driving while intoxicated), § 18.2-36.2 (involuntary manslaughter resulting from boating while intoxicated), § 18.2-51.4 (maiming resulting from driving while intoxicated), § 18.2-51.5 (maiming resulting from boating while intoxicated), § 29.1-738 (boating while intoxicated), or § 46.2-341.24 (driving a commercial vehicle while intoxicated).
B. The provisions of law pertaining to confidentiality of medical records and medical treatment shall not be applicable to reports or records of blood alcohol tests sought or admitted as evidence under the provisions of this section in prosecutions as specified in subsection A. Owners or custodians of such reports or records may disclose them, in accordance with regulations concerning patient privacy promulgated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, without obtaining consent or authorization for such disclosure. No person who is involved in taking blood or conducting blood alcohol tests shall be liable for civil damages for breach of confidentiality or unauthorized release of medical records because of the evidentiary use of blood alcohol test results under this section, or as a result of that person’s testimony given pursuant to this section.