Ministers of Justice?

There is one fundamental difference between Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys... defense attorneys are supposed to do everything they can short of illegal to protect their client. A prosecutor is simply supposed to seek justice and in theory is not trying to "win". If you look up just about any prosecutor's website, you will see them quote case law and refer to themselves as "ministers of justice". what a load of crap. Most PA offices foster an environment of win at all costs, justice be damned. All new prosecutors are taught early on that the way to advance in the office is to be an ass, bend the rules and get scalps on the wall. They will flat out lie about whether or not witnesses are present and willing to testify. And god help the poor domestic violence witness who does not want to send her spouse/significant other to jail. the state will lie to her, bully her, threaten her with arrest and prosecution and sick DFS on them to take the kids... and for what? justice? more like their own egos is more like it. I also like subpoenas.. when the state sends a subpoena to a witness in the mail, it is NOT valid service. If a person chooses not to appear on a mailed subpoena, nothing can be done to them because it cannot be proven to a judge that the person actually received it. But guess what happens when that same witness calls the PA's office and inquires if they really need to appear. The State will lie to them about the law and tell them if they do not appear, they will be arrested. If I did, such a thing I would probably be disbarred.

Don't Tell Me Looks Don't Matter

Happened to watch the Miss America pageant the other night (my mom made me). As I watched hottie after hottie, i got to thinking... where have all these babes been in my professional life. I have been doing this for close to 10 years now, I have represented probably 2,500 women and you know how many of them I would consider "hot"? i can count them on one hand. so what's the deal? pretty simple really.. if you are a woman and are hot, life is easy. no need to resort to crime. now does this mean that every unattractive woman on the planet is a criminal? no... but the odds sure are against you.

What Am I, A Leper?

This always pisses me off. The courthouse has security. nothing wrong with that in itself. there are certainly some wackos in our business that don't need to be bringing weapons with them to court. there are only 2 metal detectors though which is not nearly enough for the volume of business we do. thus, on most mornings i (and my fellow defense attorneys) wait 10 minutes to get through security. and heaven forbid if it goes off on you and you are subjected to a near cavity search by the men in blue. now we get to the part that pisses me off. while the defense bar is subjected to this crap, guess who goes through the side door and bypasses security altogether- you guessed it- the wonderful men and women of the prosecutors office. and not only the attorneys but the support staff as well. so let me get this right. i am a member of the bar and an officer of the court. i have been practicing before these judges for the past 9 years and i have to go through security but the high school dropout secretary that has been working at the PA's office for a week can breeze right on through? how much more obvious can the court make the fact that they view us in a lesser light than the State.

Journalists My Ass Part 2

It just keeps getting worse... but first a little background. Last year, 3 black people moved into Greene County and the Prosecutor decided we had a "gang problem". Thus, a grand jury was called and they indicted a bunch of folks (mostly black). Anyhow, the first person indicted by the grand jury had his trial this past week on charges of assault and armed criminal action. The Springfield News Leader sent a reporter to the trial each day for the 4 days it went on. And each day a story appeared in the paper about the trial's progress. Funny thing happened on the way to the prosecutor's slam dunk conviction. The jury found the man not guilty. The reporter was present in the courtroom when the verdict was announced. If you have read my previous post then you can guess where we are headed. That's right, no story appeared in the paper concerning the verdict. Newsworthy enough to cover all week long but the acquittal isn't important. You can bet the farm that had the verdict come back guilty, the story would have been on the front page. So what is the motive? Simple, the media hopes that by covering for the Prosecutor, they will get first scoop on arrests and busts so they can send out their cameras for some nice photo-ops. Disgusting.

Journalists My Ass

You would think that reporters would actually have some initiative and would seek out the truth rather than just sit there and repeat whatever the government tells them. Our office has won 4 straight jury trials in Greene County... guess how many stories have appeared in the news? Zero. The media has even told an attorney friend that they do not consider acquittals newsworthy. Yet every single time someone is convicted at trial, it appears on every media outlet in town. That's why prosecutors are so apt to the break the rules. they don't care if the case is overturned on appeal later- it won't be reported to the public.

Even worse is when the media just simply turns a blind eye... earlier this year our elected prosecutor and judge got in a pissing match over a 19 year old defendant. he had been indicted (more than likely cause there was no credible evidence against him). the judge released the young man on bond (after all he is presumed innocent). That pissed off the PA who took his soapbox to the media who was more than happy to help him slander the judge to media. The PA claimed he would never ever leave another criminal case in that courtroom (that lasted a whole week before he backtracked). The PA called the defendant "one of the most dangerous men in the county". The media )especially the local TV station) has a field day and covered this story for a solid week or two... well guess what happened.. the State DISMISSED the case cause.. you guessed it, no credible evidence. CASE DISMISSED.. you know how many stories the TV station ran about the dismissal.. ZERO. Mindless robots are all these "journalists" are. They would report that the sjy was red and water wasn't wet if the government told them to.

Even though I know that every single day the odds are stacked against me sometimes it hits home even more on certain days. Take this week- my buddy and I are preparing to try a murder case next week. While the PA's handling the case have shut themselves in the "war room" for the past two weeks working on nothing else, we have been in court every single day, do misdemeanors, PV's, bond hearings, etc. There simply is no one else to do it. They have more than 1 secretary for each prosecutor. We have 6 staff for 15 attorneys.. so instead of getting ready for a freakin murder, i am writing letters, tracking down witnesses, making phone calls. Real fair.

Way To Go Judge

The law seems simple enough... Supreme Court Operating Rule 16.02 (m) states that "no media coverage shall be allowed in criminal cases until the defendant is represented by counsel or waives representation". Simple right? Apparently not for the legal genius sitting on the bench. In a stunning move of stupidity, the judge allowed himself to become a part of an "undercover sting operation" by the local TV station. He allowed cameras in his courtroom to film defendants being arraigned on Driving While Revoked Charges. Their faces were not even blurred and the story even NAMED THEM. The judge, following the script, then proceeds to ask these people "if they drove to court that day". Way to honor the right to remain silent judge. Once the defendant leaves the courthouse, another camera films them driving away. Unfreakin believable. And all this time I was under the assumption the court was there to protect people's rights, not sell them out for 5 minutes of face time. I hope it was worth it judge.