tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post547635656056631343..comments2024-03-28T00:50:16.901-05:00Comments on Life at the Harris County Criminal Justice Center: Pragmatism & The True BelieverMurray Newmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00662196272138109874noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-33249875868238044422009-01-28T08:38:00.000-06:002009-01-28T08:38:00.000-06:00Mark,Who killed "Baby Grace"? Any ideas? Did the ...Mark,<BR/>Who killed "Baby Grace"? Any ideas? Did the mean lying po po coerce poor baby mama?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-83829109161491231132009-01-27T17:34:00.000-06:002009-01-27T17:34:00.000-06:00Today I revealed an NLS to a prosecutor. I would n...Today I revealed an NLS to a prosecutor. I would not have revealed it to many prosecutors, but I felt comfortable that this particular person could be trusted to deal with it fairly instead of trying to find a way around it. I believed that because of a history of fair dealing between me (and others in the criminal defense bar) and this prosecutor.<BR/><BR/>I'm a true believer: whether they did it or not, all of my clients are innocent . . . until, through trial or plea, the State proves them guilty. It's not just my clients, though; I believe the same of Murray's clients.Mark Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04128739833441582127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-324885122531069912009-01-26T15:57:00.000-06:002009-01-26T15:57:00.000-06:00arthur seaton: your calm, succinct logic is impres...arthur seaton: <BR/>your calm, succinct logic is impressive.the average joe sees your detractors for what they are and they impress only themselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-39582704401877816572009-01-26T08:36:00.000-06:002009-01-26T08:36:00.000-06:00It was an interesting discussion, sure, but I thin...It was an interesting discussion, sure, but I think the most interesting part of it (to this outsider, that is) was in Mark's notion (although I don't remember him putting it quite this way) of the holding back of information as analogous to the semi-bluff in poker.Joel Rosenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14745514449389969195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-40361890281265976702009-01-26T06:48:00.000-06:002009-01-26T06:48:00.000-06:00"The burden of proof is on the State. It is not an..."The burden of proof is on the State. It is not an even playing field. Clearly, if the Defense has to show its hand to get the State to dismiss the case then the State was not able to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt in the first place. "<BR/><BR/>Balderdash. If the State has its case ready to go and thinks it can win, and the defense has some sort of "surprise" in store, how the hell can the State ever know that?Scott C. Popehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15307985210183952341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-73459408815095037172009-01-25T21:17:00.000-06:002009-01-25T21:17:00.000-06:00Anon 4:12,I think last year, Mark and I debated ab...Anon 4:12,<BR/>I think last year, Mark and I debated about when to share information and when to hold it for trial. It's a good question and I think it all comes down to two things:<BR/>1) the credibility of the "surprise" and 2) the level of trust between the defense attorney and prosecutor.<BR/>I think we can all agree that sometimes a Defendant will get somebody with absolutely Zero Credibility to come and vouch for them in some way, shape or form. A prosecutor wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't look hard into the veracity of the "vouching". What you describe is outright coercion and shouldn't be done, obviously.<BR/>But sometimes the sharing of a credible piece of evidence can avoid a trial and get a case dismissed, thus relieving all kinds of stress for your client.Murray Newmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00662196272138109874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-48136938649682777802009-01-25T20:58:00.000-06:002009-01-25T20:58:00.000-06:00This reminded me of a story I read years ago. I t...This reminded me of a story I read years ago. I tried digging through google archives, but it would take all year. I recall a local defense attorney who truly believed all of his clients were decent, misunderstood people. He would have them at his house and let them stay when they had no place to go. After having several possessions stolen from him and being used by these guys he lost faith in all humanity and committed suicide. It really was a tragic story. A man who wanted to see the good in people, just sadly he chose the wrong people to look for the good in.Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08351350773188711876noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-36016441423606897872009-01-25T16:12:00.000-06:002009-01-25T16:12:00.000-06:00Why would any defense attorney tip their hand? So ...Why would any defense attorney tip their hand? So the prosecutor can contact your witnesses and start threatening and bullying them? Telling them that they will go to jail, lose their kids, etc.? I learned years ago that the minute you tip your hand, defense witnesses start suddenly changing their mind after a little conversation with representatives of the State, who engage in conduct for which a defense attorney would be arrested. I actually had a prosecutor question me about why I had told the State's witnesses to not come to court and was prepared to file charges on me. Of course, I had done no such thing, and the tape recording of their phone call to me saved my ass. The best practice is to not tell the prosecutor a damn thing, then beat them at trial so bad that the next time you tell them their case sucks, they listen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-58404520508102785262009-01-24T15:00:00.000-06:002009-01-24T15:00:00.000-06:00Arthur Seaton:Exactly.....but make sure to check o...Arthur Seaton:<BR/>Exactly.....but make sure to check out the veracity of the defense attorney's hand before considering dismissal--some have been known to have an ace from another deck up their sleeve.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-68025870157929043382009-01-24T09:43:00.000-06:002009-01-24T09:43:00.000-06:00Arthur Seaton,[Uhhh then why the heck would a pros...Arthur Seaton,<BR/><BR/>[Uhhh then why the heck would a prosecutor want to dismiss it until you do show your hand?]<BR/><BR/>That's simple. The burden of proof is on the State. It is not an even playing field. Clearly, if the Defense has to show its hand to get the State to dismiss the case then the State was not able to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt in the first place. I hope you are not an attorney or have never been summoned for jury duty.<BR/><BR/>The reason a true believer prosecutor is more dangerous than a defense attorney is equally as simple. The prosecutor has the apparatus of the State behind him/her. If a Defendant can not make bond, the State can prolong a Defendant's stay in jail on a case that it knows can not be proved just because. No one can make the State file a nolle. <BR/><BR/>With some of the new judges who have taken the bench the State is not getting its way with regard to bonds, etc. Some of the assumptions that were accepted by the previous judges without question are being challenged. And it's clear the State has been so used to getting its way that some ADAs are unprepared to defend the State's position.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-45074518946077389332009-01-24T07:30:00.000-06:002009-01-24T07:30:00.000-06:00"One reason defense attorneys run into this belief..."One reason defense attorneys run into this belief that we are just obstinate is that we very often do not show our hand -- the reasons we think we're going to win. "<BR/><BR/>Uhhh then why the heck would a prosecutor want to dismiss it until you do show your hand? How can you act indignant about prosecutors diggin in their heels when they don't have the information you have?Scott C. Popehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15307985210183952341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-37271742328999720262009-01-22T16:45:00.000-06:002009-01-22T16:45:00.000-06:00rage:good post for a changerage:<BR/>good post for a changeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-88865524092135499492009-01-22T16:04:00.000-06:002009-01-22T16:04:00.000-06:00You're confusion "true believer" with "idiot".I'm ...You're confusion "true believer" with "idiot".<BR/><BR/>I'm a true believer in the Constitution and that the state has to make its case before locking people up. And that both sides should play fair. I recognize that most, by far, criminal defendants are actually guilty and should be punished.<BR/><BR/>But I believe that a lying prosecutor (or cop, or investigator) is far more dangerous to our liberty than a reckless defense attorney.Rage Judicatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04765188025349228048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-84838292061864241862009-01-22T13:56:00.000-06:002009-01-22T13:56:00.000-06:00I do think that, much of the time, you still sound...I do think that, much of the time, you still sound like a (recovering) prosecutor, in part because you seem to see prosecutor and defense attorney as the same side of a different coin; that's very common among prosecutors, but not common (although not completely unknown) among defense attorneys. <BR/><BR/>(Is it true? Different issue.) <BR/><BR/>I'm not sure that that's a bad thing, mind you, and I'm pretty confident that it's not an important thing -- your clients are unlikely to care if you sound like a prosecutor on your blog; they're more likely to care about the results that you get for them in the court system, probably -- but it's still there, from this remove. <BR/><BR/>(I know <I>all</I> about this stuff; I've seen <I>several</I> episodes of <I>each</I> flavor of Law & Order.) <BR/><BR/>That said -- and I mean this gently, albeit not overly kindly -- you do capitalize like a cop. I think all those years of typing JOHN SMITH or whatever in uppercase so he can only get off if he redeems his straw man makes a lot of guys on both trades forget whatever you may have learned about the use of a caps key.<BR/><BR/>But I digress.Joel Rosenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14745514449389969195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-26342716497371173482009-01-22T12:39:00.000-06:002009-01-22T12:39:00.000-06:00And what about when those "true believers" you cri...And what about when those "true believers" you criticize happen to win? Any time a prosecutor comes across a defense attorney who is convinced his client is not guilty (or not convictable),and the prosecutor doesn't agree, he thinks the defense attorney is just being obstinate.<BR/><BR/>When the defense attorney wins a few of those cases, then the prosecutors start to see that JUST MAYBE the defense attorney should be taken seriously when he digs his heels in. Our office has won several of those sorts of cases -- and just this week got a dismissal on a case that the prosecutor had been insisting was indefensible, right up until she filed the dismissal. And, she filed it without any notice, and didn't show her face when it was presented. I didn't know it was dismissed until I approached about the schedule for jury selection!<BR/><BR/>One reason defense attorneys run into this belief that we are just obstinate is that we very often do not show our hand -- the reasons we think we're going to win. If we did, then a prosecutor might work around them before trial, intimidate our witnesses, etc. Not knowing why we are so confident, they just think we're being obstinate. The only way you break down their skepticism is to go to court and win a few times, so that they know you are dangerous. Then, when you dig your heels in, they believe you are doing so with a reason.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-73775997784296753272009-01-22T09:24:00.000-06:002009-01-22T09:24:00.000-06:00I agree with your emphasis on pragmatism, but I th...I agree with your emphasis on pragmatism, but I think you intentionally craft a very narrow defintion of "true believer" in order to describe a type of lawyer that everyone will agree is bad. Sure, there are irrational true believers, but (and without naming names) there are alo several attorneys on both sides of the aisle that many would call true believers. These true believers are good and successful even though everyone wishes they'd tone down their true believer-ness. <BR/><BR/>Is that because no one likes it when someone else can live by their ideals and we reflexively tear them down, or is it that because their ideals are misguided? What's toxic is when the true believers on one side try to suggest that the ideals of the true believers on the other are less than worthy. But what are you gonna' do? They're true believers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7566778230970156239.post-80524254803637273162009-01-22T07:58:00.000-06:002009-01-22T07:58:00.000-06:00Your analysis of Keeper cases is fundamentally obv...Your analysis of Keeper cases is fundamentally obvious and well stated. I completely agree that the broad brush banning of them is a ridiculous policy. <BR/>BTW, congratulations on your successful transition to private practice and I admire your optimism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com