Catching Up

So, after about four months (off and on) on the road working as a consultant (not a producer) on Cold Justice, we're finally done with filming for Season One and I'm back home for good.  Working on the show was a lot of work with very long days, but I enjoyed the hell out of it.  I think the show is going to be awesome when it airs.

I know the blog has been slacking badly in my absence.  I haven't been around to follow up on the latest news and gossip.  I would hear bits and pieces of news while I was out on the road, but I didn't have the time or resources to confirm what I was seeing until it was old news.

What's funny is that most of the comments I got about my absence from the blawgosphere were from people who hate the blog in the first place.  I suppose it just fulfills some need of theirs to be angry and they missed me.

I was in Arizona when I learned about Mike Anderson's cancer diagnosis.  As a friend of Mike's and as a father and husband myself, I'm saddened beyond words about what the Anderson family is going through right now.   As I said before, my thoughts and prayers are with him, Devon, and his kiddos.  Moments like this should make us all take a moment to stop and focus on the truly important things in life.

I've heard some complaints about the morale at the Office lately.  It doesn't rise to Lykosian Levels, but there have been grumblings from the troops about some of the people in higher positions and some questions about certain people in certain promotions.  Some of the complaints I agree with.  Some I don't.  It sounds a lot like the D.A.'s Office I remember from when I worked there.

There have been a couple of scandals this year, but the major one so far has been this one, which I already wrote about.

I don't know what is going on with Amanda Culbertson's lawsuit against the District Attorney's Office, Pat Lykos, and Rachel Palmer.  I haven't heard any updates.

There are some interesting developments going on in the aftermath of the Jeffrey Stern case, but I'm not at liberty to discuss them quite yet.

Two courthouse folks have publicly announced their candidacies for some appellate court positions. My friend (and one of my favorite people) Jani Jo (Maselli) Wood is running for Place 4 on the Court of Criminal Appeals.  She is an outstanding candidate who would make the Court a better place.  In addition to having outstanding taste in music, she is guided by a strong moral compass that is backed up by her tireless devotion to the law.  I'll be writing more about her in the months to come.

Harris County Assistant District Attorney David Newell is running for Place 9 on the Court of Criminal Appeals.  I don't know David very well, but I'm familiar with the work he's been doing on behalf of the Office.  Everything I know about him indicates he'll make a great candidate for the Court, as well.  I'll do some more research on him and get back to you in the months to come.

Of course, Governor Rick Perry's announcement today that he isn't going to run again for office is going to shake things up drastically around Harris County, too.

That's pretty much the stuff on my mind right now as I start to catch up on the blog.

What's on y'all's minds?

Random Question

Every once in a while, a random thought crosses my mind that I decide I would like to share with the unsuspecting masses.  The easy way to ask the question would be to ask, "What is your favorite book?"

My question is what book have you read the most times over?

Mine is probably Lonesome Dove, which I guess I've read cover to cover about four or five times,  closely followed by The Cop Who Wouldn't Quit, which I've read three or four times.

Yes, I know it has nothing to do with criminal law or the CJC, and I'm sure that somebody will find something rude to say about me going off topic, but I'm genuinely curious.

Seeing as how this isn't exactly a controversial question, if you'd like to sign your name to the answer, I'd like to know that, too.

Trial as a Condition

I was having a drink discussing legal issues with my friend John Craig Still after work today, when he mentioned that a court he was working in this morning was in trial on a murder case with some fairly graphic crime scene photos.

It brought to mind different times in my career (both as a prosecutor and a defense attorney) where I was trying cases when a morning docket was still in progress, and the interesting phenomenon occurred where there would be defendants charged with completely unrelated offenses who found themselves very intrigued by the case on trial.  On some occasions, defendants would even approach me and the other lawyers involved in the case and either ask questions or offer words of encouragement as the trial progressed.

The point that Reverend Still mentioned to me was that the prosecutor on the case had cautioned the audience that graphic photos were about to be shown in the courtroom, and that actually made me think of an idea.  Ideas are sometimes few and far between for me, so I thought I would post on it.

With budget cuts rampant with the County, and programs like Boot Camp becoming long a thing of the past, why don't judges order that defendants (especially younger ones) watch the entirety of a trial as a condition of their probation (should they receive it)?

Especially a murder trial.  Especially especially a murder trial that has some gang ties to it.

So often (as a defense attorney), I find myself explaining to a defendant how a trial would proceed for them if they elected to take their case to trial, and I find them looking at me like my dog does when I try to teach her math.  Having to watch a trial would be a tremendous civics lesson to a person who has already found themselves entwined within the Criminal Justice System, and it would be something that they could do at no cost.

It would be a hell of a lot less strenuous than community service, if you think about it.

Let's look at just some of the upsides:

#1 -- if the probationer is watching the Judge of the court of which they are on probation out of, they get a feel for what the Judge would do to them if they were to violate the terms of their probation.

#2 -- they learn the procedure of what can and what can't be done for them when they are charged with a crime.

#3 -- if the case is a violent crime with victims, they get to see something from an outsider's perspective on the effect of violent crime.  This could potentially vastly differentiate from their view of crimes related to them, because they have no ties to the case they are watching.  They will see scene photographs, pathologist testimony, and victim impact.  They might actually identify with the complainant of a case rather than the accused.  At a bare minimum, they would get to witness the loss a family can feel.

#4 -- by attending (especially in the court that their probation originates out of), the Judge becomes familiar with them, and they no longer become just a case, but more of a person to that Judge.

I'm feeling a little overly-Pollyanna here with this post, but my experience with those who watch trials is that those same people become emotionally invested in those trials and the outcomes.  Those on probation who are involved in gang life can get a nice preview of what their lives would be like if they don't deviate from their current pattern of behavior.

Anyway, it was just a random thought I had, and maybe I'm rambling, but what would be the downside to making a trial a condition of probation for those probationers that we can still reach and make a difference in their lives?

NOTE:  For those who would say that it would make them take time out of their jobs or school, etc., I would say that jurors have to take time out of their jobs to serve every day of the week, and for those in school, the condition could be served during their Summer Vacations.

What do y'all think?