In 2005 the Seattle Police department arrested Maikoiyo Alley-Barnes. In the course of the arrest the police used a "groin pick" to subdue Mr. Alley-Barnes. The police officer grabbed him by his scrotum and threw him onto the hood of a police car. From there the a witness can be heard screaming "Oh my god!" and another saying "that's too much." It was at this point in the tape where Mr. Alley-Barnes can be heard asking the officers to"please stop kicking me." The Office of Professional Responsibility recommend discipline for the officers involved. The police chief chose not to punish them.
The SPD's attorney stated "It's hard to discipline somebody when what they are doing is, in fact, in their job description."
The mission statement of the SPD: "Prevent Crime, Enforce the Law & Support Quality Public Safety by Delivering Respectful, Professional, & Dependable Police Services." Who knew that vicious beatings were considered respectful, professional and dependable services?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003762615_alleybarnes26m.html
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Monday, June 25, 2007
bus rant plus a lesson learned from a client
Simple bus etiquette establishes that sitting next to someone is only acceptable when it is the only remaining seating option. This means that smelly bicycle guy is violating the rules when he sits next to me in the front of the bus instead of walking to the back of the bus and getting a seat to himself. It does not matter that he only rides the bus for 10 minutes. I don't want to smell his BO. No one is going to steal your bike off of the rack while we are traveling at 60mph. Its not that nice of a bike anyway.
Now in the unfortunate situations where the bus is full and a seating partner is required there are additional rules that must be followed. First and foremost you may not touch the person next to you. If they are reading you may not engage them in conversation. Sleeping is acceptable. A sharp jab in the ribs is acceptable if a sleeper violates the no touching rule. If you are an old dude don't intentionally sit next to the cute college girl. That is just creepy (and takes that seat away from me.)
You may not call someone on your cellphone. Text messaging is acceptable, long phone calls are not. Calling someone to pick you up at the park and ride, acceptable. Calling to explain you are going to be late becasue the construction workers decided to close 2 lanes of the main 3 lane round into town, acceptable. Explaining to your brother how to get to the mall on the bus while your friend reads you the bus schedule, not acceptable.
When boarding the bus it is a first come, first serve situation. Violations of this rule void the other rules. If you cut in front of me to get on the bus I will sit next to you and talk loudly on my cellphone. If you cut in front of me and get the last window seat I may use you as a pillow for my nap.
If you are between the ages of 13-17 and you get on with 5 of your friends you may not speak. If you chose to violate this rule, at least have the courtesy to not discuss how much cheaper the bus fare is for you.
Technically it is a violation of the bus etiquette to engage in a conversation with more than one person. This interrupts those attempting to sleep. I confess to breaking this rule on a daily basis. In my defense I take the last bus into town so everyone on it has had ample opportunity to sleep. I also talk with an entire section of the bus. If you want to sleep move to the front of the bus.
And now for a lesson learned from a client. If the state takes away your children it is NOT a good idea to leave in the middle of the hearing for a wedding in Vegas.
The sandwich the other intern at my office lost 2 weeks ago has been found. It was located in one of the many pockets of her backpack. It was no longer fit for human consumption. Also it has come to my attention that vegetarian corndogs exist. And no, they are not just sticks dipped in batter.
Now in the unfortunate situations where the bus is full and a seating partner is required there are additional rules that must be followed. First and foremost you may not touch the person next to you. If they are reading you may not engage them in conversation. Sleeping is acceptable. A sharp jab in the ribs is acceptable if a sleeper violates the no touching rule. If you are an old dude don't intentionally sit next to the cute college girl. That is just creepy (and takes that seat away from me.)
You may not call someone on your cellphone. Text messaging is acceptable, long phone calls are not. Calling someone to pick you up at the park and ride, acceptable. Calling to explain you are going to be late becasue the construction workers decided to close 2 lanes of the main 3 lane round into town, acceptable. Explaining to your brother how to get to the mall on the bus while your friend reads you the bus schedule, not acceptable.
When boarding the bus it is a first come, first serve situation. Violations of this rule void the other rules. If you cut in front of me to get on the bus I will sit next to you and talk loudly on my cellphone. If you cut in front of me and get the last window seat I may use you as a pillow for my nap.
If you are between the ages of 13-17 and you get on with 5 of your friends you may not speak. If you chose to violate this rule, at least have the courtesy to not discuss how much cheaper the bus fare is for you.
Technically it is a violation of the bus etiquette to engage in a conversation with more than one person. This interrupts those attempting to sleep. I confess to breaking this rule on a daily basis. In my defense I take the last bus into town so everyone on it has had ample opportunity to sleep. I also talk with an entire section of the bus. If you want to sleep move to the front of the bus.
And now for a lesson learned from a client. If the state takes away your children it is NOT a good idea to leave in the middle of the hearing for a wedding in Vegas.
The sandwich the other intern at my office lost 2 weeks ago has been found. It was located in one of the many pockets of her backpack. It was no longer fit for human consumption. Also it has come to my attention that vegetarian corndogs exist. And no, they are not just sticks dipped in batter.
Friday, June 22, 2007
So you have no conscience?
I confess to being one of those people who talks on the bus. Not on a cellphone, but to those around me. I get car sick if I try and read so I try and make conversation. I've got a nice group of bus friends that I talk to most days. One of my bus friends asked me what I want to do after I graduate from law school. After I said public defender she said "So you have no conscience?"
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
transcripts are fun
I have my very own appeal now. I've been reading the transcripts of the case for the past couple of days. The defendant insisted on taking the stand even though the two main witnesses contradicted themselves on numerous occasions. His long rambling narrative answers to questions went on so long that even he forgot the question that had been asked. He went on to mimic the states witnesses and contradicted himself numerous times. When the prosecutor called him on it he just denied making the statement. His testimony was impossible to follow even after reading it three times. His story seemed to be made up as he went along, filing in details as they seemed necessary and rejecting previous parts of the story that no longer fit. I'm sure this is old news and happens all the time for the real PD's out there, but I can't believe that people are so stupid as to believe a jury will buy a story that is obviously bunk.
Shockingly the client was convicted of a drug offense, as an accomplice, with a very very small amount of the substance (police scales couldn't even record the amount, lab had to weigh it for them). Sentencing range was between 60-120 months. The state asked for 90 months. Luckily the judge was a reasonable man and gave him a sentence far below the standard range.
I went and watched some cases at the trial level today. Got to hear a suppression hearing in a homicide. A homicide where two different guns were used, one was fired multiple times the other only once. The police convinced the defendant that if he turning in the gun he used would help his case. Turning in the gun would be in his best interest, they explained, because it would prove that he hadn't used the gun that fired multiple times. Even if he didn't turn in his gun, they assured him they would find it and that they would find his DNA on any bullets in the gun if he so much as touched them. In the alternative he could turn in the his partner's gun and they would DNA and fingerprint test it to prove that he didn't use it.
Shockingly the client was convicted of a drug offense, as an accomplice, with a very very small amount of the substance (police scales couldn't even record the amount, lab had to weigh it for them). Sentencing range was between 60-120 months. The state asked for 90 months. Luckily the judge was a reasonable man and gave him a sentence far below the standard range.
I went and watched some cases at the trial level today. Got to hear a suppression hearing in a homicide. A homicide where two different guns were used, one was fired multiple times the other only once. The police convinced the defendant that if he turning in the gun he used would help his case. Turning in the gun would be in his best interest, they explained, because it would prove that he hadn't used the gun that fired multiple times. Even if he didn't turn in his gun, they assured him they would find it and that they would find his DNA on any bullets in the gun if he so much as touched them. In the alternative he could turn in the his partner's gun and they would DNA and fingerprint test it to prove that he didn't use it.
Sunday, June 17, 2007
have you read the patriot act?
Yesterday I went to visit some friends from high school. My friend lives in a very liberal college town populated almost completely with hippies. Until this weekend I thought I was a pretty liberal guy. I expected some hostility from the hippies for being in law school. I thought I would be able to deflect the hostility by explaining my intentions of becoming a public defender. I was wrong. I learned this weekend is that neither extreme of the political spectrum likes public defenders.
As I approached the party I was greeted with the scent of burning grass and people smoking "something" out of a glass pipe. My friend inquired as to whether I was going to "narc" on them for smoking pot. I reminded my friend that I want to be a public defender. I pulled out my bottle of 12 year old single malt and sat back to watch the stoned hippies make asses of themselves. Unfortunately all the guys decided they needed to take their shirts off. Then two of the girls followed (this sadly was also unfortunate). I poured myself some more scotch.
They topic of being a public defender came up (in their drunken/high state the concept of being an intern seemed to have escaped them). Drunk/high shirtless hippie #1 decided to explain to me the problems of our justice system. He explained that I was a horrible person for defending child rapists and murders. He repeatedly took issue with the fact that even if a client admitted guilt it was still my job to defend them. I explained that at that point the job of a defense attorney is not to "get the guy off" but to make sure the state proves their case. I said something about protecting our constitutional rights and he went off. He asked me which of our constitutional rights were still left. I offered an non-exhaustive list including free speech, freedom of religion and (albeit dwindling) a right to privacy. I had somehow misplaced my scotch and was entirely to sober for what followed.
This is when he took his opportunity to teach me search and seizure law. That semester of criminal procedure was apparently a waste of time. He explained that warrants are no longer needed. I responded by asking him why the police still get them when conducting searches if they don't have to. This is when he got in my face and yelled "HAVE YOU READ THE PATRIOT ACT?"
Now I dislike the patriot act and pretty much everything the Bush administration has done. I'm familiar with the "sneak and peak" searches that the patriot act authorizes. I have a huge problem with this, but they still require a warrant, an albeit meaningless warrant, but a warrant nonetheless. This explanation just angered the increasingly inebriated hippy. At this point he told me I was naive and that our system of justice was horrible. While our system does have many flaws it seems far better than the systems in the rest of the world. He said he was familiar with all the other systems in the world because he was a political science major. (I knew at this point that I would be unable to match him in a battle of wits. I can hold my own against a psych major, a philosophy major, or even an English major, but never a poli sci major. Such intellect.) I asked what sort of system he would suggest we use instead, perhaps one similar to the Germans with a more active judge. My favorite part of the evening followed. His response:"Well, um that's a good question and I should have an answer for you."
Other highlights from the hippies:
1. Hearing the hippies talk about how great it was that someone went around the town spray painting all the SUV’s with “gas guzzler” and other such remarks.
2. Getting glared at for eating chicken.
3. Being told that a shiraz and syrah are made from different grapes by a person drinking wine from a box.
As I approached the party I was greeted with the scent of burning grass and people smoking "something" out of a glass pipe. My friend inquired as to whether I was going to "narc" on them for smoking pot. I reminded my friend that I want to be a public defender. I pulled out my bottle of 12 year old single malt and sat back to watch the stoned hippies make asses of themselves. Unfortunately all the guys decided they needed to take their shirts off. Then two of the girls followed (this sadly was also unfortunate). I poured myself some more scotch.
They topic of being a public defender came up (in their drunken/high state the concept of being an intern seemed to have escaped them). Drunk/high shirtless hippie #1 decided to explain to me the problems of our justice system. He explained that I was a horrible person for defending child rapists and murders. He repeatedly took issue with the fact that even if a client admitted guilt it was still my job to defend them. I explained that at that point the job of a defense attorney is not to "get the guy off" but to make sure the state proves their case. I said something about protecting our constitutional rights and he went off. He asked me which of our constitutional rights were still left. I offered an non-exhaustive list including free speech, freedom of religion and (albeit dwindling) a right to privacy. I had somehow misplaced my scotch and was entirely to sober for what followed.
This is when he took his opportunity to teach me search and seizure law. That semester of criminal procedure was apparently a waste of time. He explained that warrants are no longer needed. I responded by asking him why the police still get them when conducting searches if they don't have to. This is when he got in my face and yelled "HAVE YOU READ THE PATRIOT ACT?"
Now I dislike the patriot act and pretty much everything the Bush administration has done. I'm familiar with the "sneak and peak" searches that the patriot act authorizes. I have a huge problem with this, but they still require a warrant, an albeit meaningless warrant, but a warrant nonetheless. This explanation just angered the increasingly inebriated hippy. At this point he told me I was naive and that our system of justice was horrible. While our system does have many flaws it seems far better than the systems in the rest of the world. He said he was familiar with all the other systems in the world because he was a political science major. (I knew at this point that I would be unable to match him in a battle of wits. I can hold my own against a psych major, a philosophy major, or even an English major, but never a poli sci major. Such intellect.) I asked what sort of system he would suggest we use instead, perhaps one similar to the Germans with a more active judge. My favorite part of the evening followed. His response:"Well, um that's a good question and I should have an answer for you."
Other highlights from the hippies:
1. Hearing the hippies talk about how great it was that someone went around the town spray painting all the SUV’s with “gas guzzler” and other such remarks.
2. Getting glared at for eating chicken.
3. Being told that a shiraz and syrah are made from different grapes by a person drinking wine from a box.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
My first post
PD Stuff posted on May 23 that PD Intern posts would be increasing in the coming weeks. I'm a little late in the game, but here it goes. This is my first attempt at a blog. I was inspired by the interns at A Public Defender's Life in Alaska's office; Of Moose & Misdemeanors. I also owe a lot of my inspiration to Skelly at http://skellywright.blogspot.com/ and 123txpublicdefender123 (who unfortunately is not Veronica Mars) at http://injusticeanywhere.blogspot.com/. Without them I never would have made it through Torts, Property, Contracts or Civ Pro.
I'm doing Appellate level defense work for indigent clients. I've only finished one year of law school so I'm not allowed to practice even with the supervision of an attorney. The other intern at my office is qualified and may get to do oral arguments.
On the first day I was given the case of a man who was convicted of rape. The victims were two girls under the age of 14. I wrote a reply brief for that case the first week. I learned a lot about juror misconduct and sentencing while researching the case. If what he allegedly did is true the guy is a totally scumbag, but that doesn't mean he wasn't entitled to a fair trial with an impartial jury. I was very surprised with, but very appreciative of, how much responsibility I was given from the start.
Once I finished the reply brief I was given the case of a homeless man who threatened to cut a woman's face unless she had sex with him. She refused and he stabbed her in the chest missing the heart by 1/4 of an inch. Her friends drove him away after the stabbing. She refused to go to the hospital, instead asking her friends to bring her food and crack. We lost his appeal so I wrote a petition for review. I think the chances of the court accepting review of his case is slim to none. Nonetheless I was really excited to have something I created filed with the court.
I've now moved on to a motion for discretionary review with the Supreme Court. This is a case that looks like we may actually win. The trial court and court of appeals are just ass wrong on the law. Unfortunately for the client the issue he might win on is a very minor point for his case. Even if we win he's still going to spend a long time in jail.
Everyone at my office is wonderful. They are all very helpful and answer my obnoxious questions. Watching them in court has been very refreshing. Real court is nothing like moot court. No one says "I respectfully disagree your honor for the following reasons." Instead they say "No your honor and here's why." I've learned more about writing persuasively in the two weeks I've been here than in all of law school. Just reading the other attorney's briefs helps me get a better understanding of the process.
The office were I work is located in a wonderful part of town. I've see two drug deals in the past two weeks outside the office. On most days a gentleman offers "fine lady's watches" for sale on the corner. They are a steal at only $10. Yesterday the other intern saw someone shooting up in the street. The smell of marijuana is often encountered on the way to lunch.
I'm not sure what I plan to accomplish with this blog. I read all the other PD blogs so much that I felt the need to join in. At the very least it will be pleasant for me to look back upon when school starts in the fall and I am forced to learn Tax Law or Business Associations.
I'm doing Appellate level defense work for indigent clients. I've only finished one year of law school so I'm not allowed to practice even with the supervision of an attorney. The other intern at my office is qualified and may get to do oral arguments.
On the first day I was given the case of a man who was convicted of rape. The victims were two girls under the age of 14. I wrote a reply brief for that case the first week. I learned a lot about juror misconduct and sentencing while researching the case. If what he allegedly did is true the guy is a totally scumbag, but that doesn't mean he wasn't entitled to a fair trial with an impartial jury. I was very surprised with, but very appreciative of, how much responsibility I was given from the start.
Once I finished the reply brief I was given the case of a homeless man who threatened to cut a woman's face unless she had sex with him. She refused and he stabbed her in the chest missing the heart by 1/4 of an inch. Her friends drove him away after the stabbing. She refused to go to the hospital, instead asking her friends to bring her food and crack. We lost his appeal so I wrote a petition for review. I think the chances of the court accepting review of his case is slim to none. Nonetheless I was really excited to have something I created filed with the court.
I've now moved on to a motion for discretionary review with the Supreme Court. This is a case that looks like we may actually win. The trial court and court of appeals are just ass wrong on the law. Unfortunately for the client the issue he might win on is a very minor point for his case. Even if we win he's still going to spend a long time in jail.
Everyone at my office is wonderful. They are all very helpful and answer my obnoxious questions. Watching them in court has been very refreshing. Real court is nothing like moot court. No one says "I respectfully disagree your honor for the following reasons." Instead they say "No your honor and here's why." I've learned more about writing persuasively in the two weeks I've been here than in all of law school. Just reading the other attorney's briefs helps me get a better understanding of the process.
The office were I work is located in a wonderful part of town. I've see two drug deals in the past two weeks outside the office. On most days a gentleman offers "fine lady's watches" for sale on the corner. They are a steal at only $10. Yesterday the other intern saw someone shooting up in the street. The smell of marijuana is often encountered on the way to lunch.
I'm not sure what I plan to accomplish with this blog. I read all the other PD blogs so much that I felt the need to join in. At the very least it will be pleasant for me to look back upon when school starts in the fall and I am forced to learn Tax Law or Business Associations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)