Singing Loudly: Deceptive State's Attorneys

Singing Loudly

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Deceptive State's Attorneys

It's weird to me that decent prosecutors/attorneys try to win with deceptive, unethical practices. Instead of using the evidence and facts of the case that their expertise, intellect, and ability should allow them to produce -- they tarnish their goodwill with deception.

A good example of this is what happened today. An inmate sent our office a letter with the law suit enclosed. The state has initiated the suit against him and opted not to provide our office with a copy of the documents.

The reason that they did not tell us about the suit is simple: they don't want us to object to a biased and unfair judge. This is a judge who engaged in ex parte conversations, left the court room during proceedings (without stopping them), encouraged the other side to mock our first chair attorney, offered suggestions to the prosecutor, changed orders based on ex parte conversations, etc.

The defendant and his or her attorney have seven days to object to the appointed judge. Of course, the prosecutor does not want us to object because this appointed judge gives them a tremendous advantage. The defendants, who have not had dealings with this judge, have no way to know what they are in store for without speaking to us.

Well, much to the prosecutor's chagrin, we found out what they did. After we learned of one suit filed, we figured that they had instituted proceedings against other inmates. I went down to the district court house where they file all their suits and found two other suits. We contacted those inmates to let them know what we advised.

Why not win based on your ability and the facts of the case?


Post a Comment

the archives:

You are currently viewing a post in the archives. You can go back to the main page, the topical index or continue perusing the archives below:

Posts by month:
Get awesome blog templates like this one from