No one can say that Judge Kent didn't put up an aggressive and creative fight in his defense against the charges levied against him - during the course of that proceeding, Kent took the offense time and again, surprising many with his strategic maneuvers.
And Samuel Kent surprised everyone once again, this week.
You'll recall from our earlier posts that Judge Kent returned to the national spotlight last month, when he sent in his letter of resignation -- with an effective date one year in the future. This would allow him to continue collecting his salary, even from his prison cell, until he was "fired" -- which for an appointed federal judge, means impeachment and trial in Congress.
Say what you will about Kent, this was a smart and shrewd move on his part, from a defense perspective.
Of course, this served to incense many, and the impeachment of Judge Kent began. Then, as the Senate was beginning its trial process by sending two Senate officials over to Judge Kent's jail cell last week to serve a summons upon him, voila.
Another surprise from Judge Kent.
He handed the Senate summons servers a short, terse letter where he resigned effective June 30, 2009. As of today, Judge Kent is no longer a federal judge, his bench is vacant, and he's no longer drawing a government paycheck.
Congress has to decide what it's going to do now. He's already in prison for 33 months. He's broke. They got lots of other business. Maybe Congress just lets this go.
Meantime, one has to wonder: book deal?
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Corpus Christi Judge Banales Asked to Be Removed From Case of Big Campaign Supporter
Just last week, we pointed to the new U.S. Supreme Court case that dealt with campaign contributions and judges across the country - with a warning that the judiciary was to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. And we predicted lots of activity based upon this new precedent.
And here it comes ....
Less than a week after Caperton v. Massey came down, Nueces County District Attorney Carlos Valdez has moved for the recusal of Judge Manuel Banales from the pending case of Mauricio Celis. The motion was filed on Wednesday, the US Supreme Court decision came down on Monday.
Seems that Mr. Celis is a well known Democratic fundraiser down in Corpus Christi, and the DA is arguing in his motion to remove Judge Banales that the judge received campaign contributions from some law firms that are somehow connected to Mr. Celis.
Who is Mauricio Celis?
Who is Mr. Celis? Well, he's interesting. Seems he was convicted last February of pretending to be a lawyer, and he was facing a year in jail, until Judge Banales removed the old trial judge and changed the sentence to 10 years probation. And, he's still got to face trial on other charges -- such as theft, money laundering, and impersonating an officer. (Judge Banales isn't hearing those charges, he already transferred those matters over to another Nueces County judge.)
Let's see what happens next week, right?
And here it comes ....
Less than a week after Caperton v. Massey came down, Nueces County District Attorney Carlos Valdez has moved for the recusal of Judge Manuel Banales from the pending case of Mauricio Celis. The motion was filed on Wednesday, the US Supreme Court decision came down on Monday.
Seems that Mr. Celis is a well known Democratic fundraiser down in Corpus Christi, and the DA is arguing in his motion to remove Judge Banales that the judge received campaign contributions from some law firms that are somehow connected to Mr. Celis.
Who is Mauricio Celis?
Who is Mr. Celis? Well, he's interesting. Seems he was convicted last February of pretending to be a lawyer, and he was facing a year in jail, until Judge Banales removed the old trial judge and changed the sentence to 10 years probation. And, he's still got to face trial on other charges -- such as theft, money laundering, and impersonating an officer. (Judge Banales isn't hearing those charges, he already transferred those matters over to another Nueces County judge.)
Let's see what happens next week, right?
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
COURT OPINIONS: US Supreme Court Nixes Judges Accepting Big Campaign Donations Due to Appearance of Bias
The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Caperton v. Massey (read the opinion here) came down yesterday, and we'll have to see how much it impacts Texas Judges -- and how often they recuse themselves from cases.
Texas Judges Run for Office: They Kiss Babies and Take Contributions
In Texas, judges run for office. (The federal judges are appointed.) Running for office is expensive. Judges have to campaign: they shake hands and kiss babies -- and take money from contributors.
The Caperton decision is big news because the highest court in the land has warned judges everywhere that if they are elected, then they must not allow even the appearance of bias regarding accepted contributions. They must recuse themselves if there is even the RISK of looking like they are playing favorites (emphasis added):
How This May Impact Texas Judges
In Texas, at first glance this is not that big of a deal because we've already got a $5000 cap on campaign contributions to judicial campaigns. (There's a $30,000 total contribution cap on members of a law firm.)
However, special interest groups don't fall within that legal cap and Caperton may impact their activities in future campaigns. In criminal law, special interest groups are very active and it will be interesting to watch campaigns in the future to see how this decision from D.C. impacts our state in the future.
Excellent Warning by the Dissenters
In his dissent (joined by Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito), Justice Roberts already warns that "this will inevitably lead to an increase in allegations that judges are biased, however groundless those charges may be," as he criticizes the majority opinion for failing to place clear guidelines for judges on when they should recuse themselves as part of the decision.
Justice Roberts is right. This decision is going to be used to try and push judges off cases - a new kind of forum shopping, sorta. We all know it.
Texas Judges Run for Office: They Kiss Babies and Take Contributions
In Texas, judges run for office. (The federal judges are appointed.) Running for office is expensive. Judges have to campaign: they shake hands and kiss babies -- and take money from contributors.
The Caperton decision is big news because the highest court in the land has warned judges everywhere that if they are elected, then they must not allow even the appearance of bias regarding accepted contributions. They must recuse themselves if there is even the RISK of looking like they are playing favorites (emphasis added):
Although there is no allegation of a quid pro quo agreement,the fact remains that Blankenship’s extraordinary contributions were made at a time when he had a vested stake in the outcome. Just as no man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, similar fears of bias can arise when — without the consent of the other parties — a man chooses the judge in his own cause. And applying this principle to the judicial election process, there was here a serious, objective risk of actual bias that required Justice Benjamin’s recusal.
Caperton, 556 U.S. ___ 2009 (slip opinion, p. 3).
How This May Impact Texas Judges
In Texas, at first glance this is not that big of a deal because we've already got a $5000 cap on campaign contributions to judicial campaigns. (There's a $30,000 total contribution cap on members of a law firm.)
However, special interest groups don't fall within that legal cap and Caperton may impact their activities in future campaigns. In criminal law, special interest groups are very active and it will be interesting to watch campaigns in the future to see how this decision from D.C. impacts our state in the future.
Excellent Warning by the Dissenters
In his dissent (joined by Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito), Justice Roberts already warns that "this will inevitably lead to an increase in allegations that judges are biased, however groundless those charges may be," as he criticizes the majority opinion for failing to place clear guidelines for judges on when they should recuse themselves as part of the decision.
Justice Roberts is right. This decision is going to be used to try and push judges off cases - a new kind of forum shopping, sorta. We all know it.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Cop Watch: Harlingen Cop Fatally Shoots Man in the Back, Juan Angel Guerra On the Case
Down Harlingen way, it was cold back in January so Diego Rivas-Soto started a fire under the Highway 77 overpass to keep warm. Rivas-Soto was a Mexican national, with family living in Durango. He was here, looking for work.
Drawn by the fire, the police showed up. Rivas-Soto was obviously frightened, and according to the police version of events, pulled a knife. So they shot him.
Rivas-Soto was shot in the back.
Now, the autopsy reports are in -- and more of the story has come to light. Rivas-Soto was fatally shot by a police shotgun blast.
And he was shot in the back. This has been confirmed by the Medical Examiner.
Was he a terrorist or a drug trafficker? Nope. He was just a guy without enough cash to pay for a room on a cold night. In fact, Rivas-Soto was a husband and father, only 41 years old when he died. He had left his wife and five children in their home of San Juan del Rio, a hamlet outside of Durango, Mexico, to get some kind of work in Texas.
Juan Guerra Representing the Family
Juan Angel Guerra is representing the family, and he's working hard on the case. He's using his past experience as a 3-term district attorney to question the actions of the Harlingen police department and current district attorney's office, and he's already released a copy of the autopsy reports to the news media.
According to Guerra, Riva-Soto was shot in the back twice, and he was shot after he was already down on the ground. Guerra appears to be very suspicious - even incredulous - of the official police version of events, and he's taking his concerns to the media.
You'll remember Mr. Guerra.
Last fall, we posted about Mr. Guerra's charging then Vice-President Dick Cheney, and others, with responsibility for abuses in privately-run Texas prisons, and about the suspicious nature of his last campaign for a fourth term as district attorney of Willacy County where some were of the opinion that Guerra had been the victim of some manipulative tactics to get him out of office.
I'm sure we'll be hearing more about the untimely death of Diego Rivas-Soto. And Juan Guerra.
Sources:
KRGV
http://www.krgv.com/news/local/story/Family-Of-Man-Shot-By-Police-File-Lawsuit/aiBZo2TZ9kab2AfJM_BXCg.cspx
The Monitor
http://www.themonitor.com/articles/shot-27789-attorney-suggests.html
Drawn by the fire, the police showed up. Rivas-Soto was obviously frightened, and according to the police version of events, pulled a knife. So they shot him.
Rivas-Soto was shot in the back.
Now, the autopsy reports are in -- and more of the story has come to light. Rivas-Soto was fatally shot by a police shotgun blast.
And he was shot in the back. This has been confirmed by the Medical Examiner.
Was he a terrorist or a drug trafficker? Nope. He was just a guy without enough cash to pay for a room on a cold night. In fact, Rivas-Soto was a husband and father, only 41 years old when he died. He had left his wife and five children in their home of San Juan del Rio, a hamlet outside of Durango, Mexico, to get some kind of work in Texas.
Juan Guerra Representing the Family
Juan Angel Guerra is representing the family, and he's working hard on the case. He's using his past experience as a 3-term district attorney to question the actions of the Harlingen police department and current district attorney's office, and he's already released a copy of the autopsy reports to the news media.
According to Guerra, Riva-Soto was shot in the back twice, and he was shot after he was already down on the ground. Guerra appears to be very suspicious - even incredulous - of the official police version of events, and he's taking his concerns to the media.
You'll remember Mr. Guerra.
Last fall, we posted about Mr. Guerra's charging then Vice-President Dick Cheney, and others, with responsibility for abuses in privately-run Texas prisons, and about the suspicious nature of his last campaign for a fourth term as district attorney of Willacy County where some were of the opinion that Guerra had been the victim of some manipulative tactics to get him out of office.
I'm sure we'll be hearing more about the untimely death of Diego Rivas-Soto. And Juan Guerra.
Sources:
KRGV
http://www.krgv.com/news/local/story/Family-Of-Man-Shot-By-Police-File-Lawsuit/aiBZo2TZ9kab2AfJM_BXCg.cspx
The Monitor
http://www.themonitor.com/articles/shot-27789-attorney-suggests.html
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Houston Judge Caught on Video Allegedly Keying Neighbor's Car Now Subject of Grand Jury Felony Investigation
Down in Houston, the Grand Jury is watching the video below, as well as other evidence, to decide whether or not felony criminal charges should be filed against retired visiting judge Woody Densen.
Seems Judge Densen may have vandalized his neighbor's Range Rover (as well as the neighbor's girlfriend's Mercedes). And the neighbor was on the lookout: he installed surveillance cameras, which were videotaping the judge as the judge walked past his SUV.
The judge does act suspiciously in the video, but geez. It's in the middle of the day. And he's a judge. And he's 69 years old. Surely the judge -- or the Grand Jury -- is getting punked?
Neighbor Did His Investigation
Well, maybe not. Apparently, the neighbor has been having problems with the vehicles in his driveway being damaged for awhile now, and he's done his homework to figure out what's been going on here. And, the harm does add up: the latest scratch marks on the Range Rover will cost $1500 to repair. That's a hit. And, over time, those repair bills may really be adding up.
What's the worst he could get if he did scratch -- or "key" -- his neighbor's vehicle? Well, it's more serious than you might think. Judge Densen could be charged with felony criminal mischief, facing jail time and a $10,000 fine. Additionally, he could face disciplinary proceedings brought by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct (which would put his ability to substitute for judges on vacation, medical leave, etc. at risk).
What Can Happen to the Judge?
Given that he's retired, and 69 years old, if the Commission were to suspense him from taking the bench for a period of time, that probably wouldn't hurt too bad.
Felony charges, that's gonna hurt. Ten thousand buck fine plus up to two years in jail is serious punishment.
Seeing this video plastered all over the web? Definitely gotta hurt. You're a JUDGE, man.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/video?id=6866291
Source:
ABC13.com
http://politicalblog.abc13.com/2009/06/visiting-judge-investigated-for-vandalizing-car.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6480140.html
Seems Judge Densen may have vandalized his neighbor's Range Rover (as well as the neighbor's girlfriend's Mercedes). And the neighbor was on the lookout: he installed surveillance cameras, which were videotaping the judge as the judge walked past his SUV.
The judge does act suspiciously in the video, but geez. It's in the middle of the day. And he's a judge. And he's 69 years old. Surely the judge -- or the Grand Jury -- is getting punked?
Neighbor Did His Investigation
Well, maybe not. Apparently, the neighbor has been having problems with the vehicles in his driveway being damaged for awhile now, and he's done his homework to figure out what's been going on here. And, the harm does add up: the latest scratch marks on the Range Rover will cost $1500 to repair. That's a hit. And, over time, those repair bills may really be adding up.
What's the worst he could get if he did scratch -- or "key" -- his neighbor's vehicle? Well, it's more serious than you might think. Judge Densen could be charged with felony criminal mischief, facing jail time and a $10,000 fine. Additionally, he could face disciplinary proceedings brought by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct (which would put his ability to substitute for judges on vacation, medical leave, etc. at risk).
What Can Happen to the Judge?
Given that he's retired, and 69 years old, if the Commission were to suspense him from taking the bench for a period of time, that probably wouldn't hurt too bad.
Felony charges, that's gonna hurt. Ten thousand buck fine plus up to two years in jail is serious punishment.
Seeing this video plastered all over the web? Definitely gotta hurt. You're a JUDGE, man.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/video?id=6866291
Source:
ABC13.com
http://politicalblog.abc13.com/2009/06/visiting-judge-investigated-for-vandalizing-car.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6480140.html
Monday, June 15, 2009
DA Watch: Tarrant County DA Seeks Recusal Again in Death Row Case Due to Prosecutor Misconduct
Earlier this year, we posted about the Tarrant County DA recusing itself from the Michael Toney case after it was revealed that the District Attorney had failed to turn over extremely important evidence to the defense that might well have kept Toney from being convicted, much less sentenced to Death Row.
In the Toney case, it took 23 years before the Fort Worth District Attorney's Office came forward and revealed that these documents were intentionally withheld from the defense. What district attorney was involved? Mike Parrish.
On Friday, a hearing was held before visiting District Judge Steven Herod in another case Mike Parrish prosecuted during his tenure at the Tarrant County District Attorney's office. Another case where a sentence of death was given.
In that hearing, Judge Herod heard evidence that Mike Parrish withheld evidence from the defense counsel for Death Row inmate Chelsea Richardson -- and also interfered with her attorney-client privilege. Two biggies. Two big No-No's.
This time, the Tarrant County District Attorney's office may get removed from the case, but they're not doing so voluntarily: the Judge isn't hearing a motion to recuse this time, as the DA filed in the Toney case. This time, Richardson's defense counsel is bringing the matter before the court.
What was withheld in the Richardson case?
The psychological report of a co-defendant, which would have been favorable to Chelsea Richardson, who was portrayed at her trial as the Evil Mastermind in the murder of her boyfriend's parents. (Guess the psych report helped with the argument that the co-defendant wasn't so easily manipulated....)
How was the attorney-client privilege purportedly interfered with by the DA?
Richardson's attorney is also contending that Mike Parrish did not reveal to anyone -- much less the judge -- that Parrish was getting scoop under the table about the case from Richardson's defense attorney's paralegal. Whoa Nellie.
Tarrant County DA Isn't Going Away Quietly Into That Good Night
This time, unlike the Toney case where the Tarrant County DA filed its own motion to remove itself from the case, the DA isn't admitting Richardson was wronged.
At the hearing, according to media reports, Tarrant County ADA Charles Mallin argued that Michael Toney "was a completely different matter" -- and that situation was irrelevant to Richardson. They argued to the visiting judge that there isn't proof that the DA's Office has any conflict upon which to base a removal.
Let's see what Judge Herod thinks about that ....
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6477205.html
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/1431236.html
In the Toney case, it took 23 years before the Fort Worth District Attorney's Office came forward and revealed that these documents were intentionally withheld from the defense. What district attorney was involved? Mike Parrish.
On Friday, a hearing was held before visiting District Judge Steven Herod in another case Mike Parrish prosecuted during his tenure at the Tarrant County District Attorney's office. Another case where a sentence of death was given.
In that hearing, Judge Herod heard evidence that Mike Parrish withheld evidence from the defense counsel for Death Row inmate Chelsea Richardson -- and also interfered with her attorney-client privilege. Two biggies. Two big No-No's.
This time, the Tarrant County District Attorney's office may get removed from the case, but they're not doing so voluntarily: the Judge isn't hearing a motion to recuse this time, as the DA filed in the Toney case. This time, Richardson's defense counsel is bringing the matter before the court.
What was withheld in the Richardson case?
The psychological report of a co-defendant, which would have been favorable to Chelsea Richardson, who was portrayed at her trial as the Evil Mastermind in the murder of her boyfriend's parents. (Guess the psych report helped with the argument that the co-defendant wasn't so easily manipulated....)
How was the attorney-client privilege purportedly interfered with by the DA?
Richardson's attorney is also contending that Mike Parrish did not reveal to anyone -- much less the judge -- that Parrish was getting scoop under the table about the case from Richardson's defense attorney's paralegal. Whoa Nellie.
Tarrant County DA Isn't Going Away Quietly Into That Good Night
This time, unlike the Toney case where the Tarrant County DA filed its own motion to remove itself from the case, the DA isn't admitting Richardson was wronged.
At the hearing, according to media reports, Tarrant County ADA Charles Mallin argued that Michael Toney "was a completely different matter" -- and that situation was irrelevant to Richardson. They argued to the visiting judge that there isn't proof that the DA's Office has any conflict upon which to base a removal.
Let's see what Judge Herod thinks about that ....
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6477205.html
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/1431236.html
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Cop Watch: Austin Cop Tasers 72 Year Old Woman TWICE - Watch Video
You know, this blog has posted about a cop using a Taser on his own wife. And that was bad. This blog has posted about cops using Tasers on the father of the bride during a wedding reception. And that was bad, too. There was also the recent post about the use of a Taser of a Galveston man, where he died. That's horrible.
But this Austin cop (actually a Travis County Constable), caught on video, using a Taser TWICE on a 72 year old woman during a traffic stop is just unbelievable.
This story has hit international media sources, and the BBC is reporting that the woman is considering a lawsuit, and the Austin American Stateman is reporting that the law authorities are standing behind the constable, taking the position that the elderly woman was dangerous.
You watch the video. You decide.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/06/10/0610tasered.html
BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8094023.stm
But this Austin cop (actually a Travis County Constable), caught on video, using a Taser TWICE on a 72 year old woman during a traffic stop is just unbelievable.
This story has hit international media sources, and the BBC is reporting that the woman is considering a lawsuit, and the Austin American Stateman is reporting that the law authorities are standing behind the constable, taking the position that the elderly woman was dangerous.
You watch the video. You decide.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/06/10/0610tasered.html
BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8094023.stm
Monday, June 08, 2009
Cop Watch: Texas Rangers Investigating 2 Seguin Cops in 2 Separate Incidents
Seguin Police Chief Kevin Kelso, according to media reports, first became aware of some bad stuff going on within his department when he got word that the Texas Rangers were investigating one of his officers -- so Kelso put this officer on paid leave.
Sometime after that, a second set of facts revealed themselves about another Seguin police officer, and a second investigation into these allegations is also being undertaken. Kelso is threatening this second cop with termination.
The media coverage hasn't given great detail about what's going on over in Seguin, but through the Texas Public Information Act, the Seguin Gazette-Enterprise has reported about three letters that have been released to them.
First Seguin Police Officer - Allegations of Some Type of "Criminal Complaint"
The first two letters, from Chief Kelso to the first officer, reference allegations of a "criminal complaint," and the placing of the first officer on paid leave. The second letter to this same officer forbids him from entering the Police Department "for any reason at any hour," and gives Kelso's request that the officer stay in his home and available to investigators during normal business hours.
Second Seguin Police Officer - Allegations of "Improper Relationship with a Minor Child"
The third letter was written by Seguin Chief Kelso to the second, unidentified officer just last Friday. This letter gives more details into what the allegations are against this Seguin cop, and the letter itself is quoted in the Seguin Gazette Enterprise and reprinted here:
Interestingly, the San Antonio Express News is reporting these two police officers as being one currently on the force, and one who has "recently left the force."
Sources:
Seguin Gazette-Enterprise
http://www.seguingazette.com/story.lasso?ewcd=22b2e3dd51dd606f
San Antonio Express News
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/Texas_Rangers_probe_sex_allegations_against_Seguin_officers.html
Sometime after that, a second set of facts revealed themselves about another Seguin police officer, and a second investigation into these allegations is also being undertaken. Kelso is threatening this second cop with termination.
The media coverage hasn't given great detail about what's going on over in Seguin, but through the Texas Public Information Act, the Seguin Gazette-Enterprise has reported about three letters that have been released to them.
First Seguin Police Officer - Allegations of Some Type of "Criminal Complaint"
The first two letters, from Chief Kelso to the first officer, reference allegations of a "criminal complaint," and the placing of the first officer on paid leave. The second letter to this same officer forbids him from entering the Police Department "for any reason at any hour," and gives Kelso's request that the officer stay in his home and available to investigators during normal business hours.
Second Seguin Police Officer - Allegations of "Improper Relationship with a Minor Child"
The third letter was written by Seguin Chief Kelso to the second, unidentified officer just last Friday. This letter gives more details into what the allegations are against this Seguin cop, and the letter itself is quoted in the Seguin Gazette Enterprise and reprinted here:
“I am considering termination of your employment for conduct unbecoming an officer of the Seguin Police Department.... Specifically, it is alleged by two local educators that you have engaged in an improper relationship with a minor child and that you are responsible for inappropriate communications (text messages) with that child.”
Interestingly, the San Antonio Express News is reporting these two police officers as being one currently on the force, and one who has "recently left the force."
Sources:
Seguin Gazette-Enterprise
http://www.seguingazette.com/story.lasso?ewcd=22b2e3dd51dd606f
San Antonio Express News
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/Texas_Rangers_probe_sex_allegations_against_Seguin_officers.html
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Judge Samuel Kent Resigns in 2010 (Next Year)
They may say a lot of things about Judge Samuel Kent but no one can say he's not clever.
As you know from earlier posts, Judge Kent took a plea deal and is set to start serving time next month for obstruction of justice in a case alleging sex crimes by the Judge against court employees. Being under official retirement age, Judge Kent sought special disability stature (he's claimed bipolar disorder, as well as depression and anxiety) in order to keep benefits coming to him that would otherwise go away with his leaving the bench.
Fifth Circuit's Edith Jones Letter
Edith Jones, Chief Justice of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, nixed that in a formal letter posted here for your review. Justice Jones unequivocally shut the door on Judge Kent's disability claim.
Next move, Kent's. Judge Kent sent a formal letter of his own, resigning his position as a federal judge -- and here's the catch. He's resigning EFFECTIVE JUNE 2010. That's right. One year from now.
This keeps Kent's federal pay and benefits coming in for a full year after he goes to jail. And, by the time that Congress could finalize his impeachment proceedings, that year will have passed anyway.
Which is Kent's biggest argument and what some say is a clever masterstroke -- by sending this letter, Kent has kept his financial position intact for a year and he's made the impeachment relatively moot.
Except for those that are calling Kent's 2010 resignation letter "thumbing his nose at Congress," "outrageous" and something that "... continue[s] to prove that he is unworthy of public service...."
So, what's next?
Well, Congress is going to go forward with impeachment proceedings. And, let's not count out serious legal minds like Edith Jones to be thinking of ways to counter Judge Kent's latest move.
Judge Kent sure is manuevering like a master, especially for someone so overcome by mental conditions that he is to be considered completely disabled, huh?
Sources:
FoxNews
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/02/texas-judge-facing-impeachment-sex-abuse-case-submits-resignation/
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6454143.html
As you know from earlier posts, Judge Kent took a plea deal and is set to start serving time next month for obstruction of justice in a case alleging sex crimes by the Judge against court employees. Being under official retirement age, Judge Kent sought special disability stature (he's claimed bipolar disorder, as well as depression and anxiety) in order to keep benefits coming to him that would otherwise go away with his leaving the bench.
Fifth Circuit's Edith Jones Letter
Edith Jones, Chief Justice of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, nixed that in a formal letter posted here for your review. Justice Jones unequivocally shut the door on Judge Kent's disability claim.
Next move, Kent's. Judge Kent sent a formal letter of his own, resigning his position as a federal judge -- and here's the catch. He's resigning EFFECTIVE JUNE 2010. That's right. One year from now.
This keeps Kent's federal pay and benefits coming in for a full year after he goes to jail. And, by the time that Congress could finalize his impeachment proceedings, that year will have passed anyway.
Which is Kent's biggest argument and what some say is a clever masterstroke -- by sending this letter, Kent has kept his financial position intact for a year and he's made the impeachment relatively moot.
Except for those that are calling Kent's 2010 resignation letter "thumbing his nose at Congress," "outrageous" and something that "... continue[s] to prove that he is unworthy of public service...."
So, what's next?
Well, Congress is going to go forward with impeachment proceedings. And, let's not count out serious legal minds like Edith Jones to be thinking of ways to counter Judge Kent's latest move.
Judge Kent sure is manuevering like a master, especially for someone so overcome by mental conditions that he is to be considered completely disabled, huh?
Sources:
FoxNews
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/02/texas-judge-facing-impeachment-sex-abuse-case-submits-resignation/
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6454143.html
Monday, June 01, 2009
DA Watch: Former Jim Wells County DA Joe Frank Garza Spent Millions in Drug Money on Vegas Trips and 3 Secretaries
Down in Alice, Texas, where US Highway 281 runs through on its way from the US -Mexico border through the heart of Texas up to Dallas and beyond, there's lots of drug busts. Law enforcement in Jim Wells County stops all sorts of vehicles on its patch of US 281, confiscating all kinds of drugs -- as well as cash.
Apparently, lots and lots of cash. We're talking millions.
Over Four Million Dollars in Drug Forfeiture Money Was Spent by Former DA Garza on Trips to Vegas and Other Interesting Stuff
Joe Frank Garza was the District Attorney for Jim Wells County for a number of years, until his opponent campaigned in Alic, and elsewhere on issues regarding Garza's spending habits, and beat him in the last election.
Now, new DA Armando Barrera is beginning to report his findings on what was happening with the drug forfeiture money. First, Barrera is reporting that there was no checks and balances here: Garza spent the cash without anyone double-checking what he was doing with it.
And what was Joe Frank Garza doing with all that cash?
Barrera's reporting that Garza spent lots of money on travel to Vegas.
Barrera's reporting that Garza spent lots of money on three particular secretaries.
The Numbers So Far
The media is reporting these tallies (the audit/investigation is ongoing, this information comes from data provided by Garza to the Attorney General's office) from 2000 - 2007 (excluding 2002) where Garza spent $4.2 million:
Garza is adamant that he has done nothing wrong. It was totally within his power to spend this drug money as he saw fit. Right now, state and county laws are being reviewed to see if this is true, or if Garza has violated either civil or criminal laws by his actions.
Stay tuned.
Sources:
Corpus Christi Caller Times
http://www.caller.com/news/2009/may/27/jim_wells_forfeiture/
Apparently, lots and lots of cash. We're talking millions.
Over Four Million Dollars in Drug Forfeiture Money Was Spent by Former DA Garza on Trips to Vegas and Other Interesting Stuff
Joe Frank Garza was the District Attorney for Jim Wells County for a number of years, until his opponent campaigned in Alic, and elsewhere on issues regarding Garza's spending habits, and beat him in the last election.
Now, new DA Armando Barrera is beginning to report his findings on what was happening with the drug forfeiture money. First, Barrera is reporting that there was no checks and balances here: Garza spent the cash without anyone double-checking what he was doing with it.
And what was Joe Frank Garza doing with all that cash?
Barrera's reporting that Garza spent lots of money on travel to Vegas.
Garza's response is that there were lots of seminars in Vegas. He and
his employees went on lots of seminars ... legal seminars, to educate
themselves.
Barrera's reporting that Garza spent lots of money on three particular secretaries.
Garza's response is that the cash was for extra pay to lots of folk within his jurisdiction.
The Numbers So Far
The media is reporting these tallies (the audit/investigation is ongoing, this information comes from data provided by Garza to the Attorney General's office) from 2000 - 2007 (excluding 2002) where Garza spent $4.2 million:
- $2.1 million was spent on "salary supplements", and while Garza had a staff of 15 who did get bonus pay, Barrera (and the county commissioner heading up the investigation) are reporting that most of this total went to just three people, three secretaries who worked for Garza.
- $267,449 on travel.
- $581,000 in operating expenses.
- $19,987 on equipment.
- $154,213 on supplies.
Garza is adamant that he has done nothing wrong. It was totally within his power to spend this drug money as he saw fit. Right now, state and county laws are being reviewed to see if this is true, or if Garza has violated either civil or criminal laws by his actions.
Stay tuned.
Sources:
Corpus Christi Caller Times
http://www.caller.com/news/2009/may/27/jim_wells_forfeiture/
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Crime News: 20th Dallas County DNA Exoneration Walks Free Today
Today, Jerry Lee Evans will walk out of a Dallas courtroom a free man, at the age of 47, after spending 23 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit.
What Happened to Put The Wrong Man Behind Bars This Time?
Back in 1986, an 18-year-old woman in her first year at SMU was abducted and raped, at knifepoint, in the Deep Ellum district of Dallas. Jerry Lee Evans was picked up, and not only did he match the description given by the victim, he also had a similar speech impediment.
Now, prosecutors are explaining away their error by pointing the finger at the cops who questioned the teenaged rape victim. According to the head of the District Attorney's conviction integrity unit, man by the name of Mike Ware, Dallas cops had the girl look over a 6-picture photo spread.
No idea how long after the crime was committed that this occurred, or the state of the victim, emotionally or physically. At any rate, when they did this, they "were leading and encouraging" her to pick Jerry Lee Evans out of the 6 photo lineup in front of her. After she went along, Ware explained, the policeman were then "enthusiastically encouraging" to her. Good job. Right. Can't you just hear the "little lady" in there, somewhere?
DNA Exonerations: Jerry Evans is Number 20 for Dallas County
Jerry Lee Evans earns a small place in local history today, as the 20th innocent man to be exonerated by DNA in Dallas County, which is particularly interesting because Dallas County, Texas, has had more than DNA exonerations any other jurisdiction in the nation since the State of Texas started to allow post-conviction DNA testing.
Congratulations to Mr. Evans and his family today.
What Happened to Put The Wrong Man Behind Bars This Time?
Back in 1986, an 18-year-old woman in her first year at SMU was abducted and raped, at knifepoint, in the Deep Ellum district of Dallas. Jerry Lee Evans was picked up, and not only did he match the description given by the victim, he also had a similar speech impediment.
Now, prosecutors are explaining away their error by pointing the finger at the cops who questioned the teenaged rape victim. According to the head of the District Attorney's conviction integrity unit, man by the name of Mike Ware, Dallas cops had the girl look over a 6-picture photo spread.
No idea how long after the crime was committed that this occurred, or the state of the victim, emotionally or physically. At any rate, when they did this, they "were leading and encouraging" her to pick Jerry Lee Evans out of the 6 photo lineup in front of her. After she went along, Ware explained, the policeman were then "enthusiastically encouraging" to her. Good job. Right. Can't you just hear the "little lady" in there, somewhere?
DNA Exonerations: Jerry Evans is Number 20 for Dallas County
Jerry Lee Evans earns a small place in local history today, as the 20th innocent man to be exonerated by DNA in Dallas County, which is particularly interesting because Dallas County, Texas, has had more than DNA exonerations any other jurisdiction in the nation since the State of Texas started to allow post-conviction DNA testing.
Congratulations to Mr. Evans and his family today.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Impeachments of Keller and Kent Advancing Side by Side
Just think. A year ago Christmas, you would have been reading about Sharon Keller, Chief Justice of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and Samuel Kent, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas (Galveston Branch) with respect. The news reports would have been dealing with some case before them, or maybe some speech they gave at a civic event.
Today, the media coverage for both of them is all about their respective falls from grace.
The Kent - Keller Impeachment Race
We've already posted details about Justice Keller and Judge Kent here, no need to go back through those scandalous tales about how the two got to where they are today. However, there are new things on the horizon -- things that they now share. In a strange twist of fate, the two are in an Impeachment Race.
On Monday, the U.S. House of Representatives Began Its Impeachment Process Against Judge Kent
The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers (D-Michigan) and the Committee's top Republican, Lamar Smith, are asking that Kent resign. Otherwise, the House is going to proceed with impeachment proceedings.
Why? Conyers and Smith don't want Judge Kent to get that $169,000 annual retirement pension that he's manuevering to get ... as we posted earlier, Kent is too young to get full retirement benefits based upon his age, so he's asserting a disability (it's grown to bipolar disorder since our last post) to keep that income (and assorted benefits) coming in.
Status: On May 12, 2009, HJC Member Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis) filed articles of impeachment against Kent. On May 13, 2009, the HJC voted to investigate Judge Kent for possible impeachment. So, the Congressional investigation has begun.
On April 28th, Texas State Rep Lon Burham Promised a Formal Motion to Impeach Keller Will Be Filed Soon with the Texas House
On April 28, 2009, on the steps of the Texas Capitol, State Representative Lon Burham (D-Fort Worth), called for the impeachment of Chief Justice Sharon Keller. Burham has told the media that he will be filing a formal motion to impeach Keller as soon as he collected enough votes to win that motion on a vote.
Status: Burham has already filed a resolution that establishes procedures for articles of impeachment to be created and voted upon, and the Texas House has already begun hearing testimony on the bill to impeach Justice Keller.
Over at Grits For Breakfast, there's talk that Burham will be able to get this to a record vote before the end of the session -- and if he does, and the vote comes down in favor of impeachment, then Justice Keller will be temporarily removed from office until her impeachment trial by the Senate is completed.
Impeachment Race Status: Kent is in the lead, but Keller's coming around the bend.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.newschannel10.com/Global/story.asp?S=10355654
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/13/house-starts-impeachment-proceedings-federal-judge-sex-case/
Daily Texan
http://www.dailytexanonline.com/representative-initiates-efforts-for-impeachment-of-sharon-keller-1.1736566
Grits for Breakfast
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2009/05/sharon-keller-out-by-2010.html
Today, the media coverage for both of them is all about their respective falls from grace.
The Kent - Keller Impeachment Race
We've already posted details about Justice Keller and Judge Kent here, no need to go back through those scandalous tales about how the two got to where they are today. However, there are new things on the horizon -- things that they now share. In a strange twist of fate, the two are in an Impeachment Race.
On Monday, the U.S. House of Representatives Began Its Impeachment Process Against Judge Kent
The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers (D-Michigan) and the Committee's top Republican, Lamar Smith, are asking that Kent resign. Otherwise, the House is going to proceed with impeachment proceedings.
Why? Conyers and Smith don't want Judge Kent to get that $169,000 annual retirement pension that he's manuevering to get ... as we posted earlier, Kent is too young to get full retirement benefits based upon his age, so he's asserting a disability (it's grown to bipolar disorder since our last post) to keep that income (and assorted benefits) coming in.
Status: On May 12, 2009, HJC Member Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis) filed articles of impeachment against Kent. On May 13, 2009, the HJC voted to investigate Judge Kent for possible impeachment. So, the Congressional investigation has begun.
On April 28th, Texas State Rep Lon Burham Promised a Formal Motion to Impeach Keller Will Be Filed Soon with the Texas House
On April 28, 2009, on the steps of the Texas Capitol, State Representative Lon Burham (D-Fort Worth), called for the impeachment of Chief Justice Sharon Keller. Burham has told the media that he will be filing a formal motion to impeach Keller as soon as he collected enough votes to win that motion on a vote.
Status: Burham has already filed a resolution that establishes procedures for articles of impeachment to be created and voted upon, and the Texas House has already begun hearing testimony on the bill to impeach Justice Keller.
Over at Grits For Breakfast, there's talk that Burham will be able to get this to a record vote before the end of the session -- and if he does, and the vote comes down in favor of impeachment, then Justice Keller will be temporarily removed from office until her impeachment trial by the Senate is completed.
Impeachment Race Status: Kent is in the lead, but Keller's coming around the bend.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.newschannel10.com/Global/story.asp?S=10355654
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/13/house-starts-impeachment-proceedings-federal-judge-sex-case/
Daily Texan
http://www.dailytexanonline.com/representative-initiates-efforts-for-impeachment-of-sharon-keller-1.1736566
Grits for Breakfast
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2009/05/sharon-keller-out-by-2010.html
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Cop Watch: Starr County Sheriff Rey Guerra Pleads Guilty to Drug Smuggling
Reymundo "Rey" Guerra was Sheriff of Starr County, Texas, for several years -- in fact, he was running for re-election last year when the FBI arrested him on drug trafficking charges. That made it hard for the citizens of Starr County since Rey Guerra was the only name on the ballot. They re-elected Guerra despite his troubles.
Guerra Was Re-elected and Had to Resign His Post - Twice
As a condition of his bond, Rey Guerra resigned his post before the election. Then, the voters elected him back as Sheriff, and he had to resign the post a second time. Yeah, this game of musical chairs really happened.
Sheriff Guerra wasn't busted all by himself -- he was first arrested as part of a big nationwide bust of Gulf Cartel members by the feds back last Fall. In fact, the feds describe him as a "minor participant" in the Cartel's operations.
What Did Starr County Sheriff Rey Guerra Do That Was So Wrong?
Seems there was a human smuggling group in the Starr County area led by a man who used to be a cop in Mexico, name of Jose Carlos Hinojosa. Guerra and Hinojosa met when they were both in law enforcement.
However, like many stories out of Mexico these days, Hinojosa traded his job with Mexican law authorities for employment with a national drug organization: this one, the infamous Zetas. The Zetas are a feared paramilitary group with close affiilations with the Gulf Cartel. (Hinojosa's already pled guilty to drug trafficking and money laundering conspiracy.)
Hinojosa would help Guerra get suspects back from Mexico who had escaped across the border, and in exchange, Guerra would give Hinojosa the names and contact information of informants targeted for raids in Starr County. Guerra didn't do this thinking that Hinojosa was still a cop -- Guerra did this knowing that Hinojosa was now a member of the Zetas, and had apparently known this as far back as January 2007.
Oh, and Guerra also got paid $2,000 - $3,000 for each scoop on informants he provided.
Now, he's pled guilty to one federal count of drug smuggling conspiracy, just one week before his trial.
As part of his plea deal with the U.S. Attorney's Office, Sheriff Rey Guerra has admitted to using his elected office as Sheriff of Starr County, Texas, to help drug dealers (read that the Gulf Cartel and the Zetas) as they trafficked in narcotics in Starr County and Miguel Alemán, Tamps, Mexico.
Right now, ex-Sheriff Guerra faces spending the rest of his life in prison. The federal sentencing hearing is set for July.
And, if you're thinking that putting a former Sheriff into a federal prison for the rest of his life is akin to a death sentence of sorts, you might well be right.
Sources:
The Monitor
http://www.themonitor.com/articles/sheriff-26040-guilty-starr.html
The Brownsville Herald
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/sheriff-97563-guilty-starr.html
The Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-jrJN7CWIGaTnumy_YsWHTHoprAD97TKOV82
Guerra Was Re-elected and Had to Resign His Post - Twice
As a condition of his bond, Rey Guerra resigned his post before the election. Then, the voters elected him back as Sheriff, and he had to resign the post a second time. Yeah, this game of musical chairs really happened.
Sheriff Guerra wasn't busted all by himself -- he was first arrested as part of a big nationwide bust of Gulf Cartel members by the feds back last Fall. In fact, the feds describe him as a "minor participant" in the Cartel's operations.
What Did Starr County Sheriff Rey Guerra Do That Was So Wrong?
Seems there was a human smuggling group in the Starr County area led by a man who used to be a cop in Mexico, name of Jose Carlos Hinojosa. Guerra and Hinojosa met when they were both in law enforcement.
However, like many stories out of Mexico these days, Hinojosa traded his job with Mexican law authorities for employment with a national drug organization: this one, the infamous Zetas. The Zetas are a feared paramilitary group with close affiilations with the Gulf Cartel. (Hinojosa's already pled guilty to drug trafficking and money laundering conspiracy.)
Hinojosa would help Guerra get suspects back from Mexico who had escaped across the border, and in exchange, Guerra would give Hinojosa the names and contact information of informants targeted for raids in Starr County. Guerra didn't do this thinking that Hinojosa was still a cop -- Guerra did this knowing that Hinojosa was now a member of the Zetas, and had apparently known this as far back as January 2007.
Oh, and Guerra also got paid $2,000 - $3,000 for each scoop on informants he provided.
Now, he's pled guilty to one federal count of drug smuggling conspiracy, just one week before his trial.
As part of his plea deal with the U.S. Attorney's Office, Sheriff Rey Guerra has admitted to using his elected office as Sheriff of Starr County, Texas, to help drug dealers (read that the Gulf Cartel and the Zetas) as they trafficked in narcotics in Starr County and Miguel Alemán, Tamps, Mexico.
Right now, ex-Sheriff Guerra faces spending the rest of his life in prison. The federal sentencing hearing is set for July.
And, if you're thinking that putting a former Sheriff into a federal prison for the rest of his life is akin to a death sentence of sorts, you might well be right.
Sources:
The Monitor
http://www.themonitor.com/articles/sheriff-26040-guilty-starr.html
The Brownsville Herald
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/sheriff-97563-guilty-starr.html
The Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-jrJN7CWIGaTnumy_YsWHTHoprAD97TKOV82
Monday, May 18, 2009
Cop Watch: Galveston County Cops Use Taser and Man Dies
The news reports are still somewhat sketchy at this point, but on Sunday night a man was obviously under the influence of something -- drugs or alcohol -- and some cops in Galveston County tried to bust him.
It happened in La Marque. It wasn't that late -- just a bit after nine o'clock last night. Media reports are that someone called the cops, complaining about this guy acting loopy.
LaMarque Cops Taser the Guy and He Dies
When the police found him, the guy was rolling around in a ditch near the intersection of Main and Lake. According to news reports, when local cops tried to bust him he fought back, and some cop decided to use the Taser.
So, the loopy guy got Tasered and that's all we know. Except that apparently, things took a serious toll because the next thing we know at this point is that the man was taken to Mainland General Hospital -- where he died.
Investigation of the Policemen Involved in this Incident Already Begun
The four cops at the scene have been placed on desk duty until an investigation is completed. According to the media, none of them have any serious injuries, but there may be an admission that they were checked out at the hospital, as well, last night.
Remember the Wedding Last March? Galveston Cops Already Have a National Reputation for Excessive Force
Last March, we posted about the wedding where Houston Astros pitcher Brandon Backe got busted in a ruckus at a wedding reception where there's video of the Galveston cops using a stun gun on the father of the bride.
Remember the Police Chief last month who Tasered His Own Wife?
And, in April, we wrote about the Oakwood Police Chief who used a Taser on his own wife. Yep, his own wife.
Does anyone see a theme here? Maybe Texas legislators need to investigate a possible state-wide problem of Taser-happy cops?
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6429054.html
My Fox - Houston
http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/local/090518_la_marque_police_death
ABC13
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6818024
It happened in La Marque. It wasn't that late -- just a bit after nine o'clock last night. Media reports are that someone called the cops, complaining about this guy acting loopy.
LaMarque Cops Taser the Guy and He Dies
When the police found him, the guy was rolling around in a ditch near the intersection of Main and Lake. According to news reports, when local cops tried to bust him he fought back, and some cop decided to use the Taser.
So, the loopy guy got Tasered and that's all we know. Except that apparently, things took a serious toll because the next thing we know at this point is that the man was taken to Mainland General Hospital -- where he died.
Investigation of the Policemen Involved in this Incident Already Begun
The four cops at the scene have been placed on desk duty until an investigation is completed. According to the media, none of them have any serious injuries, but there may be an admission that they were checked out at the hospital, as well, last night.
Remember the Wedding Last March? Galveston Cops Already Have a National Reputation for Excessive Force
Last March, we posted about the wedding where Houston Astros pitcher Brandon Backe got busted in a ruckus at a wedding reception where there's video of the Galveston cops using a stun gun on the father of the bride.
Remember the Police Chief last month who Tasered His Own Wife?
And, in April, we wrote about the Oakwood Police Chief who used a Taser on his own wife. Yep, his own wife.
Does anyone see a theme here? Maybe Texas legislators need to investigate a possible state-wide problem of Taser-happy cops?
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6429054.html
My Fox - Houston
http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/local/090518_la_marque_police_death
ABC13
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6818024
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
DA Watch: Whistleblower San Marcos DA Lynn Peach Resigned Yesterday
Lynn Peach went through law school and started building a legal career in what she thought would be a life as a career prosecutor. Lynn Peach thought she was one of the good guys, pursuing justice.
And she is, just not in the way that she thought.
On Monday, Hays County Assistant District Attorney Lynn Peach resigned her position there in San Marcos, telling reporters that she had no choice due to the “...profound philosophical differences..." between the Hays County District Attorney's policies and what she thinks is right.
Peach is hanging up a shingle in San Marcos, and starting up her own private legal practice. And yes, she says, "I believe that I did the right thing.”
What Happened Here? Lynn Peach Revealed Some Sneaky Business With an Informant
Then Assistant District Attorney Peach discovered, and revealed in open testimony, that the original informant against Shawn Nathan Shipman (a 29-year-old local facing assorted narcotics charges) was a snitch (aka "confidential informant") who had been cooperating with the San Marcos cops to feather her own nest -- she had some legal troubles of her own, and was trying to help herself out with the scoop on Shipman. The snitch was successful: in exchange for her info, her case was dropped.
Was this told to the defense, or to the courtroom? No. And this is the deceit that Peach sought to rectify. The untrue story that was first told was that the informant was "a concerned citizen," and it was told by San Marcos Police Department Detective Laray Taylor and Hays County Assistant District Attorney Chris Johnson represented this false story to be true. Peach called it all fraud on the court.
The Cops Lied and the DA Told, and Now She's Quit
Lynn Peach took the stand and revealed the truth about the informant in this case. Shipman is getting a new trial. The District Judge in the case, Jack Robison, has recused himself (i.e., quit the case) and the Hays County District Attorney's office offered no objection to Shipman's request for a new trial.
So, Shawn Shipman got a new trial on May 4th -- and on May 11th, Lynn Peach got a new chapter in life.
Welcome to the other side of the docket, Sister Peach.
Source:
SanMarcosNewsStreamz.com
http://www.newstreamz.com/2009/05/12/peach-resigns-in-protest-from-das-office/
San Marcos Mercury
http://www.sanmarcosmercury.com/archives/8436
And she is, just not in the way that she thought.
On Monday, Hays County Assistant District Attorney Lynn Peach resigned her position there in San Marcos, telling reporters that she had no choice due to the “...profound philosophical differences..." between the Hays County District Attorney's policies and what she thinks is right.
Peach is hanging up a shingle in San Marcos, and starting up her own private legal practice. And yes, she says, "I believe that I did the right thing.”
What Happened Here? Lynn Peach Revealed Some Sneaky Business With an Informant
Then Assistant District Attorney Peach discovered, and revealed in open testimony, that the original informant against Shawn Nathan Shipman (a 29-year-old local facing assorted narcotics charges) was a snitch (aka "confidential informant") who had been cooperating with the San Marcos cops to feather her own nest -- she had some legal troubles of her own, and was trying to help herself out with the scoop on Shipman. The snitch was successful: in exchange for her info, her case was dropped.
Was this told to the defense, or to the courtroom? No. And this is the deceit that Peach sought to rectify. The untrue story that was first told was that the informant was "a concerned citizen," and it was told by San Marcos Police Department Detective Laray Taylor and Hays County Assistant District Attorney Chris Johnson represented this false story to be true. Peach called it all fraud on the court.
The Cops Lied and the DA Told, and Now She's Quit
Lynn Peach took the stand and revealed the truth about the informant in this case. Shipman is getting a new trial. The District Judge in the case, Jack Robison, has recused himself (i.e., quit the case) and the Hays County District Attorney's office offered no objection to Shipman's request for a new trial.
So, Shawn Shipman got a new trial on May 4th -- and on May 11th, Lynn Peach got a new chapter in life.
Welcome to the other side of the docket, Sister Peach.
Source:
SanMarcosNewsStreamz.com
http://www.newstreamz.com/2009/05/12/peach-resigns-in-protest-from-das-office/
San Marcos Mercury
http://www.sanmarcosmercury.com/archives/8436
Monday, May 11, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Federal Judge Samuel Kent Getting Sentenced Today
This blog first posted about Galveston's federal judge Samuel Kent back in October, when Judge Kent made history as the first federal judge -- EVER -- to be indicted for sex crimes. Tidbits from that first post:
Then, in January 2009, this blog updated this story, with news that new charges had been added to Judge Kent's indictment while Judge Kent was still setting on the bench, pending trial:
Now, there's more news. Today, Judge Kent will be sentenced in federal court, after entering into a plea agreement.
Seems that last winter, right as jury selection was beginning for his trial, Judge Kent agreed to a plea bargain and avoided a public trial which promised to contain some very scandalous evidence. (See the January post for details.)
At the time of the plea, Judge Kent admitted sexual contact with the two female complaintants occurred, and was against their will. He also informed the court that he intended to retire based upon a disability (at 59, if he resigns he gets no pension - he'd have to be 65 or older for that), and that he was under the care of both a psychologist and psychiatrist at the time of the plea, as well as being on medication for depression and anxiety.
So, it looks like the deal that was made boils down to this: admit to the guilt regarding the sexual contact, and keep your pension.
Let's see if the visiting Florida judge goes along with it.
And, let's see if we ever hear anything more on those obstruction of justice charges -- were they merely a prosecutorial tool used to force a plea in a case that would otherwise be one person's word against the others? Those details should come to light at some point.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6417925.html
Judge Kent has been indicted (formally charged) with three crimes: (1) two counts of abusive sexual contact and (2) one count of attempted aggravated sexual abuse. His trial was initially set for the first week of November, in a Houston federal courtroom -- now that Ike's done its damage, the trial has just been moved back to January 2009....
Judge Kent's former case manager has said that the judge groped her, and tried to force her into a sexual act. The Department of Justice investigated, and these formal charges are the result of that investigation....
His attorney, Dick DeGuerin, isn't denying that something happen between the judge and the employee; instead, DeGuerin has explained that what happened between them was consensual. “To charge Judge Kent of conduct of which he is absolutely innocent based on this kind of flimsy evidence is inexcusable and we will fight it to the bitter end,” DeGuerin said (quoting the Wall Street Journal).
Then, in January 2009, this blog updated this story, with news that new charges had been added to Judge Kent's indictment while Judge Kent was still setting on the bench, pending trial:
So, right now, over in the Houston federal courthouse, you've got District Judge Samuel Kent working away after being transferred to Houston from his longtime bench in Galveston after becoming this infamous, indicted judge. And, down the hall, you've got the very same District Judge Samuel Kent facing trial later this month for these various sex crimes....
And, if that weren't bizarre enough for you -- last Friday, Judge Kent got three new charges added to his indictment which brought in a second female court employee alleging that Judge Kent had performed acts that amount to aggravated sexual abuse and abusive sexual contact. Also added, an obstruction of justice charge.
It's reported that his attorney, Dick DeGuerin, says that these new charges aren't true but he can't say more than that, because there is a gag order in place....
By adding this new spin to the indictment, Judge Kent not only has to defend against what two women are saying he did, but he's got to face off against investigators and the like, who are going to tell a jury that Kent lied to them about things, thwarting their efforts.
As Martha [Stewart] can tell you, under an obstruction charge, you don't have to be guilty of the crime being investigated to be guilty of obstruction. And you still face a significant punishment: on obstruction alone, Judge Kent could face 20 years imprisonment - and that's before you begin to consider the ramifications to his legal career....
Charging obstruction is a scary thing -- regardless of how horrid the alleged conduct might be, having grand juries tack these charges onto indictments is getting to be pretty Big Brother-y for some: you've got the constitutional right not to incriminate yourself, but absent taking the 5th how much leeway does a defendant having these days in dealing with the legal authorities?
Creating criminal liability where there wasn't any beforehand is a danger to justice, and something we all need to be watching, as many scholars are warning against prosecutors' "creative interpretation" of the obstruction statutes.
Now, there's more news. Today, Judge Kent will be sentenced in federal court, after entering into a plea agreement.
Seems that last winter, right as jury selection was beginning for his trial, Judge Kent agreed to a plea bargain and avoided a public trial which promised to contain some very scandalous evidence. (See the January post for details.)
At the time of the plea, Judge Kent admitted sexual contact with the two female complaintants occurred, and was against their will. He also informed the court that he intended to retire based upon a disability (at 59, if he resigns he gets no pension - he'd have to be 65 or older for that), and that he was under the care of both a psychologist and psychiatrist at the time of the plea, as well as being on medication for depression and anxiety.
So, it looks like the deal that was made boils down to this: admit to the guilt regarding the sexual contact, and keep your pension.
Let's see if the visiting Florida judge goes along with it.
And, let's see if we ever hear anything more on those obstruction of justice charges -- were they merely a prosecutorial tool used to force a plea in a case that would otherwise be one person's word against the others? Those details should come to light at some point.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6417925.html
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Cop Watch: Head of DPS Suddenly Resigns After He's Accused of Sexual Harassment and Unprofessional Conduct
What was Col. Stanley E. Clark possibly thinking when he was blowing kisses to female employees, touching them inappropriately, and calling one veteran employee "his girl"? Sometimes, you just gotta shake your head and wonder.
Here's the story of how 60 year old Col. Clark made some really stupid choices.
The Texas Department of Public Safety is a big deal here in Texas. DPS issues all motor vehicle licenses for the State of Texas and it regulates all the motor vehicles in the State. Everyone residing and driving on Texas roads today (legally) has been okayed by DPS to do so.
DPS is the State's Law Enforcement Agency, Responsible for Curtailing Drug Trafficking and Organized Crime Across the State
DPS is also responsible for statewide law enforcement. It's the state cop agency.
The DPS Criminal Law Enforcement Division has a big job here in Texas, because it is the agency assigned the big job of dealing with drug trafficking and organized crime across the state. That's a very, very big deal these days.
DPS also has a huge crime lab, which helps out other law enforcement agencies across the state. (How well it does this is a different post, for a different day.)
DPS is home to the Texas Rangers
And, DPS is home to the Texas Highway Patrol as well as the internationally known Texas Rangers. You know, the modern-day versions of Lonesome Dove's Woodrow Call and Gus McCrae.
So, you get the idea. The Texas Department of Public Safety is one big, giganto deal to be assigned the job of overseeing. Big Kahuna time.
Once in a Lifetime Opportunity
And, when the Governor's Mansion burned down last fall, the head of DPS retired and an interim director got to step up to the plate. That guy was Col. Stanley Clark, 60 years old, and here he was: running the Top Cop Shop in Texas.
Wow.
Here was a guy who was a lifer -- he'd started as a highway patrolman 36 years ago, and risen through the ranks. A real American success story.
Now, less than a year after Clark got the Big New Job, a bunch of female employees have all filed statements against him, and characterizing Col. Clark has gone from a vision of John Wayne in The Comancheros to Jackie Gleason in Smokey and the Bandit.
Legislative Review of the Department of Public Safety
So, what happens now? Perhaps Col. Clark retires to his home in East Texas. Who knows who gets the Top Cop job next -- but it's already in the works that an Inspector General may be named, who would report any oversights within the agency to the Texas Legislature. And, there's talk of a major overhaul of the entire DPS organization.
With Justice Keller and now Col. Clark, what IS the state of Texas criminal law today?
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-dps_05tex.ART.State.Edition2.4a5a490.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6409776.html
Here's the story of how 60 year old Col. Clark made some really stupid choices.
The Texas Department of Public Safety is a big deal here in Texas. DPS issues all motor vehicle licenses for the State of Texas and it regulates all the motor vehicles in the State. Everyone residing and driving on Texas roads today (legally) has been okayed by DPS to do so.
DPS is the State's Law Enforcement Agency, Responsible for Curtailing Drug Trafficking and Organized Crime Across the State
DPS is also responsible for statewide law enforcement. It's the state cop agency.
The DPS Criminal Law Enforcement Division has a big job here in Texas, because it is the agency assigned the big job of dealing with drug trafficking and organized crime across the state. That's a very, very big deal these days.
DPS also has a huge crime lab, which helps out other law enforcement agencies across the state. (How well it does this is a different post, for a different day.)
DPS is home to the Texas Rangers
And, DPS is home to the Texas Highway Patrol as well as the internationally known Texas Rangers. You know, the modern-day versions of Lonesome Dove's Woodrow Call and Gus McCrae.
So, you get the idea. The Texas Department of Public Safety is one big, giganto deal to be assigned the job of overseeing. Big Kahuna time.
Once in a Lifetime Opportunity
And, when the Governor's Mansion burned down last fall, the head of DPS retired and an interim director got to step up to the plate. That guy was Col. Stanley Clark, 60 years old, and here he was: running the Top Cop Shop in Texas.
Wow.
Here was a guy who was a lifer -- he'd started as a highway patrolman 36 years ago, and risen through the ranks. A real American success story.
Now, less than a year after Clark got the Big New Job, a bunch of female employees have all filed statements against him, and characterizing Col. Clark has gone from a vision of John Wayne in The Comancheros to Jackie Gleason in Smokey and the Bandit.
Legislative Review of the Department of Public Safety
So, what happens now? Perhaps Col. Clark retires to his home in East Texas. Who knows who gets the Top Cop job next -- but it's already in the works that an Inspector General may be named, who would report any oversights within the agency to the Texas Legislature. And, there's talk of a major overhaul of the entire DPS organization.
With Justice Keller and now Col. Clark, what IS the state of Texas criminal law today?
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-dps_05tex.ART.State.Edition2.4a5a490.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6409776.html
Monday, May 04, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Justice Sharon Keller Amends Her Financial Report, It's Up $2.4 Million
Justice Sharon Keller has submitted her amended financial statements, and boy have things changed.
She has added over $2,400,000 in property and income from the last financial statement that she filed. And, as the presiding chief justice of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, she is required by law to reveal in writing all her assets.
Why didn't she just include all this stuff before now?
Her daddy didn't tell her.
That's right. Yes, this is the explanation that the Chief Justice gave the Texas Ethics Commission for this huge, glaring omission.
In her sworn statement, which was filed along with these amended financials, Justice Keller points the finger at her dad - seems he acts as business manager for his four kids, and he's placed properties in all their names. Guess this never, ever got talked about at family gatherings, or that daddy's daughter never thought to ask anything like "what are you using my name for?"
Lawyers never think of things like that.
Still no answer on what she thought she was signing periodically, and one would assume that with $2.4 million in assets floating around, that there were times when Daddy would need Daughter's signature on something.
What are these assets?
According to the financial statement, and the reporting of the Dallas Morning News, these newly revealed assets include:
1. two fast-food restaurants
2. a bank
3. a home on Garland Road
4. another home on Garland Road
5. a commercial tract in Euless, Texas (1.5 acres)
6. 22 Certificates of Deposit (CDs) in four different banks
7. $110,000 investment income.
Must've Been A Nice Surprise
Boy howdy. Wouldn't that be great -- to discover that you own a bank, a couple of restaurants, two houses on Garland Road, some land, some CDs, and you're gonna get over $100K each year in investment income?!! Wow.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-keller_02pro.ART.State.Edition2.4aa5bed.html
She has added over $2,400,000 in property and income from the last financial statement that she filed. And, as the presiding chief justice of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, she is required by law to reveal in writing all her assets.
Why didn't she just include all this stuff before now?
Her daddy didn't tell her.
That's right. Yes, this is the explanation that the Chief Justice gave the Texas Ethics Commission for this huge, glaring omission.
In her sworn statement, which was filed along with these amended financials, Justice Keller points the finger at her dad - seems he acts as business manager for his four kids, and he's placed properties in all their names. Guess this never, ever got talked about at family gatherings, or that daddy's daughter never thought to ask anything like "what are you using my name for?"
Lawyers never think of things like that.
Still no answer on what she thought she was signing periodically, and one would assume that with $2.4 million in assets floating around, that there were times when Daddy would need Daughter's signature on something.
What are these assets?
According to the financial statement, and the reporting of the Dallas Morning News, these newly revealed assets include:
1. two fast-food restaurants
2. a bank
3. a home on Garland Road
4. another home on Garland Road
5. a commercial tract in Euless, Texas (1.5 acres)
6. 22 Certificates of Deposit (CDs) in four different banks
7. $110,000 investment income.
Must've Been A Nice Surprise
Boy howdy. Wouldn't that be great -- to discover that you own a bank, a couple of restaurants, two houses on Garland Road, some land, some CDs, and you're gonna get over $100K each year in investment income?!! Wow.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-keller_02pro.ART.State.Edition2.4aa5bed.html
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
DA Watch: Houston DA Getting Ready to Try Really, Really Old Homicide Cases
There's lots of news today regarding the spreading of swine flu around the world, along with statewide coverage of Justice Sharon Keller's pending impeachment by the Texas Legislature and the death of longtime Tarrant District Attorney Tim Curry, who recently lost his battle with cancer.
So, it's interesting that this UPI story isn't getting more coverage.
Apparently, over in Harris County, there are cases dating back to 1970 that are open homicide matters, but they've never been tried.
That's right. Defendants have been arrested and told they're going to be tried for murder. And then the clock stops. They're in limbo. And, according to press reports, there are over 600 of them.
What about the Constitutional Guarantee of a Speedy Trial?
Well, of course, the Constitution does guarantee that defendants do have the right to a speedy trial. However, there are many defense reasons why that right isn't exercised.
Say you want your speedy trial, and you've got a really short time frame to gather your defense evidence -- all your witnesses, your experts, your lab results, ... you get the idea. In this day and age, sometimes asserting the right to a speedy trial isn't in the defendant's best interests when it comes to fully preparing a proper defense.
What Happens to these Defendants?
Well, Houston DA Pat Lycos has ordered her people to set up some kind of system to try and track these defendants down, so Harris County can have criminal trials for crimes that have occurred as long as 38 years ago.
Don't you remember what you were doing back in 1970? Let's see.
Yeah. No evidence problem here.
Sources:
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/04/26/Texas-county-behind-on-homicide-cases/UPI-55981240771675/
Wikipedia - 1970
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970
So, it's interesting that this UPI story isn't getting more coverage.
Apparently, over in Harris County, there are cases dating back to 1970 that are open homicide matters, but they've never been tried.
That's right. Defendants have been arrested and told they're going to be tried for murder. And then the clock stops. They're in limbo. And, according to press reports, there are over 600 of them.
What about the Constitutional Guarantee of a Speedy Trial?
Well, of course, the Constitution does guarantee that defendants do have the right to a speedy trial. However, there are many defense reasons why that right isn't exercised.
Say you want your speedy trial, and you've got a really short time frame to gather your defense evidence -- all your witnesses, your experts, your lab results, ... you get the idea. In this day and age, sometimes asserting the right to a speedy trial isn't in the defendant's best interests when it comes to fully preparing a proper defense.
What Happens to these Defendants?
Well, Houston DA Pat Lycos has ordered her people to set up some kind of system to try and track these defendants down, so Harris County can have criminal trials for crimes that have occurred as long as 38 years ago.
Don't you remember what you were doing back in 1970? Let's see.
- Simon & Garfunkel had the number one hit song on Billboard with "Bridge over Troubled Water."
- "Patton" won the Best Picture Oscar that year.
- The Beatles gave their last live performance that year, and announced they were breaking up.
- The first New York City marathon was run.
- The Vietnam War was still raging.
- The Chevy Vega and the Ford Pinto were introduced.
- Richard Nixon was President; Barack Obama was 9 years old.
Yeah. No evidence problem here.
Sources:
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/04/26/Texas-county-behind-on-homicide-cases/UPI-55981240771675/
Wikipedia - 1970
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970
Monday, April 27, 2009
Crime News: In the Real World, You Cannot Trust the Lab Results of CSI
You know you've watched more CSI episodes than you should.
There's CSI in Vegas, and CSI in Miami, and CSI in New York. And they're all intertwined with the police department (think Horatio drawing his gun in almost every episode) - and on the screen, it's all good. The bad guys get caught. Gil and Sara live happily ever after in the jungle. You finally think of Gary Sinise as someone other than Lt. Dan.
In Real Life, It's Not Like the TV Shows
But in real life, it's very dangerous to have the crime lab intertwined with the police department. In fact, it's causing real harm and innocent people are being hurt while the guilty go free.
Example of Errors at the Houston Crime Lab: Gary Richard's Case
Just last Friday, both prosecutors and defense counsel agreed that new lab tests confirmed that a Houston Police Department crime lab analyst intentionally lied at the trial of Gary Richard and did not report on evidence that was beneficial to the defense.
Gary Alvin Richard, now in his mid-50s, is serving a life sentence for the 1987 attack and rape of a Harris County nursing student - but his claims of innocence may now be respected, since this new evidence of a biased crime lab has come to light. Richard was convicted almost 100% on the blood-typing evidence from the Houston Police Department crime lab.
Richard will be out on bond
This week, there will be an agreed motion presented to the judge in Richard's case, asking that he be released on bond while everyone tries to get to the truth in this case.
Richard's Case is not a Fluke
Even lab techs are human, you may think. There will be human error in a crime lab. And, that's true. The potential for human error must always be considered anytime humans are involved.
But there's more than an innocent mistake here. The Richard case was an intentional misleading of the jury. That's not disputed.
And, this isn't the only example of the Houston crime lab results being scewed to support the prosecution's case. The Houston Crime Lab is notoriously biased.
Reputation of the Houston Crime Lab is That the Lab is Biased
Assuming that Gary Richard is cleared, he will be the 4th Houston defendant in the past two years cleared of charges after being convicted because of the Houston crime lab's erroneous blood typing evidence.
Back in the Fall of 2007, DNA evidence cleared Ron Taylor of a rape charge (the Houston lab's tests of bodily fluids in that case were shown to be wrong). Taylor's case first revealed the crack in the Houston Crime Lab's system, and as of today's date, 160 cases (in addition to Richard's) are being reviewed by an independent investigator.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6392132.html
USA Today
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/04/real-life-csi-rife-with-conflicts-of-interest.html
Houston Observer
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2009/04/dna_crime_lab_raby.php
There's CSI in Vegas, and CSI in Miami, and CSI in New York. And they're all intertwined with the police department (think Horatio drawing his gun in almost every episode) - and on the screen, it's all good. The bad guys get caught. Gil and Sara live happily ever after in the jungle. You finally think of Gary Sinise as someone other than Lt. Dan.
In Real Life, It's Not Like the TV Shows
But in real life, it's very dangerous to have the crime lab intertwined with the police department. In fact, it's causing real harm and innocent people are being hurt while the guilty go free.
Example of Errors at the Houston Crime Lab: Gary Richard's Case
Just last Friday, both prosecutors and defense counsel agreed that new lab tests confirmed that a Houston Police Department crime lab analyst intentionally lied at the trial of Gary Richard and did not report on evidence that was beneficial to the defense.
Gary Alvin Richard, now in his mid-50s, is serving a life sentence for the 1987 attack and rape of a Harris County nursing student - but his claims of innocence may now be respected, since this new evidence of a biased crime lab has come to light. Richard was convicted almost 100% on the blood-typing evidence from the Houston Police Department crime lab.
Richard will be out on bond
This week, there will be an agreed motion presented to the judge in Richard's case, asking that he be released on bond while everyone tries to get to the truth in this case.
Richard's Case is not a Fluke
Even lab techs are human, you may think. There will be human error in a crime lab. And, that's true. The potential for human error must always be considered anytime humans are involved.
But there's more than an innocent mistake here. The Richard case was an intentional misleading of the jury. That's not disputed.
And, this isn't the only example of the Houston crime lab results being scewed to support the prosecution's case. The Houston Crime Lab is notoriously biased.
Reputation of the Houston Crime Lab is That the Lab is Biased
Assuming that Gary Richard is cleared, he will be the 4th Houston defendant in the past two years cleared of charges after being convicted because of the Houston crime lab's erroneous blood typing evidence.
Back in the Fall of 2007, DNA evidence cleared Ron Taylor of a rape charge (the Houston lab's tests of bodily fluids in that case were shown to be wrong). Taylor's case first revealed the crack in the Houston Crime Lab's system, and as of today's date, 160 cases (in addition to Richard's) are being reviewed by an independent investigator.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6392132.html
USA Today
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/04/real-life-csi-rife-with-conflicts-of-interest.html
Houston Observer
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2009/04/dna_crime_lab_raby.php
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Legal Hotshots From Across the Country Want Keller Removed and Her Attorney's Response Is Weak
Yesterday, Chip Babcock officially responded to the 24 legal ethicists from across the country -- who got together earlier this month and sent their written "declaration" to the Texas Commission of Judicial Conduct, declaring that in their august opinion, Chief Justice Sharon Keller should be removed from her position on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
What did Chip Babcock say?
He was surprised. He thought they would have looked at both sides of the story, but he thinks they've only looked at the allegations and the media reports on Justice Keller. He thinks they didn't look at Justice Keller's response. And, finally, he thinks they're doing it for the publicity.
Right. Mike Tigar and Company are such media hounds.
First, here's what the Declaration says.
1. They aren't finders of fact, but they believe that her omissions from full financial disclosure are one basis for her removal.
These omissions aren't a contested issue here. Keller's attorney, Ed Shack, isn't denying they exist. Instead, Shack has come forward to argue that Justice Keller didn't know her father had placed real estate holdings in her name and the omissions are really just a "clerical error."
2. They aren't finders of fact, but they beleive that Justice Keller's 'lack of impartiality and failure to recuse herself" in the Michael Richard case is another basis for her removal. (Read about the Richard case in our earlier post.)
Who are these legal ethicists?
They are 24 legal scholars from across the country, well-respected among the legal community. Many are law professors. They include Mike Tigar from Duke University (Tigar used to be at UT-Law) and Lawrence Fox, Harvard Law School Lecturer and Former Chair of the ABA Committee of Ethics and Professional Responsibility. (For the full listing of signatories with their credentials, check out the pdf of the Declaration, shown below.)
What are the real estate holdings that were omitted?
According to the Dallas Morning News (link shown below), they included the following holdings:
1. Seven (7) residential and commercial properties totalling in value (according to the county appraisal district records) at approximately $1.9 million. They include 2 houses that together add up to over $1,000,000 in the Keller Family Compound located across from the Dallas Arboretum. Justice Keller is listed as sole owner of these two homes under the name of "Sharon Batjer," her married name (she divorced Batjer over twenty years ago, in 1982).
2. Two (2) holding that total in value to approximately $823,000. One is a vacant commercial lot in Euless. The other is a commercial property that adjoins Keller's Drive-In on East Northwest Highway, a landmark in the hamburger restaurant chain which has been operated since 1965 by the judge's father, Jack Keller.
3. Three (3) pieces of real estate with a total value estimated at $114,000, which are held in the name of Justice Keller's 27-year-old son, that's right -- 27 -- who is going to law school right now. Justice Keller is claiming this adult son as her dependent.
That's some clerical error.
Sources:
The Declaration
http://standdown.typepad.com/KELLER-CumminsFiling-TCJC.pdf
Dallas Morning News
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/04/ethicists-weigh-in-on-keller-c.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/033009dnprokellerasets.3df3149.html
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/25/0325keller.html?cxntlid=inform_sr
What did Chip Babcock say?
He was surprised. He thought they would have looked at both sides of the story, but he thinks they've only looked at the allegations and the media reports on Justice Keller. He thinks they didn't look at Justice Keller's response. And, finally, he thinks they're doing it for the publicity.
Right. Mike Tigar and Company are such media hounds.
First, here's what the Declaration says.
1. They aren't finders of fact, but they believe that her omissions from full financial disclosure are one basis for her removal.
These omissions aren't a contested issue here. Keller's attorney, Ed Shack, isn't denying they exist. Instead, Shack has come forward to argue that Justice Keller didn't know her father had placed real estate holdings in her name and the omissions are really just a "clerical error."
2. They aren't finders of fact, but they beleive that Justice Keller's 'lack of impartiality and failure to recuse herself" in the Michael Richard case is another basis for her removal. (Read about the Richard case in our earlier post.)
Who are these legal ethicists?
They are 24 legal scholars from across the country, well-respected among the legal community. Many are law professors. They include Mike Tigar from Duke University (Tigar used to be at UT-Law) and Lawrence Fox, Harvard Law School Lecturer and Former Chair of the ABA Committee of Ethics and Professional Responsibility. (For the full listing of signatories with their credentials, check out the pdf of the Declaration, shown below.)
What are the real estate holdings that were omitted?
According to the Dallas Morning News (link shown below), they included the following holdings:
1. Seven (7) residential and commercial properties totalling in value (according to the county appraisal district records) at approximately $1.9 million. They include 2 houses that together add up to over $1,000,000 in the Keller Family Compound located across from the Dallas Arboretum. Justice Keller is listed as sole owner of these two homes under the name of "Sharon Batjer," her married name (she divorced Batjer over twenty years ago, in 1982).
2. Two (2) holding that total in value to approximately $823,000. One is a vacant commercial lot in Euless. The other is a commercial property that adjoins Keller's Drive-In on East Northwest Highway, a landmark in the hamburger restaurant chain which has been operated since 1965 by the judge's father, Jack Keller.
3. Three (3) pieces of real estate with a total value estimated at $114,000, which are held in the name of Justice Keller's 27-year-old son, that's right -- 27 -- who is going to law school right now. Justice Keller is claiming this adult son as her dependent.
That's some clerical error.
Sources:
The Declaration
http://standdown.typepad.com/KELLER-CumminsFiling-TCJC.pdf
Dallas Morning News
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/04/ethicists-weigh-in-on-keller-c.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/033009dnprokellerasets.3df3149.html
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/25/0325keller.html?cxntlid=inform_sr
Monday, April 20, 2009
DA Watch: "Dallas DNA" starring new reality TV star DA Craig Watkins debuts April 26
The Discovery Channel will offer you another reality-TV option later this month, just in case you don't have enough reality-TV options to choose from already: on April 26, "Dallas DNA" makes its first appearance, telling the story of Johnnie Lindsay (see our post on 09/26/08).
Investigation Discovery, a part of the Discovery Channel, is focusing upon the efforts of the Innocence Project in Dallas County because our local county has had more exonerations than any other county in the country. Surprise.
The show will follow the efforts of those seeking to use DNA testing to prove the innocence of men and women wrongfully convicted. Like Johnnie Lindsay.
It is not, however, a documentary. It is an entertainment show, and makes no efforts to claim otherwise.
"Dallas DNA" stars Dallas DA Craig Watkins
DA Craig Watkins will appear in the show. It's a given, since he's been involved in the exoneration of ten men in the past two years. Watkins says the show is a good thing, telling the media it will help to "make justice better by showing the good, the bad, and the ugly."
Many are concerned about the ethics of this reality-TV show
Not everyone is happy about this new summer series. Some pretty big players have taken a stand against it.
Rob Warren, the executive director of the Center for Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University has been quoted in USA Today as having misgivings about "Dallas DNA," saying he finds the show "troubling" and he is quoted by Entertainment Weekly as saying that he's concerned the show will "exploit the suffering of victims - including the wrongfully convicted - in the name of entertainment. "
Jeff Blackburn, the chief lawyer for the Innocence Project of Texas, has just come right out and said that this television show is a blatant vehicle to boost Craig Watkins' political career. Blackburn has also reported that the Innocence Project was contacted about doing a show focusing upon its efforts, but they couldn't reach an agreement because they were going to have to "stage things" and the Innocence Project couldn't agree to that.
What does Watkins say in response? According to USA Today, his response is that his critics are unhappy because they couldn't make their own media deal. According to Watkins, it's all sour grapes.
Sour grapes? Really?
Reality television isn't real, we all know that it's staged and manufactured for entertainment purposes.
Many also recognize that reality television is more profitable than other forms of entertainment, because it avoids the costs of employing lots of creative folk -- like writers for scripts -- that more traditional shows require. In fact, reality-TV can thank rising writers' salary demands as well as things like the recent writers' strike for its upsurge in popularity today.
So, when revered organizations say no to reality television because they don't want to be ... well ... phony with things being staged by Hollywood money, while others think this is just fine to do.... Well, doesn't sound like sour grapes to some.
Sounds like it's something else entirely, doesn't it? And, people can get hurt here.
Let's Hope Nothing Bad Happens Here
Let's hope that doesn't happen. Let's hope no privilege is violated, no due process is harmed, no exploitation of innocent people happens here, in all this Hollywood production zeal. Let's hope.
Because the only one apparently double-checking to insure that everything's going along according to the Law is DA Watkins. He's supposed to be insuring that privilege is protected, etc. Not a defense attorney, nope. The lead prosecutor.
Sure, there's nothing but sour grapes in the ethical concerns voiced by people like Blackburn. Right.
Sources:
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/2009-04-12-reality-dna_N.htm
Entertainment Weekly
http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/04/dna-exoneration.html
Investigation Discovery - Dallas DNA
http://investigation.discovery.com/tv/dallas-dna/dallas-dna.html
Wikipedia - Reality Television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television
Investigation Discovery, a part of the Discovery Channel, is focusing upon the efforts of the Innocence Project in Dallas County because our local county has had more exonerations than any other county in the country. Surprise.
The show will follow the efforts of those seeking to use DNA testing to prove the innocence of men and women wrongfully convicted. Like Johnnie Lindsay.
It is not, however, a documentary. It is an entertainment show, and makes no efforts to claim otherwise.
"Dallas DNA" stars Dallas DA Craig Watkins
DA Craig Watkins will appear in the show. It's a given, since he's been involved in the exoneration of ten men in the past two years. Watkins says the show is a good thing, telling the media it will help to "make justice better by showing the good, the bad, and the ugly."
Many are concerned about the ethics of this reality-TV show
Not everyone is happy about this new summer series. Some pretty big players have taken a stand against it.
Rob Warren, the executive director of the Center for Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University has been quoted in USA Today as having misgivings about "Dallas DNA," saying he finds the show "troubling" and he is quoted by Entertainment Weekly as saying that he's concerned the show will "exploit the suffering of victims - including the wrongfully convicted - in the name of entertainment. "
Jeff Blackburn, the chief lawyer for the Innocence Project of Texas, has just come right out and said that this television show is a blatant vehicle to boost Craig Watkins' political career. Blackburn has also reported that the Innocence Project was contacted about doing a show focusing upon its efforts, but they couldn't reach an agreement because they were going to have to "stage things" and the Innocence Project couldn't agree to that.
What does Watkins say in response? According to USA Today, his response is that his critics are unhappy because they couldn't make their own media deal. According to Watkins, it's all sour grapes.
Sour grapes? Really?
Reality television isn't real, we all know that it's staged and manufactured for entertainment purposes.
Many also recognize that reality television is more profitable than other forms of entertainment, because it avoids the costs of employing lots of creative folk -- like writers for scripts -- that more traditional shows require. In fact, reality-TV can thank rising writers' salary demands as well as things like the recent writers' strike for its upsurge in popularity today.
So, when revered organizations say no to reality television because they don't want to be ... well ... phony with things being staged by Hollywood money, while others think this is just fine to do.... Well, doesn't sound like sour grapes to some.
Sounds like it's something else entirely, doesn't it? And, people can get hurt here.
Let's Hope Nothing Bad Happens Here
Let's hope that doesn't happen. Let's hope no privilege is violated, no due process is harmed, no exploitation of innocent people happens here, in all this Hollywood production zeal. Let's hope.
Because the only one apparently double-checking to insure that everything's going along according to the Law is DA Watkins. He's supposed to be insuring that privilege is protected, etc. Not a defense attorney, nope. The lead prosecutor.
Sure, there's nothing but sour grapes in the ethical concerns voiced by people like Blackburn. Right.
Sources:
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/2009-04-12-reality-dna_N.htm
Entertainment Weekly
http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/04/dna-exoneration.html
Investigation Discovery - Dallas DNA
http://investigation.discovery.com/tv/dallas-dna/dallas-dna.html
Wikipedia - Reality Television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Cop Watch: Nightmare as Innocent Woman Discovers She's Named on Registered Sex Offender List
Stigma. According to Webster's Dictionary, it's "...[a]ny mark of infamy or disgrace; sign of moral blemish; stain or reproach caused by dishonorable conduct; reproachful characterization."
Right now, no one knows the meaning of being stigmatized better than Rachel Marquez, a Dallas single mother of two, 20 years old, working on her college degree.
What happened to Rachel Marquez?
Rachel Marquez was listed as a registered sex offender in the Texas Department of Public Safety's database. You know the one, the one that anyone with a computer and Internet access can go review anytime they want. The one that employers routinely search, along with all sorts of nosy nellies.
And apartment managers. It was only when Rachel Marquez was denied a lease for a new apartment that she discovered that her name was on the Registered Sex Offender list.
Imagine How You'd Feel. What A Nightmare.
Needless to say, Rachel Marquez is NOT a sex offender, and she has no idea what harm may have been done to her because she has been stigmatized in this way.
Well, she does know she lost out on an apartment -- and had all those apartment people thinking she did bad things to kids. And, she believes that she may have lost out on a job.
How Did This Happen?
The first clue came from the list itself. A long ago juvenile arrest for trespassing, which happened when Rachel was 13 and living in Collin County, had to have been involved because the photo taken for that file made its way into the DPS system as part of her sex offender listing.
At first, no one knew how that old Collin County juvie record was connected to the Sex Offender Registry. DPS was "investigating." The Collin County officials pointed fingers at DPS; DPS pointed fingers right back at Collin County.
Last week, DPS issued a public apology to Rachel Marquez and explained that a data entry clerk checked the wrong box and voila! Rachel was labelled a sex offender.
All Because A DPS Data Entry Clerk Checked the Wrong Box on A Form
No one is sure how long Rachel's name was on the list - DPS mentioned five years, and Rachel is thinking it may be as long as seven years.
Meanwhile, everyone is so upset about the sex offender foul up that no one has begun to discuss how a juvie record has made its way into public exposure. Juvie records aren't supposed to be for public consumption, either.
Kids are protected, theoretically, in ways that adults are not, regarding record revelations. We shouldn't know about Rachel's trespassing charge when she was 13.
The Real Damage to Rachel Marquez Is Still Unknown
Rachel Marquez has been labelled as a sex offender for who knows how long, and been harmed not only in the practicalities of finding an apartment and getting a job, but also in all that gossip that you know has been happening behind her back.
And now, in order to correct that, we all get to know that back when she was a young teenager, she did some trespassing -- something we don't need to know about, and should have remained private.
Sure, there's more of a stigma to be listed on the DPS Sex Offender list than to be revealed as having a juvie record, but there's somewhat of a public stigma attached to both.
Rachel Marquez has a right to be outraged. We should all be angry about this.
And, maybe we should all check the DPS list, too. Make sure OUR names aren't listed on there.
Sources:
NBC-DFW.NEWS
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/You-must-be-mistaken.html
NBC-DFW.NEWS
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Oops-DPS-Apologizes-for-Mistake-Listing-Woman-as-Sex-Offender.html
Right now, no one knows the meaning of being stigmatized better than Rachel Marquez, a Dallas single mother of two, 20 years old, working on her college degree.
What happened to Rachel Marquez?
Rachel Marquez was listed as a registered sex offender in the Texas Department of Public Safety's database. You know the one, the one that anyone with a computer and Internet access can go review anytime they want. The one that employers routinely search, along with all sorts of nosy nellies.
And apartment managers. It was only when Rachel Marquez was denied a lease for a new apartment that she discovered that her name was on the Registered Sex Offender list.
Imagine How You'd Feel. What A Nightmare.
Needless to say, Rachel Marquez is NOT a sex offender, and she has no idea what harm may have been done to her because she has been stigmatized in this way.
Well, she does know she lost out on an apartment -- and had all those apartment people thinking she did bad things to kids. And, she believes that she may have lost out on a job.
How Did This Happen?
The first clue came from the list itself. A long ago juvenile arrest for trespassing, which happened when Rachel was 13 and living in Collin County, had to have been involved because the photo taken for that file made its way into the DPS system as part of her sex offender listing.
At first, no one knew how that old Collin County juvie record was connected to the Sex Offender Registry. DPS was "investigating." The Collin County officials pointed fingers at DPS; DPS pointed fingers right back at Collin County.
Last week, DPS issued a public apology to Rachel Marquez and explained that a data entry clerk checked the wrong box and voila! Rachel was labelled a sex offender.
All Because A DPS Data Entry Clerk Checked the Wrong Box on A Form
No one is sure how long Rachel's name was on the list - DPS mentioned five years, and Rachel is thinking it may be as long as seven years.
Meanwhile, everyone is so upset about the sex offender foul up that no one has begun to discuss how a juvie record has made its way into public exposure. Juvie records aren't supposed to be for public consumption, either.
Kids are protected, theoretically, in ways that adults are not, regarding record revelations. We shouldn't know about Rachel's trespassing charge when she was 13.
The Real Damage to Rachel Marquez Is Still Unknown
Rachel Marquez has been labelled as a sex offender for who knows how long, and been harmed not only in the practicalities of finding an apartment and getting a job, but also in all that gossip that you know has been happening behind her back.
And now, in order to correct that, we all get to know that back when she was a young teenager, she did some trespassing -- something we don't need to know about, and should have remained private.
Sure, there's more of a stigma to be listed on the DPS Sex Offender list than to be revealed as having a juvie record, but there's somewhat of a public stigma attached to both.
Rachel Marquez has a right to be outraged. We should all be angry about this.
And, maybe we should all check the DPS list, too. Make sure OUR names aren't listed on there.
Sources:
NBC-DFW.NEWS
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/You-must-be-mistaken.html
NBC-DFW.NEWS
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Oops-DPS-Apologizes-for-Mistake-Listing-Woman-as-Sex-Offender.html
Monday, April 13, 2009
Corrupt Cops: Proposed Law sets the Texas Rangers upon Corrupt Cops Statewide
Dallas State Senator John Carona has been a busy guy -- he's drafted a bill that is about to go before the entire Texas Senate which, if passed into law, will create a special division of the elite Texas Rangers.
What will this special division do? Their entire mandate will be to track down and lasso corrupt cops in Texas.
Yep, the famous Texas Rangers will soon have a squad, if you will, dedidated to ferreting out evildoers in local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. Federal and state. Anywhere in Texas.
It's unclear how many Rangers will be assigned to this division, but we're sure that the "one riot, one Ranger" reputation still holds true.
What brought this on?
Apparently, the amount of influence that drug cartels have been having on law enforcement across the State of Texas has become evident all the way from the border up to Dallas, where Senator Carona wrote his proposed law.
Not Everyone's Happy
Surprise, surprise. There are some elected officials that criticize this proposed law because, they say, we've already got the FBI investigating things. And, anyone reading this blog with any regularity knows that's true: the FBI has been revealling all sorts of bad acts across this State.
However, proponents point to the strength of the drug cartels as efficient organizations whose operation cross several borders - and that these cartels are known to approach and turn law enforcement officials to their side, as standard operating procedure. Proponents argue that having the Rangers in addition to the FBI can't hurt. It's a big job, and it's growing.
Status of the Bill
The senator's proposal should reach the Senate floor for a vote next week. If the bill becomes law, then the earliest that we'll have Rangers with their own Corrupt Cop Division is 2010.
Background of the Texas Rangers
What's the big deal about the Texas Rangers, anyway? Well, first, they've been around forever. The organization was begun in 1823 by Stephen F. Austin -- "the father of Texas" -- just two years after he brought around 600 settlers into the Texas area, as part of a contract that Austin had signed with Spain. Seems Stephen F. Austin thought that the settlers needed some protection, and since there was no Spainish army to protect them, Austin created the Rangers.
Since then, in various incarnations, the Texas Rangers have fought against horse thieves, fence cutters, robbers, raiders, and other assorted bad folk. A concise history can be found at the Texas Department of Public Safety site (shown below) and a romantic tale of the Texas Ranger can be found in Larry McMurtry's famous novel (and later, TV mini-series), Lonesome Dove.
Surely There's Enough Work to Go Around ....
As for those objecting to the proposed bill, you gotta wonder. Seems like there's more than enough corruption in Texas law enforcement these days to keep both the FBI and the Rangers busy....
Sources:
Brownsville Herald
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/create_96865___article.html/law_enforcement.html
Texas Department of Public Safety
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/texas_rangers/
What will this special division do? Their entire mandate will be to track down and lasso corrupt cops in Texas.
Yep, the famous Texas Rangers will soon have a squad, if you will, dedidated to ferreting out evildoers in local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. Federal and state. Anywhere in Texas.
It's unclear how many Rangers will be assigned to this division, but we're sure that the "one riot, one Ranger" reputation still holds true.
What brought this on?
Apparently, the amount of influence that drug cartels have been having on law enforcement across the State of Texas has become evident all the way from the border up to Dallas, where Senator Carona wrote his proposed law.
Not Everyone's Happy
Surprise, surprise. There are some elected officials that criticize this proposed law because, they say, we've already got the FBI investigating things. And, anyone reading this blog with any regularity knows that's true: the FBI has been revealling all sorts of bad acts across this State.
However, proponents point to the strength of the drug cartels as efficient organizations whose operation cross several borders - and that these cartels are known to approach and turn law enforcement officials to their side, as standard operating procedure. Proponents argue that having the Rangers in addition to the FBI can't hurt. It's a big job, and it's growing.
Status of the Bill
The senator's proposal should reach the Senate floor for a vote next week. If the bill becomes law, then the earliest that we'll have Rangers with their own Corrupt Cop Division is 2010.
Background of the Texas Rangers
What's the big deal about the Texas Rangers, anyway? Well, first, they've been around forever. The organization was begun in 1823 by Stephen F. Austin -- "the father of Texas" -- just two years after he brought around 600 settlers into the Texas area, as part of a contract that Austin had signed with Spain. Seems Stephen F. Austin thought that the settlers needed some protection, and since there was no Spainish army to protect them, Austin created the Rangers.
Since then, in various incarnations, the Texas Rangers have fought against horse thieves, fence cutters, robbers, raiders, and other assorted bad folk. A concise history can be found at the Texas Department of Public Safety site (shown below) and a romantic tale of the Texas Ranger can be found in Larry McMurtry's famous novel (and later, TV mini-series), Lonesome Dove.
Surely There's Enough Work to Go Around ....
As for those objecting to the proposed bill, you gotta wonder. Seems like there's more than enough corruption in Texas law enforcement these days to keep both the FBI and the Rangers busy....
Sources:
Brownsville Herald
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/create_96865___article.html/law_enforcement.html
Texas Department of Public Safety
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/director_staff/texas_rangers/
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Cop Watch: Texas Police Chief Tasers His Own Wife
About 100 miles south of Dallas is the little Texas town of Oakwood, and as of Monday night they're looking for a new top cop.
Seems their old police chief was arrested and fired on Monday after he was charged with aggravated assault and jailed over in Leon County, Texas. What did the police chief do?
Apparently, Chief Oly Ivy, 31 years old, used a Taser gun on his wife. That's right. His wife.
He was arrested, and jailed, and right now he's out on $100,000 bond and looking for a new job (and maybe a new wife).
What's a Taser gun and what does it do?
Taser is the brand name for a device that shoots an electric shock into the body of its human target through a small, thin wire that is shot from the "gun" into the target's body. The electrical current sends 50,000 volts of electricity into the target, or victim, and they become momentarily incapacitated because the electric shock disrupts the superficial muscle function.
Many in law enforcement have welcomed Tasers as a safer alternative to using a gun, particularly when they are trying to control individuals incarcerated in jails or prisons. However, those same officials are also questioning the use of the electroshock guns because of rising concern that there has not been enough scientific study on their use on the human body and what the exact risk of human death may be with their use.
Some Cops Consider Tasers to be Cruel and Unusual Punishment
What is known with certainty is not only do Tasers work -- the target is instantly stopped in their tracks by the electric shock -- but they are very, very painful. Some police officials have described the intensity of the pain as so severe that it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment (which we all know is unconstitutional).
In most jurisdictions, before a police officer is allowed to use a Taser, he is required to be targeted with one under the theory that he will be less likely to abuse the weapon once he understands how devestating the shock can be.
One wonders if Chief Ivy was ever Tasered before he was issued one of the electroshock guns by the county. If not, perhaps his wife would volunteer for the job.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6364297.html
Associated Press
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Police-Chief-Charged-with-Zapping-Wife.html
Taser.Com
http://www.taser.com/pages/default.aspx
PoliceOne.Com
http://www.policeone.com/police-products/less-lethal/articles/89933-Deaths-Spur-TASER-Debate-Police-Embrace-Stun-Guns-but-a-Series-of-Fatalities-Brings-Calls-for-Halt-to-Their-Use/
Seems their old police chief was arrested and fired on Monday after he was charged with aggravated assault and jailed over in Leon County, Texas. What did the police chief do?
Apparently, Chief Oly Ivy, 31 years old, used a Taser gun on his wife. That's right. His wife.
He was arrested, and jailed, and right now he's out on $100,000 bond and looking for a new job (and maybe a new wife).
What's a Taser gun and what does it do?
Taser is the brand name for a device that shoots an electric shock into the body of its human target through a small, thin wire that is shot from the "gun" into the target's body. The electrical current sends 50,000 volts of electricity into the target, or victim, and they become momentarily incapacitated because the electric shock disrupts the superficial muscle function.
Many in law enforcement have welcomed Tasers as a safer alternative to using a gun, particularly when they are trying to control individuals incarcerated in jails or prisons. However, those same officials are also questioning the use of the electroshock guns because of rising concern that there has not been enough scientific study on their use on the human body and what the exact risk of human death may be with their use.
Some Cops Consider Tasers to be Cruel and Unusual Punishment
What is known with certainty is not only do Tasers work -- the target is instantly stopped in their tracks by the electric shock -- but they are very, very painful. Some police officials have described the intensity of the pain as so severe that it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment (which we all know is unconstitutional).
In most jurisdictions, before a police officer is allowed to use a Taser, he is required to be targeted with one under the theory that he will be less likely to abuse the weapon once he understands how devestating the shock can be.
One wonders if Chief Ivy was ever Tasered before he was issued one of the electroshock guns by the county. If not, perhaps his wife would volunteer for the job.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6364297.html
Associated Press
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Police-Chief-Charged-with-Zapping-Wife.html
Taser.Com
http://www.taser.com/pages/default.aspx
PoliceOne.Com
http://www.policeone.com/police-products/less-lethal/articles/89933-Deaths-Spur-TASER-Debate-Police-Embrace-Stun-Guns-but-a-Series-of-Fatalities-Brings-Calls-for-Halt-to-Their-Use/
Monday, April 06, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Another Texas Judge Arrested by the FBI
You read these stories, and you just know you're seeing a future Law & Order episode ....
Last Thursday, after an investigation with an undercover FBI agent posing as a defendant pending trial, the FBI arrested El Paso state district judge Manuel J. Barraza, 53, on four counts of federal criminal activity that is being described as taking bribes and soliciting sex from defendants appearing before him.
Officially, the grand jury indictment includes three charges of "wire fraud and deprivation of honest services" and a fourth charge of lying to a federal agent. Judge Barraza has been released from custody after posting $10,000 bail.
El Paso District Attorney is Reviewing Every Case that Went Before Barraza
Meanwhile, the El Paso district attorney is reviewing every case that has gone before Judge Barraza and it's expected that some of these cases will be tossed out as a result of the prosecutor's investigation. Even though the judge has only been on the bench a short while, that review is going to encompass over 100 cases.
Apparently, it didn't take Barraza long ....
Barraza just got elected judge last November. And,according to investigators, Barraza started these solicitations for money and sex long before he took the bench in January. In fact, Barraza purportedly starting inviting defendants to pay him money and sex for his influence as a judge shortly after he won the election on November 2nd.
Shocking Blow to a Once-Promising Career
Barraza, now a grandfather of four and father of two, built a legal career as a criminal defense attorney who represented complex and notorious criminal defendants, including serial killer Richard Ramirez (known as "the Night Stalker" in the media) as his local counsel.
However, maybe there was a hint of things to come: the El Paso Times is reporting that Barraza was charged with attempting to bribe a probation officer back in 1983, but the charges were dismissed for lack of evidence.
What Happens to Manuel Barraza?
First, he's going to have to face those federal charges. Then, maybe Barraza can go back to practicing law. But his short stint as a member of the judiciary (did he even reach 90 days on the bench?) is the end of Manuel Barraza, Judge.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6359175.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-judgearrested_03tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a96528.html
El Paso Times
http://www.elpasotimes.com/politics/ci_12060597
Last Thursday, after an investigation with an undercover FBI agent posing as a defendant pending trial, the FBI arrested El Paso state district judge Manuel J. Barraza, 53, on four counts of federal criminal activity that is being described as taking bribes and soliciting sex from defendants appearing before him.
Officially, the grand jury indictment includes three charges of "wire fraud and deprivation of honest services" and a fourth charge of lying to a federal agent. Judge Barraza has been released from custody after posting $10,000 bail.
El Paso District Attorney is Reviewing Every Case that Went Before Barraza
Meanwhile, the El Paso district attorney is reviewing every case that has gone before Judge Barraza and it's expected that some of these cases will be tossed out as a result of the prosecutor's investigation. Even though the judge has only been on the bench a short while, that review is going to encompass over 100 cases.
Apparently, it didn't take Barraza long ....
Barraza just got elected judge last November. And,according to investigators, Barraza started these solicitations for money and sex long before he took the bench in January. In fact, Barraza purportedly starting inviting defendants to pay him money and sex for his influence as a judge shortly after he won the election on November 2nd.
Shocking Blow to a Once-Promising Career
Barraza, now a grandfather of four and father of two, built a legal career as a criminal defense attorney who represented complex and notorious criminal defendants, including serial killer Richard Ramirez (known as "the Night Stalker" in the media) as his local counsel.
However, maybe there was a hint of things to come: the El Paso Times is reporting that Barraza was charged with attempting to bribe a probation officer back in 1983, but the charges were dismissed for lack of evidence.
What Happens to Manuel Barraza?
First, he's going to have to face those federal charges. Then, maybe Barraza can go back to practicing law. But his short stint as a member of the judiciary (did he even reach 90 days on the bench?) is the end of Manuel Barraza, Judge.
Sources:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6359175.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-judgearrested_03tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a96528.html
El Paso Times
http://www.elpasotimes.com/politics/ci_12060597
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Cop Watch: Watch Dallas Police Officer Pull Over Texan Running Back While Mother in Law is Dying
Nothing tells this story like this video.
Listen to Moats' voice.
Listen to Powell's voice.
"Shut your mouth."
Watch the nurses try to help and the cop ignoring them.
This should make you very mad, and very scared the next time you see some flashing lights in your rearview mirror.
Our condolences to the Moats family.
Listen to Moats' voice.
Listen to Powell's voice.
"Shut your mouth."
Watch the nurses try to help and the cop ignoring them.
This should make you very mad, and very scared the next time you see some flashing lights in your rearview mirror.
Our condolences to the Moats family.
Monday, March 30, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Court of Criminal Appeals Chief Justice Sharon Keller Wants the State to Pay for Her Attorney
First things first: here is the actual response that Chief Justice Sharon Keller has filed in her defense to the trial proceedings before the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct (for details, see earlier post).
Please, take the time to go read that .pdf document. Heck, you might even want to print it. Why?
Justice Keller is asking that the State of Texas pay for her legal fees.
That's right. It's public record that the Chief Justice of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is paid an annual salary of $152,500 - which takes her a long, long way from indigent. So, what's her argument?
And, remember, this is a woman who graduated Rice University with a degree in philosophy, and went on to become the presiding justice of the highest criminal court in the state.
You'd think she'd have a really, really good reason for this. Right?
Here are her arguments.
1. She argues that she is being forced to choose either to “defend herself pro se or risk a financially ruinous legal bill to defend against these charges which are without merit.”
2. She argues that she cannot take up Charlie Babcock of Jackson Walker's offer of representing her for the fee of one dollar because the ethical rules prohibit this -- judges don't get to take that kind of help from attorneys.
3. She argues that the Commission should pay her attorney's fees because they're doing something that's unconstitutional anyway.
Here are some things she doesn't point out.
1. She's been the presiding judge of the highest court for criminal cases in this state since 2002. Before that, she worked in the appellate section of the Dallas prosecutor's office. If she has to represent herself, well ... she's not exactly inexperienced in the ways of legal representation here.
2. She's not just getting that nice salary, public records also reveal that (a) she comes from a wealthy Dallas family (ever had a Keller's Hamburger?) and (b) she owns a lot (a LOT) of income-producing real estate. Would paying Jackson's full fees really and truly break her? Really?
3. Lots of poor people have to take the attorney they can get, or can afford, and not the attorney that they would like in a Perfect World. There's no legal right to the attorney of your choice.
4. This isn't a criminal case, it's a civil one. There's no right to counsel in a civil case.
5. If she really and truly wants to take up Charlie Babcock on his offer to work for free, she can. She just has to resign as judge first. Easy.
Sources:
Keller's Hamburgers
http://kellershamburgers.com/
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/court/justice_skeller.asp
Judgepedia
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Sharon_Keller
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/08judge.html?hp
Texas Observer
http://www.dallasobserver.com/1999-11-18/news/judge-shake-it-baby/
Please, take the time to go read that .pdf document. Heck, you might even want to print it. Why?
Justice Keller is asking that the State of Texas pay for her legal fees.
That's right. It's public record that the Chief Justice of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is paid an annual salary of $152,500 - which takes her a long, long way from indigent. So, what's her argument?
And, remember, this is a woman who graduated Rice University with a degree in philosophy, and went on to become the presiding justice of the highest criminal court in the state.
You'd think she'd have a really, really good reason for this. Right?
Here are her arguments.
1. She argues that she is being forced to choose either to “defend herself pro se or risk a financially ruinous legal bill to defend against these charges which are without merit.”
2. She argues that she cannot take up Charlie Babcock of Jackson Walker's offer of representing her for the fee of one dollar because the ethical rules prohibit this -- judges don't get to take that kind of help from attorneys.
3. She argues that the Commission should pay her attorney's fees because they're doing something that's unconstitutional anyway.
Here are some things she doesn't point out.
1. She's been the presiding judge of the highest court for criminal cases in this state since 2002. Before that, she worked in the appellate section of the Dallas prosecutor's office. If she has to represent herself, well ... she's not exactly inexperienced in the ways of legal representation here.
2. She's not just getting that nice salary, public records also reveal that (a) she comes from a wealthy Dallas family (ever had a Keller's Hamburger?) and (b) she owns a lot (a LOT) of income-producing real estate. Would paying Jackson's full fees really and truly break her? Really?
3. Lots of poor people have to take the attorney they can get, or can afford, and not the attorney that they would like in a Perfect World. There's no legal right to the attorney of your choice.
4. This isn't a criminal case, it's a civil one. There's no right to counsel in a civil case.
5. If she really and truly wants to take up Charlie Babcock on his offer to work for free, she can. She just has to resign as judge first. Easy.
Sources:
Keller's Hamburgers
http://kellershamburgers.com/
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/court/justice_skeller.asp
Judgepedia
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Sharon_Keller
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/08judge.html?hp
Texas Observer
http://www.dallasobserver.com/1999-11-18/news/judge-shake-it-baby/
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Court Opinions: Court of Criminal Appeals Says Andre Thomas May Be "Crazy" (Duh) But He's Sane Enough for Death
Warning - this is gruesome stuff here....
Andre Thomas is 26 years old, and he's living on Texas' Death Row for the killing of his wife's 13-month old daughter. His wife and their 4 year old son were also murdered by Andre during this violence.
Each victim was stabbed and then their hearts were ripped from their bodies.
That's horrific.
Andre did these horrible things, went home and stabbed himself three times in the chest, and then reportedly - somehow - walked into the Sherman Police Department, told the police what he had done, and said God had told him to do it.
And, yes, mental illness does run through Andre's family.
At trial, it was revealed that several members of his family heard voices and had hallucinations - but they considered these to be "gifts" and that they were hearing from God.
Plucks Out One Eye, Eats the Other: Who Can Argue Against Insanity?
Five days after his arrest, while setting in the Grayson County jail, Andre plucked out his right eye. Yes, you read that right. Think about that.
Then, several months ago, Andre Thomas, now confined to Death Row, removed his only remaining eye and ate it. That's right. Ate it.
That's horrific, too. And, creepily there seems to be some insane connection in his mind to the removal of body parts. It just seems obvious that this guy is severely mentally ill, right?
The Court of Criminal Appeals Still Finds a Way to Keep Andre on Death Row
Well, the Court of Criminal Appeals agrees with that. In her concurring statement on whether or not Andre Thomas should be spared the death penalty, the high court's Justice Cochran opined that Andre was "crazy" but -- get this -- he's still sane under state law and therefore, his appeal was denied. (Read her statement in full, at the link below.)
It was a unanimous decision. In an unpublished opinion.
No wonder this court is getting the kind of media coverage it's getting, with words like "bias" being used.
Crazy. Indeed.
For more on this court, go read the earlier post on Justice Keller's impending trial and possible impeachment (link below) -- it's the same group of judges.
You gotta wonder -- if Andre's not crazy under Texas law, then who the heck IS?
Sources:
March Order (per curiam)
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18129&FILENAME=WR-69,859-01 ORI.PDF
Justice Cochran's Statement
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=18123
October 2008 Opinion
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17509
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/03/18/Blind_killers_appeal_denied_in_Texas/UPI-36251237426590/
KTEN.Com
http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=10031519
Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Andre Thomas Info
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/thomasandre.htm
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog -- Justice Keller Indictment
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/20-minutes-and-2-phone-calls-may-be.html
Andre Thomas is 26 years old, and he's living on Texas' Death Row for the killing of his wife's 13-month old daughter. His wife and their 4 year old son were also murdered by Andre during this violence.
Each victim was stabbed and then their hearts were ripped from their bodies.
That's horrific.
Andre did these horrible things, went home and stabbed himself three times in the chest, and then reportedly - somehow - walked into the Sherman Police Department, told the police what he had done, and said God had told him to do it.
And, yes, mental illness does run through Andre's family.
At trial, it was revealed that several members of his family heard voices and had hallucinations - but they considered these to be "gifts" and that they were hearing from God.
Plucks Out One Eye, Eats the Other: Who Can Argue Against Insanity?
Five days after his arrest, while setting in the Grayson County jail, Andre plucked out his right eye. Yes, you read that right. Think about that.
Then, several months ago, Andre Thomas, now confined to Death Row, removed his only remaining eye and ate it. That's right. Ate it.
That's horrific, too. And, creepily there seems to be some insane connection in his mind to the removal of body parts. It just seems obvious that this guy is severely mentally ill, right?
The Court of Criminal Appeals Still Finds a Way to Keep Andre on Death Row
Well, the Court of Criminal Appeals agrees with that. In her concurring statement on whether or not Andre Thomas should be spared the death penalty, the high court's Justice Cochran opined that Andre was "crazy" but -- get this -- he's still sane under state law and therefore, his appeal was denied. (Read her statement in full, at the link below.)
It was a unanimous decision. In an unpublished opinion.
No wonder this court is getting the kind of media coverage it's getting, with words like "bias" being used.
Crazy. Indeed.
For more on this court, go read the earlier post on Justice Keller's impending trial and possible impeachment (link below) -- it's the same group of judges.
You gotta wonder -- if Andre's not crazy under Texas law, then who the heck IS?
Sources:
March Order (per curiam)
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18129&FILENAME=WR-69,859-01 ORI.PDF
Justice Cochran's Statement
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=18123
October 2008 Opinion
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=17509
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/03/18/Blind_killers_appeal_denied_in_Texas/UPI-36251237426590/
KTEN.Com
http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=10031519
Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Andre Thomas Info
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/thomasandre.htm
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog -- Justice Keller Indictment
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/20-minutes-and-2-phone-calls-may-be.html
Monday, March 23, 2009
Cop Watch: Galveston Cops Disciplined For Excessive Force On Wedding Guests
One 19-year-old kid, some beer, and 30 Galveston cops ... mix well, and get a wedding fiasco and police suspensions. Oh, and the arrest of Houston Astros' pitcher Brandon Backe....
Galveston Wedding Makes National News
Thirteen cops just got suspended for their over-zealous behavior at a Galveston wedding last year, and it's making the national news. Seems that it all started with one 19-year-old kid, Danny O'Balle, whose sister had just been married during a lavish wedding at the Convention Center. Party!
Seems Danny got drunk during the wedding reception. (This is not a disputed fact.) Surprise.
At the end of the reception, Danny tried to take beer out of the Convention Center with him, a security guard tried to stop Danny, and there was some sort of brouhaha between them.
Later that night, this same guard saw Drunk Danny over at a hotel bar, the H2O, and called the cops. (We don't know how or why this guard mysteriously appeared at the H2O bar ... a curious fact.)
Galveston Police Arrive on the Scene
While Danny was continuing his celebrations at the bar, the Galveston police arrived. At first, it appears that a single officer confronted Danny (a minor) about his drinking (again, the fact that Danny was severely inebriated is not contested).
Danny apparently didn't want to heed the officer's warnings and suddenly - wham! zap! - THIRTY (30) Galveston cops were on the scene, to stop this reign of terror.
The crisis escalated, of course, as those trying to protect the drunk kid from the police (including the Astros' pitcher) faced off against the Galveston police force. Video shows the cops using a stun gun on the father of the bride. Kid you not.
In the end, force was used and arrests were made.
And, now, after the entire "crowd control" incident has been reviewed, nine Galveston cops have been suspended and four are receiving written reprimands.
What a wedding.
Sources:
CNN.COM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/19/texas.wedding.brawl/
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/03/19/Wedding_melee_prompts_police_suspensions/UPI-48371237478351/
Galveston Wedding Makes National News
Thirteen cops just got suspended for their over-zealous behavior at a Galveston wedding last year, and it's making the national news. Seems that it all started with one 19-year-old kid, Danny O'Balle, whose sister had just been married during a lavish wedding at the Convention Center. Party!
Seems Danny got drunk during the wedding reception. (This is not a disputed fact.) Surprise.
At the end of the reception, Danny tried to take beer out of the Convention Center with him, a security guard tried to stop Danny, and there was some sort of brouhaha between them.
Later that night, this same guard saw Drunk Danny over at a hotel bar, the H2O, and called the cops. (We don't know how or why this guard mysteriously appeared at the H2O bar ... a curious fact.)
Galveston Police Arrive on the Scene
While Danny was continuing his celebrations at the bar, the Galveston police arrived. At first, it appears that a single officer confronted Danny (a minor) about his drinking (again, the fact that Danny was severely inebriated is not contested).
Danny apparently didn't want to heed the officer's warnings and suddenly - wham! zap! - THIRTY (30) Galveston cops were on the scene, to stop this reign of terror.
The crisis escalated, of course, as those trying to protect the drunk kid from the police (including the Astros' pitcher) faced off against the Galveston police force. Video shows the cops using a stun gun on the father of the bride. Kid you not.
In the end, force was used and arrests were made.
And, now, after the entire "crowd control" incident has been reviewed, nine Galveston cops have been suspended and four are receiving written reprimands.
What a wedding.
Sources:
CNN.COM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/19/texas.wedding.brawl/
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/03/19/Wedding_melee_prompts_police_suspensions/UPI-48371237478351/
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Jail Watch: Houston Chronicle Releases Report on Jailer's Smuggling Contraband Goods Into Prisons
The Houston Chronicle has just published the results of its looksie into Texas prisons and how commonplace it is for goods to be smuggled behind bars to the prisoners or inmates.
It's pretty darn common. Surprise, surprise.
The Houston Chronicle Reports on Contraband Discovered When Jailers Were Caught
Now, all the Chronicle is reporting about are instances where jailers got caught bringing stuff into the facilities. The report doesn't give any details on how much stuff is actually getting through -- and the report only covers a select subset of institutions across the entire State of Texas. We're not talking the whole story here.
What's the Stuff Being Smuggled?
And by stuff, of course, we mean contraband. Cellphones, cigarettes, any kind of weapon ... the Chronicle even reports on McDonald's Hamburgers being snuck into the joint.
From Their Study of 300 Jailers, Only 13% Were Fired
Their study covers the time period from 2003 to 2008, and investigates the 20 prison units where it is believed the smuggling problem is the worst. During these six years, approximately 300 correctional institution employees were found to have received reprimands for the possession of contraband.
Out of 263 jailers who were disciplined for contraband, 75% got probation, which meant that they stayed on the job but were put under "special scrutiny" for set time periods. Only 35 were fired. And, 26 scooted away without being punished in any way. One solitary jailer did get prosecuted for this crime -- because this smuggling by the guards is a crime -- but he didn't serve any time behind bars for it.
What Made the Chronicle Do This Study?
According to the Chronicle's story, this contraband issue came up because of a story last fall, where Richard Lee Tabler, an inmate on Texas' Death Row used a smuggled cell phone to call and threaten State Senator John Whitmire.
One has to wonder, though, if part of the impetus of this news story is Sheriff Keating and his Montague Jail (see the earlier posts here about Sheriff Keating) -- where recliners were in the jail cells, and which the media is now labelling as the "Inmates Gone Wild Jail" and the "Animal House" ....
After all, smuggling a full-size recliner into a jail cell is pretty darn big job of getting contraband through ....
Source:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6310340.html
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-11-14-2129216335_x.htm
KCBY
http://www.kcby.com/news/national/41369717.html
It's pretty darn common. Surprise, surprise.
The Houston Chronicle Reports on Contraband Discovered When Jailers Were Caught
Now, all the Chronicle is reporting about are instances where jailers got caught bringing stuff into the facilities. The report doesn't give any details on how much stuff is actually getting through -- and the report only covers a select subset of institutions across the entire State of Texas. We're not talking the whole story here.
What's the Stuff Being Smuggled?
And by stuff, of course, we mean contraband. Cellphones, cigarettes, any kind of weapon ... the Chronicle even reports on McDonald's Hamburgers being snuck into the joint.
From Their Study of 300 Jailers, Only 13% Were Fired
Their study covers the time period from 2003 to 2008, and investigates the 20 prison units where it is believed the smuggling problem is the worst. During these six years, approximately 300 correctional institution employees were found to have received reprimands for the possession of contraband.
Out of 263 jailers who were disciplined for contraband, 75% got probation, which meant that they stayed on the job but were put under "special scrutiny" for set time periods. Only 35 were fired. And, 26 scooted away without being punished in any way. One solitary jailer did get prosecuted for this crime -- because this smuggling by the guards is a crime -- but he didn't serve any time behind bars for it.
What Made the Chronicle Do This Study?
According to the Chronicle's story, this contraband issue came up because of a story last fall, where Richard Lee Tabler, an inmate on Texas' Death Row used a smuggled cell phone to call and threaten State Senator John Whitmire.
One has to wonder, though, if part of the impetus of this news story is Sheriff Keating and his Montague Jail (see the earlier posts here about Sheriff Keating) -- where recliners were in the jail cells, and which the media is now labelling as the "Inmates Gone Wild Jail" and the "Animal House" ....
After all, smuggling a full-size recliner into a jail cell is pretty darn big job of getting contraband through ....
Source:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6310340.html
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-11-14-2129216335_x.htm
KCBY
http://www.kcby.com/news/national/41369717.html
Monday, March 16, 2009
Cop Watch: Tenaha Police Highway Robbery Scheme Subject of Fed Class Action Suit
Tenaha is a small Texas town, but it's on a big traffic route. It sits smack dab in the pathway between Houston and Louisiana's gambling spots, on US 59 - a highway that's also known to be a major route for drugs being transported up from Mexico to the South and Midwest.
Lotsa cash in those cars as they speed down the highway.
Which may be why the police in Tenaha got the big idea to start pulling people over and taking property from them. And by property, we mean cars, cash, cell phones, digital cameras. Apparently, whatever took their fancy.
Traffic Stops Gone Very, Very Bad
What these cops in Shelby County, Texas, were doing was bending the State of Texas asset forfeiture law, which was enacted to discourage drug trafficking.
The Tenaha police would stop drivers and detain them. The local District Attorney was in on the con game, too, by the way.
The drivers, with their families in tow, were taken in - and shown paperwork where they could be charged with bad, bad felonies like money laundering. The option? Forfeit the property (cash, car, whatever) to the county, sign a waiver, and escape the high costs of defending themselves against this bad, bad crime. If anyone balked and children were involved, these renegades would threaten to call Child Protective Services to come and take the kids.
Imagine how horrible this must have been for these drivers. No wonder many of them just signed the waiver and got the heck out of there.
Class Action Suit Reveals the Numbers
In the class action suit filed by 10 of the wronged drivers, paperwork reveals that out of almost 200 instances (covering 2006-2008) where the cops took property, only 50 were charged with any kind of drug possession. The other 147 had nothing illegal with them, and had done no illegal act (like speeding, etc.).
The class action also reveals that most of those pulled over by the Tenaha cops were out of state drivers.
And, the biggest fact of all in this case: most of these drivers were African American.
Yep, that's right.
Suit filed in Marshall, Texas, and It's Got Lots of Official Government Defendants
In addition to the guy who did most of the arrests in these cases, Tenaha City Marshall Barry Washington, the lawsuit also brings in as defendants Tenaha's Mayor, George Bowers; the District Attorney of Shelby County, Linda K. Russell, and the Shelby County Constable, Randy Whatley.
Sources:
KTBS.Com
http://www.ktbs.com/news/Lawsuit-challenges-traffic-stops-in-East-Texas-town-27709/
Wall Street Journal
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/03/10/chicago-trib-use-caution-while-driving-through-tenaha-texas/
Lotsa cash in those cars as they speed down the highway.
Which may be why the police in Tenaha got the big idea to start pulling people over and taking property from them. And by property, we mean cars, cash, cell phones, digital cameras. Apparently, whatever took their fancy.
Traffic Stops Gone Very, Very Bad
What these cops in Shelby County, Texas, were doing was bending the State of Texas asset forfeiture law, which was enacted to discourage drug trafficking.
The Tenaha police would stop drivers and detain them. The local District Attorney was in on the con game, too, by the way.
The drivers, with their families in tow, were taken in - and shown paperwork where they could be charged with bad, bad felonies like money laundering. The option? Forfeit the property (cash, car, whatever) to the county, sign a waiver, and escape the high costs of defending themselves against this bad, bad crime. If anyone balked and children were involved, these renegades would threaten to call Child Protective Services to come and take the kids.
Imagine how horrible this must have been for these drivers. No wonder many of them just signed the waiver and got the heck out of there.
Class Action Suit Reveals the Numbers
In the class action suit filed by 10 of the wronged drivers, paperwork reveals that out of almost 200 instances (covering 2006-2008) where the cops took property, only 50 were charged with any kind of drug possession. The other 147 had nothing illegal with them, and had done no illegal act (like speeding, etc.).
The class action also reveals that most of those pulled over by the Tenaha cops were out of state drivers.
And, the biggest fact of all in this case: most of these drivers were African American.
Yep, that's right.
Suit filed in Marshall, Texas, and It's Got Lots of Official Government Defendants
In addition to the guy who did most of the arrests in these cases, Tenaha City Marshall Barry Washington, the lawsuit also brings in as defendants Tenaha's Mayor, George Bowers; the District Attorney of Shelby County, Linda K. Russell, and the Shelby County Constable, Randy Whatley.
Sources:
KTBS.Com
http://www.ktbs.com/news/Lawsuit-challenges-traffic-stops-in-East-Texas-town-27709/
Wall Street Journal
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/03/10/chicago-trib-use-caution-while-driving-through-tenaha-texas/
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Montgomery County Judge Sadler Slips Past DWI (For Now)
Judge Alan "Barb" Sadler over in Conroe must have slept well last night, because he's not been charged with driving drunk. Yet.
He did get himself arrested last week, though.
Seems Judge Sadler was driving his 2008 Chevy Avalache on North Loop 336 over there in Conroe about 8:30 on a Wednesday evening, when he was involved in a car crash. At the scene, police did field sobriety tests on Judge Sadler, and while the Judge initially agreed to a Breath Test, he changed his mind.
So they busted Judge Sadler for suspicion of driving drunk and took him down to the jail.
Once they were there, the cops had to wait for two hours to get a warrant and draw his blood for a blood test of his BAC (blood alcohol content). In Texas, you are guilty of driving drunk, as an adult, if your BAC is .08 or higher. And, you can't take someone's blood without a search warrant. That's constitutionally protected.
Judge Sadler changed his mind about the breath test - hours later.
Almost three hours after the wreck, Judge Sadler changed his mind AGAIN and agreed to the Breath Test. He tested out at .02 ... so he was found not to be drunk per the BAC standards and the DA released him.
What about the blood test? It's still at the lab.
The DA is telling the press that the case isn't closed. They'll arrest the Judge for driving drunk if that blood test doesn't come back in his favor.
And that blood test will show not only intoxication due to alcohol, but any other substances that can cause impaired judgment. Heck, even Nyquil can impair your judgment (as can any of those flu or cold medications that warn "don't drive heavy machinery while taking this drug").
Has Judge Sadler Been Following Judge Berry's DWI Case?
Wonder if Judge Sadler has been following the case of Judge Elizabeth Berry (see earlier post, below), who also refused the breath test at the scene? As you'll recall, Judge Berry's blood test later revealed a BAC well over .o8....
Sources:
MSNBC.COM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29537968/
Montgomery County News
http://www.montgomerycountynews.net/index.php?module=article&view=279
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/judge-watch-district-judge-berry-wins.html
He did get himself arrested last week, though.
Seems Judge Sadler was driving his 2008 Chevy Avalache on North Loop 336 over there in Conroe about 8:30 on a Wednesday evening, when he was involved in a car crash. At the scene, police did field sobriety tests on Judge Sadler, and while the Judge initially agreed to a Breath Test, he changed his mind.
So they busted Judge Sadler for suspicion of driving drunk and took him down to the jail.
Once they were there, the cops had to wait for two hours to get a warrant and draw his blood for a blood test of his BAC (blood alcohol content). In Texas, you are guilty of driving drunk, as an adult, if your BAC is .08 or higher. And, you can't take someone's blood without a search warrant. That's constitutionally protected.
Judge Sadler changed his mind about the breath test - hours later.
Almost three hours after the wreck, Judge Sadler changed his mind AGAIN and agreed to the Breath Test. He tested out at .02 ... so he was found not to be drunk per the BAC standards and the DA released him.
What about the blood test? It's still at the lab.
The DA is telling the press that the case isn't closed. They'll arrest the Judge for driving drunk if that blood test doesn't come back in his favor.
And that blood test will show not only intoxication due to alcohol, but any other substances that can cause impaired judgment. Heck, even Nyquil can impair your judgment (as can any of those flu or cold medications that warn "don't drive heavy machinery while taking this drug").
Has Judge Sadler Been Following Judge Berry's DWI Case?
Wonder if Judge Sadler has been following the case of Judge Elizabeth Berry (see earlier post, below), who also refused the breath test at the scene? As you'll recall, Judge Berry's blood test later revealed a BAC well over .o8....
Sources:
MSNBC.COM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29537968/
Montgomery County News
http://www.montgomerycountynews.net/index.php?module=article&view=279
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/judge-watch-district-judge-berry-wins.html
Monday, March 09, 2009
DA Watch: Harris County DA Hires Lobbyist for Rest of Texas Legislative Session
Now, here's something to ponder over ... district attorneys (elected officials) hiring private, third-party lobbists to lobby for them with lawmakers (other elected officials).
So, the lawmakers don't just check with the DAs on the repercussions of changing the Penal Code as part of their job?
Apparently NOT.
Over in Houston, the District Attorney has taken $17,000 out of the Hot Checks division and used it to pay for a lobbyist.
That's right: a lobbyist. This guy, Hank Mitchell, is being paid by the Harris County District Attorney to lobby the Texas Legislature on behalf of the DA.
For how long? Through the end of the current legislative session.
About what? according to the Houston Chronicle, Mr. Mitchell's job is to "ensure lawmakers have a Houston prosecutor's perspective on possible changes to the penal code and other criminal justice laws."
And, before you start scratching your head, you might like to know that this isn't the first time this has been done.
Up in Vegas last summer, there was a big deal about a lobbyist name Rick Loop upping his fee from $80,000 to $150,000 to represent Distict and Justice Court judges before the Nevada legislature during its 2009 legislative session. The media brouhaha wasn't over the fact that the judges were hiring the lobbyist, the brouhaha was over his price hike. Vegas, right.
Awhile back, someone thought there might be an ethical issue here. At least San Antonio DA Susan Reed did.
Back in 1999, the District Attorney for Bexar County, then and now Susan Reed, requested and got an Opinion from the Attorney General of the State of Texas, who was then John Cornyn, asking if a county could use public funds to hire a lobbyist to influence legislation. Cornyn said yes.
Here's the link to that AG Opinion if you want to read it:
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/pdf/JC0089.pdf.
Source:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6292221.html
Las Vegas Sun
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jun/29/same-lobbyist-courts-shorter-term-more-money/
So, the lawmakers don't just check with the DAs on the repercussions of changing the Penal Code as part of their job?
Apparently NOT.
Over in Houston, the District Attorney has taken $17,000 out of the Hot Checks division and used it to pay for a lobbyist.
That's right: a lobbyist. This guy, Hank Mitchell, is being paid by the Harris County District Attorney to lobby the Texas Legislature on behalf of the DA.
For how long? Through the end of the current legislative session.
About what? according to the Houston Chronicle, Mr. Mitchell's job is to "ensure lawmakers have a Houston prosecutor's perspective on possible changes to the penal code and other criminal justice laws."
And, before you start scratching your head, you might like to know that this isn't the first time this has been done.
Up in Vegas last summer, there was a big deal about a lobbyist name Rick Loop upping his fee from $80,000 to $150,000 to represent Distict and Justice Court judges before the Nevada legislature during its 2009 legislative session. The media brouhaha wasn't over the fact that the judges were hiring the lobbyist, the brouhaha was over his price hike. Vegas, right.
Awhile back, someone thought there might be an ethical issue here. At least San Antonio DA Susan Reed did.
Back in 1999, the District Attorney for Bexar County, then and now Susan Reed, requested and got an Opinion from the Attorney General of the State of Texas, who was then John Cornyn, asking if a county could use public funds to hire a lobbyist to influence legislation. Cornyn said yes.
Here's the link to that AG Opinion if you want to read it:
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/pdf/JC0089.pdf.
Source:
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6292221.html
Las Vegas Sun
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jun/29/same-lobbyist-courts-shorter-term-more-money/
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Jail Watch: The Other Shoe Drops for Sheriff Bill Keating of Montague County
Drive north of Dallas/Fort Worth to Denton, and keep straight as the crow flies on a northwest path and very soon, you end up in Montague County, Texas. That's where Sheriff Bill Keating reigned as the top dog of county law enforcement until a federal investigation toppled him from power.
Last Friday, the State of Texas issued its 106-count Indictment against Bill Keating and several of his jailers
Last month, we posted about the federal plea bargain that ex-Sheriff Keating entered into, and all the sordid details of how that jail was run (remember the recliners in the jail cells?) ... well, apparently, the feds have nothing on the State of Texas. There's a whole new kettle of fish in these charges.
Seventeen people charged with wrongdoing in their official capacities at the Montague County Jail, including having sex with inmates
And here's what is contained in those 106 charges within Friday's indictment:
1. Ex-sheriff Bill Keating is charged with official oppression and having sex with inmates.
2. Some of the female jail guards are also charged with having sex with inmates.
3. Jail guards, male and female, are charged with bringing inmates cigarettes, cell phones, and drugs (and possibly other banned items).
4. Some of these guards are also charged with drug possession.
If convicted, Ex-Sheriff Keating will face a year in jail for the oppression charge, and up to 2 years on the charge of having sex with an inmate (officially, the crime is "improper sexual activity with someone in custody").
Apparently, the Feds Charged for Sex Outside the Jail, State Charges are for Sex Inside the Jail
And, that earlier charge against the Sheriff - the one that resulted in a plea bargain with the feds last month? That case is apparently unrelated to these new state charges. That's right: apparently, the feds charged the Sheriff with illegal sexual activity outside of the jail, and the state has charged him for illegal sexual activity inside the jail.
What About the Recliners?
The names of those jailers who have been charged haven't been released yet. And, no, still no word of the fate of the infamouse jail cell recliners. Will they be used as evidence (picture CSI analysis here)? Will they be auctioned off by the county? How many are there? These are facts -- along with many others (color? number? were they the popular brand we all know, or a bunch of cheap knockoffs?)that are being guarded by the prosecution right now.
Sources:
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/cop-watch-north-texas-sheriff-cops-plea.html
Associated Press
http://www.correctionsone.com/corrections/articles/1792273-Former-Texas-sheriff-ex-jailers-among-17-charged-in-drug-sex-crimes/
Last Friday, the State of Texas issued its 106-count Indictment against Bill Keating and several of his jailers
Last month, we posted about the federal plea bargain that ex-Sheriff Keating entered into, and all the sordid details of how that jail was run (remember the recliners in the jail cells?) ... well, apparently, the feds have nothing on the State of Texas. There's a whole new kettle of fish in these charges.
Seventeen people charged with wrongdoing in their official capacities at the Montague County Jail, including having sex with inmates
And here's what is contained in those 106 charges within Friday's indictment:
1. Ex-sheriff Bill Keating is charged with official oppression and having sex with inmates.
2. Some of the female jail guards are also charged with having sex with inmates.
3. Jail guards, male and female, are charged with bringing inmates cigarettes, cell phones, and drugs (and possibly other banned items).
4. Some of these guards are also charged with drug possession.
If convicted, Ex-Sheriff Keating will face a year in jail for the oppression charge, and up to 2 years on the charge of having sex with an inmate (officially, the crime is "improper sexual activity with someone in custody").
Apparently, the Feds Charged for Sex Outside the Jail, State Charges are for Sex Inside the Jail
And, that earlier charge against the Sheriff - the one that resulted in a plea bargain with the feds last month? That case is apparently unrelated to these new state charges. That's right: apparently, the feds charged the Sheriff with illegal sexual activity outside of the jail, and the state has charged him for illegal sexual activity inside the jail.
What About the Recliners?
The names of those jailers who have been charged haven't been released yet. And, no, still no word of the fate of the infamouse jail cell recliners. Will they be used as evidence (picture CSI analysis here)? Will they be auctioned off by the county? How many are there? These are facts -- along with many others (color? number? were they the popular brand we all know, or a bunch of cheap knockoffs?)that are being guarded by the prosecution right now.
Sources:
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/cop-watch-north-texas-sheriff-cops-plea.html
Associated Press
http://www.correctionsone.com/corrections/articles/1792273-Former-Texas-sheriff-ex-jailers-among-17-charged-in-drug-sex-crimes/
Monday, March 02, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht - Ethics Complaint Dismissed for Insufficient Evidence
Here in Texas, our highest courts in the adjudication of Texas law are split -- civil matters go to the Texas Supreme Court (TSCt), and criminal cases are reviewed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA).
And, there's something to ponder in the fact that the national media has justices on both these courts in their headlines for possible bad acts. Yes, folks, let's ponder that for a bit.
While CCA Chief Justice Sharon Keller (see earlier post on her impending trial and possible impeachment) will be in the news for months to come, TSCt Justice Nathan Hecht is probably going to fade away from the national media scene because of a decision released last month, and hitting the media news late last week.
Texas Ethics Commission Clears Justice Hecht
On February 12, 2009, the Texas Ethics Commission issued a final order in a year-long investigation into activities of Justice Hecht. The TEC dismissed the complaint against the Texas Supreme Court justice because "insufficient evidence" was found that the state election code had been violated.
Justice Hecht Accused of Using Political Contributions for Personal Use
Over a year ago, Hecht was accused of using campaign money to travel to Carrollton, Texas (Hecht lives in Austin). Hecht, however, has a home in Carrollton, attends church in Carrollton, does some of his TSCt work in Carrollton, and has "lots of friends" in Carrollton.
Justice Hecht's Reprimand and $29K Fine Still Holds
Of course, this doesn't change the reprimand that Justice Hecht received last fall, from this same ethics commission, to the tune of $29,000. In that matter, Justice Hecht was found to have received an illegal campaign contribution amounting to $168,000 because the law firm Jackson Walker discounted his legal fees by that amount during his legal fight against allegations that he had abused his position as a justice on the TSCt by openly supporting Harriett Miers in her failed bid for the United States Supreme Court.
(Hecht's argument to the underlying legal challenge? He's prohibited from supporting a candidate running for judicial office under the Code of Judicial Conduct, not from supporting someone nominated for appointment.)
That's Not All Folks ....
And, if you're thinking this is all there is to ethics investigations into the high courts of our fair state, think again. There's the 2008 investigation into TSCt Justice David Medina - alleging that he may have violated state law when he reimbursed himself $57,000 in mileage (commuting between his Houston home and Austin) out of campaign funds.
You'll remember that Houston home -- it's the one that Justice Medina's wife was accused of burning down when arson charges were filed against her.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbVtxppqsV8p1RE_M-z5Uhysp6yQD96JK3280
International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/12/05/america/Texas-Justice-Ethics.php
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-hecht_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a8701f.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/robison/5863268.html
And, there's something to ponder in the fact that the national media has justices on both these courts in their headlines for possible bad acts. Yes, folks, let's ponder that for a bit.
While CCA Chief Justice Sharon Keller (see earlier post on her impending trial and possible impeachment) will be in the news for months to come, TSCt Justice Nathan Hecht is probably going to fade away from the national media scene because of a decision released last month, and hitting the media news late last week.
Texas Ethics Commission Clears Justice Hecht
On February 12, 2009, the Texas Ethics Commission issued a final order in a year-long investigation into activities of Justice Hecht. The TEC dismissed the complaint against the Texas Supreme Court justice because "insufficient evidence" was found that the state election code had been violated.
Justice Hecht Accused of Using Political Contributions for Personal Use
Over a year ago, Hecht was accused of using campaign money to travel to Carrollton, Texas (Hecht lives in Austin). Hecht, however, has a home in Carrollton, attends church in Carrollton, does some of his TSCt work in Carrollton, and has "lots of friends" in Carrollton.
Justice Hecht's Reprimand and $29K Fine Still Holds
Of course, this doesn't change the reprimand that Justice Hecht received last fall, from this same ethics commission, to the tune of $29,000. In that matter, Justice Hecht was found to have received an illegal campaign contribution amounting to $168,000 because the law firm Jackson Walker discounted his legal fees by that amount during his legal fight against allegations that he had abused his position as a justice on the TSCt by openly supporting Harriett Miers in her failed bid for the United States Supreme Court.
(Hecht's argument to the underlying legal challenge? He's prohibited from supporting a candidate running for judicial office under the Code of Judicial Conduct, not from supporting someone nominated for appointment.)
That's Not All Folks ....
And, if you're thinking this is all there is to ethics investigations into the high courts of our fair state, think again. There's the 2008 investigation into TSCt Justice David Medina - alleging that he may have violated state law when he reimbursed himself $57,000 in mileage (commuting between his Houston home and Austin) out of campaign funds.
You'll remember that Houston home -- it's the one that Justice Medina's wife was accused of burning down when arson charges were filed against her.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbVtxppqsV8p1RE_M-z5Uhysp6yQD96JK3280
International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/12/05/america/Texas-Justice-Ethics.php
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-hecht_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a8701f.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/robison/5863268.html
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Cop Watch: Atlanta Cops Gun Down 92 Yr Old Kathryn Johnson and Get 5 - 10 Yrs Prison Time
Kathryn Johnson was 92 years old, and still able to live in her own home over there in Atlanta.From this small fact we know that Mrs. Johnson had to have taken pretty darn good care of herself - physically, financially - in order to avoid nursing homes, or worse.
So, we're respecting Kathryn Johnson right now, right? We're thinking - boy, when I'm 92 years old, I want to be living on my own, doing my own thing. You Go Girl! Right?
Sure we are. We like and respect Mrs. Kathryn Johnson. Look at that sweet face.
Kathryn Johnson - 92 Yr Old Steel Magnolia Pulls a Rusty Pistol to Stop a Home Invasion
Well, here's one more fact about Mrs. Kathryn Johnson for you: when she heard someone trying to get in her front door back in November 2006, she pulled out a rusty old pistol she had in the house, and fired one shot through the front door - high, where it would go over their heads.
After all, Mrs. Johnson didn't live in the best of neighborhoods -- she lived in downtown Atlanta, where there was crime and where home invasions occur. Old Mrs. Johnson was ready for them.
And, right after she took that shot, THIRTY-NINE shots came back at her, through her home's front door. That's right: 39.
Kathryn Johnson was hit with five of those bullets, and died there in her front entryway.
Who killed Kathryn Johnson?
We're upset now, right? Our sweet, strong and sassy Mrs. Kathryn Johnson lies shot - dead - in her own home, a woman who deserved the utmost of dignified passings?
You bet we're upset. And, it's gonna get worse now: because three Atlanta cops have admitted that they were the ones who snuck up to the home of Mrs. Kathryn Johnson and without so much as a by-your-leave, killed her.
Illegal No-Knock Search - it was an invasion of her home
That's because they got an illegal no-knock search warrant for her house, and started breaking in her door without giving her any warning. No wonder she thought that her home was being invaded: it was.
Cop stuffs marijuana that he conveniently has with him in Mrs. Johnson's house to cover up
And, after these bad cops discovered that they had done a Very Bad Thing, one of them (officer Smith) planted marijuana in her home to try and support their defense that this was a drug house. Right. (I'm wondering where Officer Smith had such a ready source of pot to just grab and toss into Mrs. Johnson's home, aren't you?)
What's Their Story? They had a quota to meet (I kid you not)
Sure, they've got one. These cops have said it's not their fault because the whole Atlanta Police Department is just so, so bad that it is really to blame.
You see, they had quotas to meet (9 arrests, 2 search warrants a month) or they risked being transferred. They just had to meet these performance quotas.
And, apparently, at the Atlanta Police Department, officers routinely lied about things, breaking all sorts of rules. So, they just went along with the practice. To meet their quota.
- One example - they'd do "handoffs" where one cop would lie in an affidavit that he personally knew all this stuff, when all he had was a story from another cop about it.
- Another one - they'd split drugs taken in one case, and use part of them as evidence in another.
Sentenced in Federal Court, Awaiting Sentencing in State Court
Well, quota-schmota. These five cops just got sentenced to a range of 5 to 10 years in federal prison, and they've still got to face sentencing in state court on state law charges.
Officers Smith and Junnier have expressed remorse. Smith says that he prays for Mrs. Johnson daily, and Junnier hopes that other cops will have more backbone than he did. Junnier is quoted in the Atlanta paper as saying "I used to think I was a good person."
That's what corrupt institutions do -they corrupt the people within them.
And, now as we consider the loss of Mrs. Kathryn Johnson, perhaps the only solace we can take from this story is that Mrs. Johnson's death was quick, and that Mrs. Johnson's death was not in vain.
Because from her death, Kathryn Johnson has brought a national spotlight upon a corrupt police department where investigations continue and other arrests by both federal and state authorities have been, and will continue to be made.
And somehow, I think Mrs. Kathryn Johnson would be mighty proud of that.
Bless your heart and rest in peace, ma'am.
Sources:
Atlanta Journal Constitution
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2009/02/23/johnston_sentencing.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab
CNN.com
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/23/atlanta.police.sentencing/
Sunday, February 22, 2009
20 Minutes and 2 Phone Calls May Be the Death Knell for Chief Justice Sharon Keller of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Say what you like, no one who gets a philosophy degree from Rice University can be anything but brilliant.
Justice Sharon Keller got hers back in 1975 (and her law degree from SMU in 1978). So how could someone so smart do something so, so stupid?
It's All About Twenty Minutes - Just 20 Minutes
Back on September 25, 2007, the United States Supreme Court announced that it was going to consider whether or not lethal injections were a constitutional way to impose the death penalty. (The federal constitution does not allow for cruel and unusual punishment ... which is why we don't have electric chairs for capital punishment anymore.)
That same day, here in Texas, attorneys for a man on death row - name of Michael Richard - worked feverishly to finalize the necessary documents to halt his execution, which was scheduled for that day, September 25, 2007.
They were drafting a Motion to Stay his execution, based upon the announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court -- after all, if the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that lethal injection was unconstitutional, then it shouldn't be used for Michael Richard.
Imagine the tension in that office that day. The hurry, the pressure. And then the computer screws up. (Of course it did - doesn't this happen to you, too, when you're on a deadline?)
So, these zealous defense attorneys call over to the Clerk's office for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. They ask the Clerk to keep the doors open for twenty minutes -- just 20 minutes -- so they can file their Motion to Stay.
Justice Keller said no. And, all because of this 20 minute gap in time, Michael Richard died that day, by lethal injection. At 6 p.m.
It's Also About Two Phone Calls
Well, after word got around that Chief Justice Keller (she is not only on the high court, she is the chief justice for the high court) had said no, and Richard had died - things began happening.
For one thing, the Commission for Judicial Conduct began a year-long investigation. And, it's from the CJC's results that we know a little more about what happened that day.
First, everyone at the Court of Criminal Appeals knew that the Motion for Stay was coming, because around two o'clock that afternoon, they got an email that told them it was on its way, based upon the U.S. Supreme Court's announcement earlier that day.
The justices took a little vote amongst themselves, even before they got the Motion, and came down 5-4 that they were going to turn down the stay request when it did turn up. And then, Justice Cheryl Johnson and three other justices worked to prepare for the motion they were expecting ... everyone at the court knew this motion was on its way, and that Richard was scheduled to die at six o'clock that day.
Chief Justice Keller went home to meet a repairman.
And here's the story about the first phone call, from CJC report per the Austin American Statesman:
Then, the second phone call:
The Trial of Justice Sharon Keller
Sources:
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/opinion/19thu2.html?_r=1
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/22/0222keller.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022009dnmetkeller.403608f.html
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals - Justice Keller web page
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/court/justice_skeller.asp
Justice Sharon Keller got hers back in 1975 (and her law degree from SMU in 1978). So how could someone so smart do something so, so stupid?
It's All About Twenty Minutes - Just 20 Minutes
Back on September 25, 2007, the United States Supreme Court announced that it was going to consider whether or not lethal injections were a constitutional way to impose the death penalty. (The federal constitution does not allow for cruel and unusual punishment ... which is why we don't have electric chairs for capital punishment anymore.)
That same day, here in Texas, attorneys for a man on death row - name of Michael Richard - worked feverishly to finalize the necessary documents to halt his execution, which was scheduled for that day, September 25, 2007.
They were drafting a Motion to Stay his execution, based upon the announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court -- after all, if the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that lethal injection was unconstitutional, then it shouldn't be used for Michael Richard.
Imagine the tension in that office that day. The hurry, the pressure. And then the computer screws up. (Of course it did - doesn't this happen to you, too, when you're on a deadline?)
So, these zealous defense attorneys call over to the Clerk's office for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. They ask the Clerk to keep the doors open for twenty minutes -- just 20 minutes -- so they can file their Motion to Stay.
Justice Keller said no. And, all because of this 20 minute gap in time, Michael Richard died that day, by lethal injection. At 6 p.m.
It's Also About Two Phone Calls
Well, after word got around that Chief Justice Keller (she is not only on the high court, she is the chief justice for the high court) had said no, and Richard had died - things began happening.
For one thing, the Commission for Judicial Conduct began a year-long investigation. And, it's from the CJC's results that we know a little more about what happened that day.
First, everyone at the Court of Criminal Appeals knew that the Motion for Stay was coming, because around two o'clock that afternoon, they got an email that told them it was on its way, based upon the U.S. Supreme Court's announcement earlier that day.
The justices took a little vote amongst themselves, even before they got the Motion, and came down 5-4 that they were going to turn down the stay request when it did turn up. And then, Justice Cheryl Johnson and three other justices worked to prepare for the motion they were expecting ... everyone at the court knew this motion was on its way, and that Richard was scheduled to die at six o'clock that day.
Chief Justice Keller went home to meet a repairman.
And here's the story about the first phone call, from CJC report per the Austin American Statesman:
[Court General Counsel] Marty picked up the phone to relay the request to Keller. ... It was a short conversation, but they dispute what was said. Marty recalls saying that Richard's lawyers "wanted the court to stay open late." Keller says Marty asked only about keeping the clerk's office open past 5 p.m. — not the court — and that her answer reflected common practice: All clerks went home at closing time. "No," she told Marty.
Then, the second phone call:
Shortly after 5 p.m., Keller telephoned Marty to ask whether Richard's lawyers had filed anything. The answer was no.It's not clear when Justice Johnson and the other judges found out about the request for 20 minutes. And, it's not clear why Marty routed the call to Keller, at home, instead of Justice Johnson, who was on rotation to hear the motion.
The Trial of Justice Sharon Keller
Charges have been filed against Justice Keller with the Commission for Judicial Conduct, although no trial date has been set. She's accused of five violations of either the Texas Constitution or the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. And her fate (exoneration, reprimand, or removal) will be decided by an as-yet-unknown specially appointed judge. It will be a public proceeding.
The Impeachment of Justice Sharon Keller
Her trial may not happen for over a year, and that's not soon enough for Fort Worth State Representative Lon Burnam. He's filed a resolution before the Texas House, asking that the legislative body investigate these events, and if the House finds cause for impeachment, then the Texas Senate will hold an impeachment trial.
An Odd Balance
Somehow, all this seems very, very odd. At the worst, Justice Keller loses her job. She'll get another one.
Balance that against Michael Richard.
Sources:
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/opinion/19thu2.html?_r=1
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/22/0222keller.html
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022009dnmetkeller.403608f.html
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals - Justice Keller web page
http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/court/justice_skeller.asp
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Cop Watch: Feds Say 6 Dallas Cops Lied To Put Innocent Man Behind Bars for 10 Months
First, here are the names:
Lawrence Coddington
Jerry Dodd
David Durica
David Nevitt
Frank Poblenz
Randy Sundquist.
These six men led relatively quiet lives, until now. They were cops. They led cop lives, wore the uniform, drove the car, raised the families.
They got the respect that police get these days -- kids waving at them from the street, grandmas smiling at them in the mall. These days, it's not like the Sixties. These days, we are a society that takes pride in our men in blue. Maybe 9/11 had something to do with that, I dunno.
Now, they've lost all that. And the Dallas Police Department has one more smear on its reputation. A reputation that is still tarnished with the 2001 Fake Drug Scandal (remember that? Over 80 cases were dismissed after WFAA-TV exposed a pattern of cops busting folk, including lots of Mexican immigrants, for what turned out NOT to be illegal substances at all. Fake Drugs.)
And, maybe we've all lost something here. Wait, there's no "maybe" with that one.
What happened?
These six veteran cops (the youngest is 41, the oldest is 57) are accused of putting a man in jail on false charges, where he sat -- an innocent man -- for 10 months. Almost a year.
Because, according to the feds, the cops LIED. THEY LIED. And there's video to prove it.
Federal prosecutors have filed a federal lawsuit charging civil rights violations here, and who knows if there's gonna be criminal charges, too. They think they have a strong case -- which was helped by the innocent guy's criminal defense attorney who was savvy enough to fully investigate the situation. He found a video that is clean and clear and directly contradicts what the cops said.
Sure, there's a guy carrying a black bag with guns and drugs. It's just NOT this guy. Not even close.
Why Do This Stupid Thing?
The Feds, and the innocent guy's attorney, are blatant in their allegations that Officer Nevitt lied when he said this guy had drugs and guns with him when the guy was arrested outside of a North Dallas hotel.
These six cops all went over to the Windham Hotel to bust this guy for violating his parole. Don't know why this took 6 cops.
Nevitt, apparently, is the cop that pointed the finger. Repeatedly and adamently. The others backed him up.
Dodd wrote the police report. He wrote that Nevitt saw the guy leave the hotel with this Evil Bag, which the guy dropped after he spotted the cops coming for him. The report fails to mention the hotel video.
Now, we've got an innocent man who lost almost a year of his life. And, we've got another situation where those boxes full of prosecution cases marked "closed" are going to have to be pulled out and investigated, because who knows how many other times this may have happened.
And, finally, we've got that guy that got away -- the real guy on the video, who really dropped the Evil Black Bag -- smiling just a little as he reads the morning paper.
Source:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/
yahoolatestnews/stories/021709dnmetdpd.4035ff0.html
Wikipedia - Dallas Police Department
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Police_Department
Lawrence Coddington
Jerry Dodd
David Durica
David Nevitt
Frank Poblenz
Randy Sundquist.
These six men led relatively quiet lives, until now. They were cops. They led cop lives, wore the uniform, drove the car, raised the families.
They got the respect that police get these days -- kids waving at them from the street, grandmas smiling at them in the mall. These days, it's not like the Sixties. These days, we are a society that takes pride in our men in blue. Maybe 9/11 had something to do with that, I dunno.
Now, they've lost all that. And the Dallas Police Department has one more smear on its reputation. A reputation that is still tarnished with the 2001 Fake Drug Scandal (remember that? Over 80 cases were dismissed after WFAA-TV exposed a pattern of cops busting folk, including lots of Mexican immigrants, for what turned out NOT to be illegal substances at all. Fake Drugs.)
And, maybe we've all lost something here. Wait, there's no "maybe" with that one.
What happened?
These six veteran cops (the youngest is 41, the oldest is 57) are accused of putting a man in jail on false charges, where he sat -- an innocent man -- for 10 months. Almost a year.
Because, according to the feds, the cops LIED. THEY LIED. And there's video to prove it.
Federal prosecutors have filed a federal lawsuit charging civil rights violations here, and who knows if there's gonna be criminal charges, too. They think they have a strong case -- which was helped by the innocent guy's criminal defense attorney who was savvy enough to fully investigate the situation. He found a video that is clean and clear and directly contradicts what the cops said.
Sure, there's a guy carrying a black bag with guns and drugs. It's just NOT this guy. Not even close.
Why Do This Stupid Thing?
The Feds, and the innocent guy's attorney, are blatant in their allegations that Officer Nevitt lied when he said this guy had drugs and guns with him when the guy was arrested outside of a North Dallas hotel.
These six cops all went over to the Windham Hotel to bust this guy for violating his parole. Don't know why this took 6 cops.
Nevitt, apparently, is the cop that pointed the finger. Repeatedly and adamently. The others backed him up.
Dodd wrote the police report. He wrote that Nevitt saw the guy leave the hotel with this Evil Bag, which the guy dropped after he spotted the cops coming for him. The report fails to mention the hotel video.
Now, we've got an innocent man who lost almost a year of his life. And, we've got another situation where those boxes full of prosecution cases marked "closed" are going to have to be pulled out and investigated, because who knows how many other times this may have happened.
And, finally, we've got that guy that got away -- the real guy on the video, who really dropped the Evil Black Bag -- smiling just a little as he reads the morning paper.
Source:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/
yahoolatestnews/stories/021709dnmetdpd.4035ff0.html
Wikipedia - Dallas Police Department
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Police_Department
Monday, February 16, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Pa Juvie Judges Get $$$ Rich Off Throwing Kids In Private Jails
Well, maybe the only good thing about this story - aside from the fact that they got caught - is that these judges aren't from Texas.
Up in Pennsylvania, they've got private companies that run the kid jails -- you know, like the ones here in Texas that we call "juvenile detention centers."
And, the Pennsylvania companies have such nice names: "PA Child Care LLC" and its sister company, "Western PA Child Care LLC". Sounds like day care, right?
Well, apparently getting those government contracts to house these wayward youth wasn't enough for the BigWigs at PA Child Care LLC and Western PA Child Care LLC. They apparently wanted to insure a steady stream of clientele, so into the story enters Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella, 58, and Michael Conahan, 56.
Seems these two Pennsylvania Juvie Judges (definitely old enough to know better) have allegedly pocketed around $2,600,000 -- that's right, $2,600,000 -- provided by the powers that be at the Child Care facilities. And that's just what we know for the years 2003-2006.
Down here in Texas, that's called "graft" and it's really bad when we're talking KIDS here.
KIDS.
Yep, it gets worse.
Seems that after these two took their cash, they took steps to insure that they would meet their responsibilities to Child Care LLC, and they had these children brought before them without the aid of counsel.
These kids had a right to an attorney to stand with them, and protect their interests. These were kids, they didn't KNOW they had that right, apparently. So no one told them. Or the Judges hemmed and hawed if they, or their parents, did have the savvy to ask for a lawyer.
Children were sent on ridiculous grounds for cruel stints in these prisons. Because call it some cutesy name like "Child Care" all you want, these are PRISONS.
Just because kids are incarcerated there instead of adults doesn't make this nicer.
Lives Have Been Forever Harmed Here. Forever. So, What's Happening Now?
1. The two Juvie Judges pled guilty in federal court, and they're being sent to prison now.
2. Authorities are combing through their past workloads, and odds are that a great many of these juvie cases will be reviewed, and lots of records will be expunged.
3. The BigWigs at the Child Care companies are still being investigated. And, according to media reports, they're pointing the finger at the Juvie Judges: apparently, they were forced to pay the moola. They were, in the quoted words of the New York Times, "victims." Umm Hmmm.
4. Class action suits, brought by several hundred of the kids' families, were filed against the two Juvie Judges on Friday for civil rights violations.
5. Lawmakers on Friday have called for hearings into the entire juvenile justice system for the State of Pennsylvania.
Sources:
MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29142654/
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/us/14judge.html?hp
Up in Pennsylvania, they've got private companies that run the kid jails -- you know, like the ones here in Texas that we call "juvenile detention centers."
And, the Pennsylvania companies have such nice names: "PA Child Care LLC" and its sister company, "Western PA Child Care LLC". Sounds like day care, right?
Well, apparently getting those government contracts to house these wayward youth wasn't enough for the BigWigs at PA Child Care LLC and Western PA Child Care LLC. They apparently wanted to insure a steady stream of clientele, so into the story enters Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella, 58, and Michael Conahan, 56.
Seems these two Pennsylvania Juvie Judges (definitely old enough to know better) have allegedly pocketed around $2,600,000 -- that's right, $2,600,000 -- provided by the powers that be at the Child Care facilities. And that's just what we know for the years 2003-2006.
Down here in Texas, that's called "graft" and it's really bad when we're talking KIDS here.
KIDS.
Yep, it gets worse.
Seems that after these two took their cash, they took steps to insure that they would meet their responsibilities to Child Care LLC, and they had these children brought before them without the aid of counsel.
These kids had a right to an attorney to stand with them, and protect their interests. These were kids, they didn't KNOW they had that right, apparently. So no one told them. Or the Judges hemmed and hawed if they, or their parents, did have the savvy to ask for a lawyer.
Children were sent on ridiculous grounds for cruel stints in these prisons. Because call it some cutesy name like "Child Care" all you want, these are PRISONS.
Just because kids are incarcerated there instead of adults doesn't make this nicer.
Lives Have Been Forever Harmed Here. Forever. So, What's Happening Now?
1. The two Juvie Judges pled guilty in federal court, and they're being sent to prison now.
2. Authorities are combing through their past workloads, and odds are that a great many of these juvie cases will be reviewed, and lots of records will be expunged.
3. The BigWigs at the Child Care companies are still being investigated. And, according to media reports, they're pointing the finger at the Juvie Judges: apparently, they were forced to pay the moola. They were, in the quoted words of the New York Times, "victims." Umm Hmmm.
4. Class action suits, brought by several hundred of the kids' families, were filed against the two Juvie Judges on Friday for civil rights violations.
5. Lawmakers on Friday have called for hearings into the entire juvenile justice system for the State of Pennsylvania.
Sources:
MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29142654/
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/us/14judge.html?hp
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
DA Watch: Brazoria County DA Holds Back Release of Hot XXX Stuff Found On Judge's PC
There's always a story when a judge quits his job, and this time was no different.
Back on August 29th, Brazoria County Court at Law Place 3 Judge James Blackstock resigned his bench and pled "no contest" to charges of official oppression and assault of five different women.
Allegations Involved Touching, Kissing, and Lewd Computer Stuff
Judge Blackstock had been accused of touching, kissing, and sending lewd pix via email to these five female employees of Brazoria County. There were apparently some text messages, too, and all this totalled to 14 official oppression charges against the Judge.
That's a pretty big story right there, but that's not the end of it.
Up in Travis County, another lawsuit has been filed - this time by Brazoria County District Attorney Jeri Yenne, asking for the court's decision on what should be done with the data stored on Judge Blackstock's computer per the Texas Open Records Act.
Seems the Brazoria County publication, The Facts (http://thefacts.com) and an attorney for two of the female employees are asking for this XXX stuff.
Brazoria County DA Wants A Second Opinion Before She Releases XXX Computer Data
DA Yenne already has the Attorney General's opinion. The Attorney General of the State of Texas says fork the stuff over. That's not enough for DA Yenne.
Instead, DA Yenne has gone to a Travis County Judge asking that judge to weigh in -- why?
According to a quote in TheFacts, Yenne says that the stuff is obscenity, and that she feels the Texas Penal Code against transmitting obscenity trumps whether or not a request is valid under the Open Records Act.
Interesting to ponder: Open Records Access vs. Obscenity Laws.
And while this Travis County Judge gets down to business on making that ruling, there's still more happening here.
Seems the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is checking into this stuff, too, and a federal court judge already issued a subpoena on the EEOC's behalf last September. The feds got their hands on the XXX Computer Data months ago.
That must be some Hot XXX Stuff on Judge Blackstock's hard drive, right?
Source:
TheFacts.Com
http://thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=6d05febb4fbce278
Back on August 29th, Brazoria County Court at Law Place 3 Judge James Blackstock resigned his bench and pled "no contest" to charges of official oppression and assault of five different women.
Allegations Involved Touching, Kissing, and Lewd Computer Stuff
Judge Blackstock had been accused of touching, kissing, and sending lewd pix via email to these five female employees of Brazoria County. There were apparently some text messages, too, and all this totalled to 14 official oppression charges against the Judge.
That's a pretty big story right there, but that's not the end of it.
Up in Travis County, another lawsuit has been filed - this time by Brazoria County District Attorney Jeri Yenne, asking for the court's decision on what should be done with the data stored on Judge Blackstock's computer per the Texas Open Records Act.
Seems the Brazoria County publication, The Facts (http://thefacts.com) and an attorney for two of the female employees are asking for this XXX stuff.
Brazoria County DA Wants A Second Opinion Before She Releases XXX Computer Data
DA Yenne already has the Attorney General's opinion. The Attorney General of the State of Texas says fork the stuff over. That's not enough for DA Yenne.
Instead, DA Yenne has gone to a Travis County Judge asking that judge to weigh in -- why?
According to a quote in TheFacts, Yenne says that the stuff is obscenity, and that she feels the Texas Penal Code against transmitting obscenity trumps whether or not a request is valid under the Open Records Act.
Interesting to ponder: Open Records Access vs. Obscenity Laws.
And while this Travis County Judge gets down to business on making that ruling, there's still more happening here.
Seems the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is checking into this stuff, too, and a federal court judge already issued a subpoena on the EEOC's behalf last September. The feds got their hands on the XXX Computer Data months ago.
That must be some Hot XXX Stuff on Judge Blackstock's hard drive, right?
Source:
TheFacts.Com
http://thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=6d05febb4fbce278
Monday, February 09, 2009
Cop Watch: Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez Has Been Sued
There’s a new Sheriff in town, but does she hold a grudge?
Mebbe. Four Dallas County Sheriff's Deputies have sued their boss, Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez, along with the Executive Chief Deputy Jesse Flores, alleging that the Sheriff transferred them to yucky jobs after she got elected because they had supported her opponent in the election.
The yucky jobs? Working night shift at the jail.
Of course, the deputies are suing in federal court, and they want their old jobs back, along with money damages. They’re suing under the federal crime of “illegal political retaliation,” along with alleging there’s been violations of their U.S. constitutional rights to free speech, as well as due process and equal protection violations in how they were treated in the county civil service system. (They are all long-time veterans of the department.)
What did they do before?
One was the county's only motorcycle deputy, and he got moved to the information desk at the jail for the midnight shift. Another was one of the two police dog handlers; he also got the midnight shift. The third was the department’s firearms instructor, and he got the evening shift, which looks like it’s bad but better than the graveyard duty the other two are pulling right now.
Is it tradition?
This lawsuit has just begun; however, there are ramblings by the defense and rumors in the media that retaliatory actions by Texas Sheriffs after elections are rampant across the state, almost like it’s a tradition or something.
Guess this is just one more thing for the feds to be investigating, once they get done with counting all the recliners over in the Wichita Falls jail.
Recliners? Yep. For the details, see last week’s post: Sheriff Bill Keating pled guilty to federal sexual assault charges, he’ll be sentenced in May, and he’s out on the streets right now – he did have to surrender his guns, though.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/012909dnmetvaldez.161a8e4a.html
KERA
http://publicbroadcasting.net/kera/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1463777§ionID=1
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g6FG_8F8-Kdg5r_VIRh9X6tBOIUQD960V0O82
DallasJustice.Com
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/cop-watch-north-texas-sheriff-cops-plea.html
Mebbe. Four Dallas County Sheriff's Deputies have sued their boss, Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez, along with the Executive Chief Deputy Jesse Flores, alleging that the Sheriff transferred them to yucky jobs after she got elected because they had supported her opponent in the election.
The yucky jobs? Working night shift at the jail.
Of course, the deputies are suing in federal court, and they want their old jobs back, along with money damages. They’re suing under the federal crime of “illegal political retaliation,” along with alleging there’s been violations of their U.S. constitutional rights to free speech, as well as due process and equal protection violations in how they were treated in the county civil service system. (They are all long-time veterans of the department.)
What did they do before?
One was the county's only motorcycle deputy, and he got moved to the information desk at the jail for the midnight shift. Another was one of the two police dog handlers; he also got the midnight shift. The third was the department’s firearms instructor, and he got the evening shift, which looks like it’s bad but better than the graveyard duty the other two are pulling right now.
Is it tradition?
This lawsuit has just begun; however, there are ramblings by the defense and rumors in the media that retaliatory actions by Texas Sheriffs after elections are rampant across the state, almost like it’s a tradition or something.
Guess this is just one more thing for the feds to be investigating, once they get done with counting all the recliners over in the Wichita Falls jail.
Recliners? Yep. For the details, see last week’s post: Sheriff Bill Keating pled guilty to federal sexual assault charges, he’ll be sentenced in May, and he’s out on the streets right now – he did have to surrender his guns, though.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/012909dnmetvaldez.161a8e4a.html
KERA
http://publicbroadcasting.net/kera/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1463777§ionID=1
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g6FG_8F8-Kdg5r_VIRh9X6tBOIUQD960V0O82
DallasJustice.Com
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/02/cop-watch-north-texas-sheriff-cops-plea.html
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Crime News: Judge Charlie Baird May Exonerate a Dead Man and Give Justice to Tim Cole
Tim Cole is dead.
And you should know that Tim Cole died with integrity, consistently maintaining he was innocent of the crime for which he was accused.
Now, it may be time that he finally receives justice.
Tim Cole Took the Hard Road - He Went to Jail Rather Than Deny His Innocence
Before we go into the details of what may be happening this week, think about this. Tim Cole was a young man, only 22 years old, attending Texas Tech University when he was arrested and charged with the rape of Michele Mallin.
It would have been easy -- so easy, think about how the prosecutors tried to persuade him -- to take a plea bargain, admit to guilt, and get probation. Tim Cole refused. He took the hard road, because he maintained he was innocent.
Later, after he was convicted and sent to prison, once again Tim Cole faced a tempting choice: admit his guilt to the parole board, and get his freedom. Once again, Tim Cole steadfastly refused. He did this -- refusing the parole board's offer -- FOUR times. Again, he took the hard road, because he maintained he was innocent.
Think about that: Tim Cole chose to stay in prison on four separate occasions rather than just say he was guilty and get out on parole.
Would you do that, in his shoes? Could you do that?
Tim Cole Died at the Age of 39, After Spending 17 Years Behind Bars
In 1999, Tim Cole died at the age of 39 of complications from asthma. He'd spent 17 years behind bars rather than admit he raped Michele Mallin because Mr. Cole wouldn't admit to a crime for which he maintained he was innocent.
Only now, maybe now, will Justice Serve Tim Cole
This Thursday, Austin District Judge Charlie Baird (formerly of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals) will hear arguments from the Innocence Project that Tim Cole should be posthumously exonerated and their case will be strong: DNA evidence supports Tim Cole's consistent claims of innocence. DNA points to another man.
Even the victim wants Justice for Tim Cole
Now 44 years old, Michele Mallin has voiced her support for the exoneration of Tim Cole. At the time of trial, she asserts that she assumed that there was other evidence beside her finger-pointing at Defendant Tim Cole to support his guilt. She says that the prosecutors back then should have done a better job.
As it stands, the rape victim's testimony that Tim Cole was her attacker was the only evidence against him, and that proved to be enough to send him to the prison where he remained until he died.
And we all know how reliable eyewitness testimony can be. (Cough, cough, cough.) (Something to ponder: why'd the D.A.'s office, way back then, think that they had enough to go to trial in this case with just this evidence? Rat, there's a rat somewhere .... Actually, a pack of rats. Go read all the background on the trial of this case in the sources below for details.)
Lubbock Judge Refuses Tim Cole's Case, Austin Judge Charlie Baird Takes It Up
Admittedly, the Tim Cole case will be the first case where a dead man is exonerated because of DNA evidence. (It's going to be a procedural dance to get this done.) That's okay with Austin District judge Charlie Baird, who took up the gauntlet after the Lubbock County courts nixed the idea.
Quoting Judge Baird (in the Austin American Statesman):
"I am disappointed that the courts in Lubbock County did not think that there was sufficient basis to conduct a hearing," Baird said. "I think it is incumbent upon a judge somewhere in Texas to pick up this case and give the Cole family a fair hearing and to restore the good name of their child."
Ditto, Judge.
Judge Baird: A Refreshing Change to the Usual Reports on Texas Judges
While all too often, the bad acts of Texas judges reveal themselves and find their way into posts on this blog, it is a refreshing and joyous change to find a Texas district judge who is willing to fight for justice in this way.
Kudos and tipping the hat to Gentleman Judge Charlie Baird, and heartfelt condolences to the loved ones of Tim Cole - especially his 72 year old mother, Ruby Cole Session - along with great good wishes that finally, the name of Tim Cole will be recognized as belonging to a man of integrity, honesty, and innocence.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/03/0203exonerate.html
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-02-03-exoneration_N.htm
And you should know that Tim Cole died with integrity, consistently maintaining he was innocent of the crime for which he was accused.
Now, it may be time that he finally receives justice.
Tim Cole Took the Hard Road - He Went to Jail Rather Than Deny His Innocence
Before we go into the details of what may be happening this week, think about this. Tim Cole was a young man, only 22 years old, attending Texas Tech University when he was arrested and charged with the rape of Michele Mallin.
It would have been easy -- so easy, think about how the prosecutors tried to persuade him -- to take a plea bargain, admit to guilt, and get probation. Tim Cole refused. He took the hard road, because he maintained he was innocent.
Later, after he was convicted and sent to prison, once again Tim Cole faced a tempting choice: admit his guilt to the parole board, and get his freedom. Once again, Tim Cole steadfastly refused. He did this -- refusing the parole board's offer -- FOUR times. Again, he took the hard road, because he maintained he was innocent.
Think about that: Tim Cole chose to stay in prison on four separate occasions rather than just say he was guilty and get out on parole.
Would you do that, in his shoes? Could you do that?
Tim Cole Died at the Age of 39, After Spending 17 Years Behind Bars
In 1999, Tim Cole died at the age of 39 of complications from asthma. He'd spent 17 years behind bars rather than admit he raped Michele Mallin because Mr. Cole wouldn't admit to a crime for which he maintained he was innocent.
Only now, maybe now, will Justice Serve Tim Cole
This Thursday, Austin District Judge Charlie Baird (formerly of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals) will hear arguments from the Innocence Project that Tim Cole should be posthumously exonerated and their case will be strong: DNA evidence supports Tim Cole's consistent claims of innocence. DNA points to another man.
Even the victim wants Justice for Tim Cole
Now 44 years old, Michele Mallin has voiced her support for the exoneration of Tim Cole. At the time of trial, she asserts that she assumed that there was other evidence beside her finger-pointing at Defendant Tim Cole to support his guilt. She says that the prosecutors back then should have done a better job.
As it stands, the rape victim's testimony that Tim Cole was her attacker was the only evidence against him, and that proved to be enough to send him to the prison where he remained until he died.
And we all know how reliable eyewitness testimony can be. (Cough, cough, cough.) (Something to ponder: why'd the D.A.'s office, way back then, think that they had enough to go to trial in this case with just this evidence? Rat, there's a rat somewhere .... Actually, a pack of rats. Go read all the background on the trial of this case in the sources below for details.)
Lubbock Judge Refuses Tim Cole's Case, Austin Judge Charlie Baird Takes It Up
Admittedly, the Tim Cole case will be the first case where a dead man is exonerated because of DNA evidence. (It's going to be a procedural dance to get this done.) That's okay with Austin District judge Charlie Baird, who took up the gauntlet after the Lubbock County courts nixed the idea.
Quoting Judge Baird (in the Austin American Statesman):
"I am disappointed that the courts in Lubbock County did not think that there was sufficient basis to conduct a hearing," Baird said. "I think it is incumbent upon a judge somewhere in Texas to pick up this case and give the Cole family a fair hearing and to restore the good name of their child."
Ditto, Judge.
Judge Baird: A Refreshing Change to the Usual Reports on Texas Judges
While all too often, the bad acts of Texas judges reveal themselves and find their way into posts on this blog, it is a refreshing and joyous change to find a Texas district judge who is willing to fight for justice in this way.
Kudos and tipping the hat to Gentleman Judge Charlie Baird, and heartfelt condolences to the loved ones of Tim Cole - especially his 72 year old mother, Ruby Cole Session - along with great good wishes that finally, the name of Tim Cole will be recognized as belonging to a man of integrity, honesty, and innocence.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/02/03/0203exonerate.html
USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-02-03-exoneration_N.htm
Monday, February 02, 2009
COP WATCH: North Texas Sheriff Cops a Plea in Fed Court, Faces 10 Yrs in Pen
The feds got themselves another Texas Sheriff last week.
Montague Sheriff Bill Keating Pled Guilty and Faces 10 Years in Prison, $250K in Fines
Last Thursday, Montague County Sheriff Bill Keating - a man who has worn a badge for the past forty years - accepted a plea deal offered by federal prosecutors, pleading guilty in federal court for violating the civil rights of a woman and facing a maximum fine of $250,000 and 10 years in federal prison.
"Civil rights violation" sounds pretty tame, doesn't it? Well, actually it is kinda reminiscent of the old Al Capone case, where the feds got Capone on tax evasion. Those federal crimes sound kind of dull and dry, until you find out all the details behind them.
The Backstory on Sheriff Bill
The real story behind Sheriff Bill Keating, 62, is a nasty one. As reported by the Feds, it seems the sheriff and his crew went out to some guy's house, with a warrant, to arrest him. When they got there, the man and his girlfriend were at the house. Rather than just taking the guy in, the Sheriff's posse looked around and found some drug paraphernalia along with the dregs of some methamphetamine.
Sexual Assault On More Than One Occasion Equals Violation of Federal Civil Rights
And here's where the story gets really bad. Seems Sheriff Keating took the girlfriend aside and threatened to bust her, too, unless she had sex with him. Authorities report that the two, the Sheriff and the girlfriend, drove in his pickup truck to some back road where she performed oral sex on Sheriff Bill.
It wasn't over then, though. The Feds report that Sheriff Bill went back to the girlfriend on several occasions with the same demands for sexual favors, and that he also forced her to agree to become an informant for the Sheriff's Department.
This is the stuff of bad B movies. The only good thing? That woman had the courage to tell the truth about what was happening to her. Good for her. That took guts, to go against a Texas Sheriff and his whole department.
Now, the State District Attorney Has His Turn at Bat: More Charges Are Expected
While the Feds have made their case based upon constitutional violations, the State of Texas still has a turn at bat. And, the Montague County District Attorney has announced he's looking to file charges against Sheriff Bill Keating, along with assorted deputies, for having sex with inmates in the county jail along with allowing contraband into the facility.
And, get this -- things were so bad in that jail under Sheriff Bill's command, that some of the jail cells had recliners in them. Recliners. Think about that.
Look for the State indictments to hit sometime later this month.
Betcha we're gonna here lots more bad stuff about ol' Sheriff Bill: that fed story about the girlfriend? Tip of the iceberg. Betcha.
And, betcha we're gonna see some civil lawsuits popping up sometime soon, too. You know, civil damages for the Sheriff's bad actions, and the assertions of an immunity defense.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g6FG_8F8-Kdg5r_VIRh9X6tBOIUQD9612ED00
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/state/stories/DN-sheriff_30tex.ART.State.Edition1.46fda64.html
Montague Sheriff Bill Keating Pled Guilty and Faces 10 Years in Prison, $250K in Fines
Last Thursday, Montague County Sheriff Bill Keating - a man who has worn a badge for the past forty years - accepted a plea deal offered by federal prosecutors, pleading guilty in federal court for violating the civil rights of a woman and facing a maximum fine of $250,000 and 10 years in federal prison.
"Civil rights violation" sounds pretty tame, doesn't it? Well, actually it is kinda reminiscent of the old Al Capone case, where the feds got Capone on tax evasion. Those federal crimes sound kind of dull and dry, until you find out all the details behind them.
The Backstory on Sheriff Bill
The real story behind Sheriff Bill Keating, 62, is a nasty one. As reported by the Feds, it seems the sheriff and his crew went out to some guy's house, with a warrant, to arrest him. When they got there, the man and his girlfriend were at the house. Rather than just taking the guy in, the Sheriff's posse looked around and found some drug paraphernalia along with the dregs of some methamphetamine.
Sexual Assault On More Than One Occasion Equals Violation of Federal Civil Rights
And here's where the story gets really bad. Seems Sheriff Keating took the girlfriend aside and threatened to bust her, too, unless she had sex with him. Authorities report that the two, the Sheriff and the girlfriend, drove in his pickup truck to some back road where she performed oral sex on Sheriff Bill.
It wasn't over then, though. The Feds report that Sheriff Bill went back to the girlfriend on several occasions with the same demands for sexual favors, and that he also forced her to agree to become an informant for the Sheriff's Department.
This is the stuff of bad B movies. The only good thing? That woman had the courage to tell the truth about what was happening to her. Good for her. That took guts, to go against a Texas Sheriff and his whole department.
Now, the State District Attorney Has His Turn at Bat: More Charges Are Expected
While the Feds have made their case based upon constitutional violations, the State of Texas still has a turn at bat. And, the Montague County District Attorney has announced he's looking to file charges against Sheriff Bill Keating, along with assorted deputies, for having sex with inmates in the county jail along with allowing contraband into the facility.
And, get this -- things were so bad in that jail under Sheriff Bill's command, that some of the jail cells had recliners in them. Recliners. Think about that.
Look for the State indictments to hit sometime later this month.
Betcha we're gonna here lots more bad stuff about ol' Sheriff Bill: that fed story about the girlfriend? Tip of the iceberg. Betcha.
And, betcha we're gonna see some civil lawsuits popping up sometime soon, too. You know, civil damages for the Sheriff's bad actions, and the assertions of an immunity defense.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g6FG_8F8-Kdg5r_VIRh9X6tBOIUQD9612ED00
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/state/stories/DN-sheriff_30tex.ART.State.Edition1.46fda64.html
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: District Judge Berry Wins On DWI Charge, Any Appeal Will Go to Waco and Justice Tom Gray
Remember the story about Justice Tom Grey of Waco last week? Well, news flash:
Looks Like Justice Grey Will Judge Judge Dohoney's Reversal of Judge Driver's Decision regarding Judge Berry,
or
The Judge Who Judges Judges and Got Judged Is Judging Judge Dohoney's Decision that Judge Driver Was Wrong in Issuing a Search Warrant for a blood test of Judge Berry.
Here's the story:
Back in November, State District Judge Elizabeth Berry was pulled over a little ways south of Fort Worth, driving 92 mph in a 65 mph speed limit. The Alvarado, Texas, cop who pulled her over reported that he smelled alcohol on her breath and he saw beer cans in her car. Some of the beer cans were empty. Judge Berry refused to take any sobriety tests.
A request was made for a search warrant to take the district judge's blood. The request was granted, and the search warrant was obtained from Judge Toni Driver.
A blood alcohol test was done, with results showing a BAC for Judge Berry above the Texas legal limit of 0.08.
District Judge Elizabeth Berry Charged With Misdemeanor Drunk Driving
Judge Berry was charged with misdemeanor drink driving, and faced a monetary fine of $2000 and a maximum jail time of 180 days. And what did she do then? What all smart folk do that are facing serious criminal charges: Judge Berry went and got herself a really good criminal defense lawyer.
Motion to Suppress the Blood Test is Filed - And Judge Berry Wins
Judge Berry's savvy defense attorney quickly filed a motion to suppress evidence. It was heard last Friday before retired Senior Judge Robert Dohoney -- so there's no political agenda here, right? He's retired....
And guess what? Berry won.
Judge Dohoney reviewed Judge Driver's decision, and ruled that the police didn't have probable cause to draw Judge Berry's blood that day. The police officer didn't give enough details in his affidavit to support the search warrant that was issued for the blood test. The search warrant shouldn't have been issued in Judge Dohoney's opinion.
What? Well, in Officer Archibald's affidavit, he used words like "confused" and "quiet" to describe the judge, but didn't get explicit -- there wasn't anything like "mumbling, slurred speech" or other types of descriptive behavior that is clearly part of being intoxicated. In Judge Dohoney's opinion, words like "confused" don't get you to probable cause that someone is drunk.
Throwing Out the BAC Evidence Likely Guts the Prosecution's Case
Without this BAC evidence, the district attorney doesn't have much left to take to trial. The prosecution needs that blood test or they really can't justify spending taxpayer dollars -- trying cases is expensive, and cost is a factor in deciding what cases go to a jury in any jurisdiction.
The Possible Appeal of Judge Dohoney's Decision
Already, there's been talk in the media about prosecutors opting for another route: appealing the decision of Judge Dohoney that Judge Driver was wrong to issue the search warrant, up to the appropriate appeals court. Have a higher court grade the papers of the judge who graded Judge Driver's papers.
And guess which one that is? Yep.
The Appeal Will Be Heard in Waco
If they choose to appeal, Judge Dohoney's analysis and ultimate decision will be reviewed by the Waco Court of Appeals, where Chief Justice Tom Gray presides.
You know Judge Tom Gray. He's the justice who just got his own papers graded by the State Commission that oversees judicial conduct. (See the link below to this blog's recent post on that story.)
What About that Judicial Commission Anyway?
Which brings up a question: is Judge Berry going to have to face that same commission here? Will she only have to face this commission review if she's found guilty of the drunk driving charge? Hmmmmm.
Sources:
Cleburne Times Review
http://www.cleburnetimesreview.com/johnsoncounty/local_story_022182139.html?keyword=topstory
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa090123_wz_judgedwi.22f817f2.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6226434.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/judge-watch-10th-circuit-justice-tom.html
Looks Like Justice Grey Will Judge Judge Dohoney's Reversal of Judge Driver's Decision regarding Judge Berry,
or
The Judge Who Judges Judges and Got Judged Is Judging Judge Dohoney's Decision that Judge Driver Was Wrong in Issuing a Search Warrant for a blood test of Judge Berry.
Here's the story:
Back in November, State District Judge Elizabeth Berry was pulled over a little ways south of Fort Worth, driving 92 mph in a 65 mph speed limit. The Alvarado, Texas, cop who pulled her over reported that he smelled alcohol on her breath and he saw beer cans in her car. Some of the beer cans were empty. Judge Berry refused to take any sobriety tests.
A request was made for a search warrant to take the district judge's blood. The request was granted, and the search warrant was obtained from Judge Toni Driver.
A blood alcohol test was done, with results showing a BAC for Judge Berry above the Texas legal limit of 0.08.
District Judge Elizabeth Berry Charged With Misdemeanor Drunk Driving
Judge Berry was charged with misdemeanor drink driving, and faced a monetary fine of $2000 and a maximum jail time of 180 days. And what did she do then? What all smart folk do that are facing serious criminal charges: Judge Berry went and got herself a really good criminal defense lawyer.
Motion to Suppress the Blood Test is Filed - And Judge Berry Wins
Judge Berry's savvy defense attorney quickly filed a motion to suppress evidence. It was heard last Friday before retired Senior Judge Robert Dohoney -- so there's no political agenda here, right? He's retired....
And guess what? Berry won.
Judge Dohoney reviewed Judge Driver's decision, and ruled that the police didn't have probable cause to draw Judge Berry's blood that day. The police officer didn't give enough details in his affidavit to support the search warrant that was issued for the blood test. The search warrant shouldn't have been issued in Judge Dohoney's opinion.
What? Well, in Officer Archibald's affidavit, he used words like "confused" and "quiet" to describe the judge, but didn't get explicit -- there wasn't anything like "mumbling, slurred speech" or other types of descriptive behavior that is clearly part of being intoxicated. In Judge Dohoney's opinion, words like "confused" don't get you to probable cause that someone is drunk.
Throwing Out the BAC Evidence Likely Guts the Prosecution's Case
Without this BAC evidence, the district attorney doesn't have much left to take to trial. The prosecution needs that blood test or they really can't justify spending taxpayer dollars -- trying cases is expensive, and cost is a factor in deciding what cases go to a jury in any jurisdiction.
The Possible Appeal of Judge Dohoney's Decision
Already, there's been talk in the media about prosecutors opting for another route: appealing the decision of Judge Dohoney that Judge Driver was wrong to issue the search warrant, up to the appropriate appeals court. Have a higher court grade the papers of the judge who graded Judge Driver's papers.
And guess which one that is? Yep.
The Appeal Will Be Heard in Waco
If they choose to appeal, Judge Dohoney's analysis and ultimate decision will be reviewed by the Waco Court of Appeals, where Chief Justice Tom Gray presides.
You know Judge Tom Gray. He's the justice who just got his own papers graded by the State Commission that oversees judicial conduct. (See the link below to this blog's recent post on that story.)
What About that Judicial Commission Anyway?
Which brings up a question: is Judge Berry going to have to face that same commission here? Will she only have to face this commission review if she's found guilty of the drunk driving charge? Hmmmmm.
Sources:
Cleburne Times Review
http://www.cleburnetimesreview.com/johnsoncounty/local_story_022182139.html?keyword=topstory
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa090123_wz_judgedwi.22f817f2.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6226434.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/judge-watch-10th-circuit-justice-tom.html
Monday, January 26, 2009
DA Watch: Tarrant County DA Tosses Hot Potato to Texas AG in Toney Case
Well, well, well. Seems the District Attorney's Office over in Fort Worth isn't going to make the call in the Michael Toney case. They've just recused themselves, and now the decision about what to do with Michael Toney is on the Attorney General's desk.
Who's Michael Toney? Why is this case a hot potato?
Back in October 2008, we had a lengthy post here (link below) about Michael Toney with all the backstory details. Suffice to say, it was his case where the Tarrant County DA held back important evidence -- evidence that could have saved Mr. Toney from a murder conviction and Death Row.
Yep. Michael Toney has been setting on Death Row since 1999, while dust gathered on key evidence over there in the Tarrant County DA's offices.
What was held back?
Fourteen (14) separate documents that threw mud all over the evidence provided at trial against Toney by his ex-wife and his ex-best-friend -- and theirs was the only witness evidence against him.
What does this mean?
By recusing itself, Tarrant County is transfering prosecution of this matter to the Attorney General for the State of Texas. It's now the AG's office that will have to decide whether or not to spend taxpayer money on a new trial for Michael Toney.
Right now, it's unclear whether or not they've got enough evidence to pursue a case against him. (There was no physical evidence, and it's not disputed that Toney had absolutely no connection with the three victims of the 1985 Thanksgiving Day bomb.)
When will the trial decision be made?
There's no deadline - but Toney's attorneys could move the court to set one.
What's being said?
According to the Star-Telegram, Tarrant County says this was the "appropriate thing to do," and the AG didn't say anything (telling the media they didn't have enough info yet).
Toney's got some really big guns fighting for him: over in San Francisco, Colleen Kennedy of O'Melvany & Myers spoke on Toney's behalf and agreed that the recusal was "appropriate."
The victim's family has been quoted as believing Toney is guilty, but wanting to make sure he gets a fair trial.
What's the kicker?
It may just be the appropriate thing to do for Tarrant County to get this case out of its offices after it's uncontested that this important evidence sat there -- stuff that could have freed a man from Death Row.
However, it's curious, too.
If there's not enough evidence - once it's all spread out on the table - for there to be a retrial of Michael Toney, then that's gonna be decided and announced from the AG's Office, not Tarrant County. And from the press reports, you gotta wonder what's left on the State's side to demonstrate guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at this juncture.
So, if the decision is made not to re-try Toney, then what's up his fancy California law firm's sleeve? Does anyone wonder about the civil lawsuit that might be waiting in the wings?
That's possibly a big case: after all, he's been setting on Death Row for all this time, stalwarting claiming that he is innocent of that bombing.
Is this is a case that the AG's getting ready for? Just something to ponder. Cha-ching.
Source:
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.star-telegram.com/arlington_news/story/1160442.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2008/10/da-watch-tarrant-county-das-office-held.html
Who's Michael Toney? Why is this case a hot potato?
Back in October 2008, we had a lengthy post here (link below) about Michael Toney with all the backstory details. Suffice to say, it was his case where the Tarrant County DA held back important evidence -- evidence that could have saved Mr. Toney from a murder conviction and Death Row.
Yep. Michael Toney has been setting on Death Row since 1999, while dust gathered on key evidence over there in the Tarrant County DA's offices.
What was held back?
Fourteen (14) separate documents that threw mud all over the evidence provided at trial against Toney by his ex-wife and his ex-best-friend -- and theirs was the only witness evidence against him.
What does this mean?
By recusing itself, Tarrant County is transfering prosecution of this matter to the Attorney General for the State of Texas. It's now the AG's office that will have to decide whether or not to spend taxpayer money on a new trial for Michael Toney.
Right now, it's unclear whether or not they've got enough evidence to pursue a case against him. (There was no physical evidence, and it's not disputed that Toney had absolutely no connection with the three victims of the 1985 Thanksgiving Day bomb.)
When will the trial decision be made?
There's no deadline - but Toney's attorneys could move the court to set one.
What's being said?
According to the Star-Telegram, Tarrant County says this was the "appropriate thing to do," and the AG didn't say anything (telling the media they didn't have enough info yet).
Toney's got some really big guns fighting for him: over in San Francisco, Colleen Kennedy of O'Melvany & Myers spoke on Toney's behalf and agreed that the recusal was "appropriate."
The victim's family has been quoted as believing Toney is guilty, but wanting to make sure he gets a fair trial.
What's the kicker?
It may just be the appropriate thing to do for Tarrant County to get this case out of its offices after it's uncontested that this important evidence sat there -- stuff that could have freed a man from Death Row.
However, it's curious, too.
If there's not enough evidence - once it's all spread out on the table - for there to be a retrial of Michael Toney, then that's gonna be decided and announced from the AG's Office, not Tarrant County. And from the press reports, you gotta wonder what's left on the State's side to demonstrate guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at this juncture.
So, if the decision is made not to re-try Toney, then what's up his fancy California law firm's sleeve? Does anyone wonder about the civil lawsuit that might be waiting in the wings?
That's possibly a big case: after all, he's been setting on Death Row for all this time, stalwarting claiming that he is innocent of that bombing.
Is this is a case that the AG's getting ready for? Just something to ponder. Cha-ching.
Source:
Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.star-telegram.com/arlington_news/story/1160442.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2008/10/da-watch-tarrant-county-das-office-held.html
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: 10th Circuit Chief Justice Tom Gray of Waco Publicly Admonished by State Commission on Judicial Conduct
Judge Who Judges Judges Gets Judged.
Say that three times fast.
First things first, for those of you who don't know, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals here in Texas is based in Waco and serves the surrounding Central Texas area (to be specific, 18 Texas counties are under its perview).
It is a court of review, with its 3 sitting justices reviewing the decisions (judgments) of lower district courts in both civil and criminal matters. Sometimes, the appellate court issues its own decision on something; however, its main purpose is to grade the papers of trial courts to make sure justice has been done. Its official website estimates that the Waco court hears 400 appellate matters each year.
The buck doesn't stop with the circuit courts of appeal, of course. These courts have their papers graded by the Texas Supreme Court in civil matters and the Court of Criminal Appeals in criminal cases. And, technically, any federal issues would be heard in the federal system, but that's a different jurisdiction and something to ponder on a different day.
Circuit Courts of Appeal are Very Powerful
Only a fraction of the circuit court's decisions are accepted for review by the two Texas high courts - they've got to control their workload, for one thing - and this leaves the circuit courts of appeal as very, very powerful institutions in this state. Odds are high that the decision made by the interim appellate courts, like Waco, will be the final deterimination -- so while you may not know the names of Chief Justice Tom Gray, Justice Felipe Reyna or Justice Bill Vance, it doesn't mean that they aren't three Very Big Kahunas.
Waco Chief Justice Tom Gray is Publicly Admonished by the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct
So, it's a big deal and something for you to know that an appellate court justice (and a chief justice at that) has had his own papers graded by the state agency that watches over the conduct of judges in this state. From the high courts to the J.P. courts, this commission oversees judicial conduct and not only investigates but punishes impropriety.
The Admonition and Justice Gray's Response are Online in their Entirety
And, the news today is that the Commission has issued a Public Admonition regarding Waco's Chief Justice Tom Gray. (You can read it at the site shown below.)
And, Chief Justice Gray has also issued a public response (you can read it, too, at the link below).
Excerpts From the Ruling
"2. In March 2007, Justice Felipe Reyna introduced Justice Gray as the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the Republican Club of Somervel County in Glen Rose, Texas.
"3. At the conclusion of his introduction to the approximately sixty (60) Republicansattending the fundraiser, Justice Reyna told the group, “Please join me in welcoming mygood friend, Chief Justice Tom Gray,” or words to that effect.
"4. Justice Gray began his remarks to the audience by thanking Justice Reyna for theintroduction, but went on to state, “Really, we are not friends. He’s never been in my home. I’ve never been in his home. And furthermore, every time there’s a close vote onthe Court, he always votes with Bill Vance,” or words to that effect. ...
[So, at at Republic Party meeting in Glen Rose (where's that?), the Chief Justice took the podium and said that his colleague wasn't his 'friend'.]
"8. Thereafter, Justice Gray initiated a “whisper campaign” against Justice Reyna by criticizing him to Republican Party leaders in the counties located within the Court’sjurisdiction.
"9. Justice Gray attended Republican lunches and dinners and told party leaders “somebody needs to talk to Felipe. He’s not being a good Republican,” and that Justice Reyna“always votes with a liberal Democrat, [Justice] Bill Vance,” or words to that effect. ...
[So, we've got unknown gossips who are reporting that Chief Justice Gray was talking with party leaders that Justice Reyna wasn't following the party line. Remember that judges are elected in this state, not appointed. They are POLITICIANS, every single one of them.]
"11. According to a security tape obtained during the course of the investigation, on or about June 16, 2008, Justice Gray unlocked and entered the private offices of Justice Vance without permission.
"12. In his appearance before the Commission, Justice Gray defended the unauthorized entry of Justice Vance’s private offices by explaining that he was searching for a file. Justice Gray acknowledged, however, that after determining that the file was not in Justice Vance’s office, he reviewed other papers located on Justice Vance’s desk.
"13. Justice Gray further testified that he has unlocked and entered the private offices of both Justice Vance and Justice Reyna in the past to look for files while the other justices were not present and had not given their permission.
"14. Following these incidents, Justice Gray never informed his fellow judges of his entry intotheir offices....
[So, the boss of the Waco Court, which is what the Chief Justice is when you think about it, went into his colleagues' offices and looked around. Did they have an expectation of privacy? You know, that legal concept? Under labor law, do you have an expectation of privacy about your desk when you leave the office for the night, or the weekend? Just something to ponder here.]
"17. Justice Vance and Justice Reyna also testified about instances when Justice Gray hastreated court staff in a sarcastic, intimidating and demeaning manner, which conduct alsoincluded angry outbursts and personal attacks. Statements implying that the chief clerk would be out of a job after January 1, 2009, and efforts at other times to convince the other justices to vote in favor of firing the chief clerk and the accountant were also common. Such mistreatment was sufficient to reduce some staff members to tears and has contributed to extremely low employee morale at the Court.
[Well, it sure sounds like a tense working environment. Wonder what the chief clerk had to say about all this.]
"Canon 2B of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct states in pertinent part: “A judge shall not allow any relationship to influence judicial conduct or judgment.”
"Canon 3B(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct states in pertinent part: “A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in his official capacity[.]”
"The Commission concludes, based on the facts and evidence before it, that Justice Gray allowed his acrimonious relationship with Justices Vance and Reyna to improperly influence his conduct and judgment, and in the process, failed to treat those with whom he interacted in anofficial capacity, including court personnel, in a patient, dignified and courteous manner.
"The Commission concludes that Justice Gray’s conduct constituted willful and/or persistentviolations of Canons 2B and 3B(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct.
"In condemnation of the conduct described above that violated Canons 2B and 3B(4) ofthe Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, it is the Commission’s decision to issue a PUBLIC ADMONITION to the Honorable Tom Gray, Chief Justice, 10th Court of Appeals, Waco,McLennan County, Texas.
"Pursuant to the authority contained in Article V, §1-a(8) of the Texas Constitution, it isordered that the actions described above be made the subject of a PUBLIC ADMONITION by the Commission.
"The Commission has taken this action in a continuing effort to protect public confidence in the judicial system and to assist the state’s judiciary in its efforts to embody the principles and values set forth in the Texas Constitution and the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. Issued this the 18th day of December, 2008."
"After what I thought was a fairly well orchestrated campaign to file complaints against me with the Judicial Conduct Commission, I was very pleased to learn that all the complaints were dismissed with the exception of one part of one complaint.
That complaint, which was filed jointly by Justices Vance and Reyna, asked the Commission to remove me from the office to which the citizens of this great State had elected me. The Commission rejected their request.
In a State with as many judges as Texas, the Commission has a difficult task sorting out the complaints and has a very limited budget upon which to work. Obviously I was able to respond to the Commission’s concerns on the more concrete complaints linked to individual opinions like The City of Waco vs. Kelly and others.
What was more difficult for me to respond to were general allegations made by Justices Vance and Reyna regarding my management style and the way they allege that I interacted with Court staff.
They provided only general testimony that characterized my conduct in a negative light and due to the Commission’s limited funding the Commission did not require Justices Vance and Reyna to be more specific in their complaints nor did they call any other witnesses about the allegations of the Justices.
All I could really do is explain to the Commission that since Justice Vance said he would challenge any conduct that he found to be disrespectful and thus to create a hostile work environment, he did so on ONLY ONE occasion and that was just before he filed his complaint with the Commission.
I referred Justice Vance's complaint about this specific incident to another entity and that entity determined that I had not created a hostile work environment. The Commission’s admonition related only to the manner in which I interacted with the court staff and others.
So while I am disappointed that the Commission decided to take any action with regard to any of the Complaints, I respect that the Commission has a job to do.
I did what I thought was needed to do my job and to abide by my oath to “faithfully perform the duties of the office of Chief Justice of the Tenth Court of Appeals District of the State of Texas and to the best of my abilities, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and Laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God.”
Sources:
Tenth Court of Appeals Official Site
http://www.10thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/
Commission's Ruling -- Public Admonition
http://www.kwtx.com/news/misc/37613984.html
Justice Gray's Response
http://www.kwtx.com/news/misc/37614089.html
Say that three times fast.
First things first, for those of you who don't know, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals here in Texas is based in Waco and serves the surrounding Central Texas area (to be specific, 18 Texas counties are under its perview).
It is a court of review, with its 3 sitting justices reviewing the decisions (judgments) of lower district courts in both civil and criminal matters. Sometimes, the appellate court issues its own decision on something; however, its main purpose is to grade the papers of trial courts to make sure justice has been done. Its official website estimates that the Waco court hears 400 appellate matters each year.
The buck doesn't stop with the circuit courts of appeal, of course. These courts have their papers graded by the Texas Supreme Court in civil matters and the Court of Criminal Appeals in criminal cases. And, technically, any federal issues would be heard in the federal system, but that's a different jurisdiction and something to ponder on a different day.
Circuit Courts of Appeal are Very Powerful
Only a fraction of the circuit court's decisions are accepted for review by the two Texas high courts - they've got to control their workload, for one thing - and this leaves the circuit courts of appeal as very, very powerful institutions in this state. Odds are high that the decision made by the interim appellate courts, like Waco, will be the final deterimination -- so while you may not know the names of Chief Justice Tom Gray, Justice Felipe Reyna or Justice Bill Vance, it doesn't mean that they aren't three Very Big Kahunas.
Waco Chief Justice Tom Gray is Publicly Admonished by the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct
So, it's a big deal and something for you to know that an appellate court justice (and a chief justice at that) has had his own papers graded by the state agency that watches over the conduct of judges in this state. From the high courts to the J.P. courts, this commission oversees judicial conduct and not only investigates but punishes impropriety.
The Admonition and Justice Gray's Response are Online in their Entirety
And, the news today is that the Commission has issued a Public Admonition regarding Waco's Chief Justice Tom Gray. (You can read it at the site shown below.)
And, Chief Justice Gray has also issued a public response (you can read it, too, at the link below).
Excerpts From the Ruling
From their findings of fact:
"2. In March 2007, Justice Felipe Reyna introduced Justice Gray as the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the Republican Club of Somervel County in Glen Rose, Texas.
"3. At the conclusion of his introduction to the approximately sixty (60) Republicansattending the fundraiser, Justice Reyna told the group, “Please join me in welcoming mygood friend, Chief Justice Tom Gray,” or words to that effect.
"4. Justice Gray began his remarks to the audience by thanking Justice Reyna for theintroduction, but went on to state, “Really, we are not friends. He’s never been in my home. I’ve never been in his home. And furthermore, every time there’s a close vote onthe Court, he always votes with Bill Vance,” or words to that effect. ...
[So, at at Republic Party meeting in Glen Rose (where's that?), the Chief Justice took the podium and said that his colleague wasn't his 'friend'.]
"8. Thereafter, Justice Gray initiated a “whisper campaign” against Justice Reyna by criticizing him to Republican Party leaders in the counties located within the Court’sjurisdiction.
"9. Justice Gray attended Republican lunches and dinners and told party leaders “somebody needs to talk to Felipe. He’s not being a good Republican,” and that Justice Reyna“always votes with a liberal Democrat, [Justice] Bill Vance,” or words to that effect. ...
[So, we've got unknown gossips who are reporting that Chief Justice Gray was talking with party leaders that Justice Reyna wasn't following the party line. Remember that judges are elected in this state, not appointed. They are POLITICIANS, every single one of them.]
"11. According to a security tape obtained during the course of the investigation, on or about June 16, 2008, Justice Gray unlocked and entered the private offices of Justice Vance without permission.
"12. In his appearance before the Commission, Justice Gray defended the unauthorized entry of Justice Vance’s private offices by explaining that he was searching for a file. Justice Gray acknowledged, however, that after determining that the file was not in Justice Vance’s office, he reviewed other papers located on Justice Vance’s desk.
"13. Justice Gray further testified that he has unlocked and entered the private offices of both Justice Vance and Justice Reyna in the past to look for files while the other justices were not present and had not given their permission.
"14. Following these incidents, Justice Gray never informed his fellow judges of his entry intotheir offices....
[So, the boss of the Waco Court, which is what the Chief Justice is when you think about it, went into his colleagues' offices and looked around. Did they have an expectation of privacy? You know, that legal concept? Under labor law, do you have an expectation of privacy about your desk when you leave the office for the night, or the weekend? Just something to ponder here.]
"17. Justice Vance and Justice Reyna also testified about instances when Justice Gray hastreated court staff in a sarcastic, intimidating and demeaning manner, which conduct alsoincluded angry outbursts and personal attacks. Statements implying that the chief clerk would be out of a job after January 1, 2009, and efforts at other times to convince the other justices to vote in favor of firing the chief clerk and the accountant were also common. Such mistreatment was sufficient to reduce some staff members to tears and has contributed to extremely low employee morale at the Court.
[Well, it sure sounds like a tense working environment. Wonder what the chief clerk had to say about all this.]
Excerpts from their decision
"Canon 2B of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct states in pertinent part: “A judge shall not allow any relationship to influence judicial conduct or judgment.”
"Canon 3B(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct states in pertinent part: “A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in his official capacity[.]”
"The Commission concludes, based on the facts and evidence before it, that Justice Gray allowed his acrimonious relationship with Justices Vance and Reyna to improperly influence his conduct and judgment, and in the process, failed to treat those with whom he interacted in anofficial capacity, including court personnel, in a patient, dignified and courteous manner.
"The Commission concludes that Justice Gray’s conduct constituted willful and/or persistentviolations of Canons 2B and 3B(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct.
"In condemnation of the conduct described above that violated Canons 2B and 3B(4) ofthe Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, it is the Commission’s decision to issue a PUBLIC ADMONITION to the Honorable Tom Gray, Chief Justice, 10th Court of Appeals, Waco,McLennan County, Texas.
"Pursuant to the authority contained in Article V, §1-a(8) of the Texas Constitution, it isordered that the actions described above be made the subject of a PUBLIC ADMONITION by the Commission.
"The Commission has taken this action in a continuing effort to protect public confidence in the judicial system and to assist the state’s judiciary in its efforts to embody the principles and values set forth in the Texas Constitution and the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. Issued this the 18th day of December, 2008."
Justice Tom Gray's Response, in its entirety:
"After what I thought was a fairly well orchestrated campaign to file complaints against me with the Judicial Conduct Commission, I was very pleased to learn that all the complaints were dismissed with the exception of one part of one complaint.
That complaint, which was filed jointly by Justices Vance and Reyna, asked the Commission to remove me from the office to which the citizens of this great State had elected me. The Commission rejected their request.
In a State with as many judges as Texas, the Commission has a difficult task sorting out the complaints and has a very limited budget upon which to work. Obviously I was able to respond to the Commission’s concerns on the more concrete complaints linked to individual opinions like The City of Waco vs. Kelly and others.
What was more difficult for me to respond to were general allegations made by Justices Vance and Reyna regarding my management style and the way they allege that I interacted with Court staff.
They provided only general testimony that characterized my conduct in a negative light and due to the Commission’s limited funding the Commission did not require Justices Vance and Reyna to be more specific in their complaints nor did they call any other witnesses about the allegations of the Justices.
All I could really do is explain to the Commission that since Justice Vance said he would challenge any conduct that he found to be disrespectful and thus to create a hostile work environment, he did so on ONLY ONE occasion and that was just before he filed his complaint with the Commission.
I referred Justice Vance's complaint about this specific incident to another entity and that entity determined that I had not created a hostile work environment. The Commission’s admonition related only to the manner in which I interacted with the court staff and others.
So while I am disappointed that the Commission decided to take any action with regard to any of the Complaints, I respect that the Commission has a job to do.
I did what I thought was needed to do my job and to abide by my oath to “faithfully perform the duties of the office of Chief Justice of the Tenth Court of Appeals District of the State of Texas and to the best of my abilities, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and Laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God.”
So, Should Texas Judges Be Elected or Appointed?
Well, looks like one thing this whole event does is add fuel to the fire burning in the Let's Appoint Our Judges Camp here in Texas. There's been a big brouhaha for decades now on whether or not judges should be elected or appointed. Federal judges are appointed, remember?
So, should judges run for office, pick a party (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green) and do the meet and greets?
You be the judge.
Sources:
Tenth Court of Appeals Official Site
http://www.10thcoa.courts.state.tx.us/
Commission's Ruling -- Public Admonition
http://www.kwtx.com/news/misc/37613984.html
Justice Gray's Response
http://www.kwtx.com/news/misc/37614089.html
Monday, January 19, 2009
Cop Watch: Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy Steals 4 Kilos of Cocaine From Dealer
You just can't trust anyone these days.
A week ago Friday, before the bust, Standric Choice was a Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy with 8 years seniority and a previous record of working for the county as a jail guard. He drove a Sheriff's Department squad car, wore the uniform, and patroled South Dallas.
After the bust, on that same Friday afternoon, Choice became an inmate of the feds, wearing overalls and fabric shoes, with the prosecutors arguing he needs to stay behind bars until trial time because he's a high flight risk.
Deputy Standric Choice is facing a possible sentence of 80 years behind bars and a $250,000 fine.
What happened?
Well, the feds are at it again -- just like down in Cameron County (see the earlier post on that one) -- the federal government is busy investigating corruption in Texas policing agencies, and they're getting results.
Choice's undoing began on a Wednesday when an informant ratted to the FBI that there was a Dallas County Sheriff's deputy who would be "trading licks" that Friday.
Trading licks? That's the lingo for a con game where the deputy was going to help steal cocaine from a drug dealer. Yep, sort of a twisted Robin Hood game plan.
The FBI Cons the Con
The feds instructed the informant to go ahead and set things up with Deputy Choice and Charlie Hill (rumored to be Choice's brother-in-law). The rat allegedly told Hill that he was going to buy 4 kilograms of cocaine from the drug dealer on Friday afternoon, at the TA Truck Stop on IH 20 and Bonnie View Lane here in Dallas.
(Guess what? The "dealer" in this sting operation was really going to be a federal agent. Yes, just like on TV.)
Hill would watch the rat and the "dealer" meet at the truck stop, and Hill would call up Deputy Choice. Choice would barrel into the truck stop in his squad car, search the "dealer's" car and "confiscate" the coke. He'd also let the "dealer" go (not sure how this would be explained away) and then Deputy Choice, Hill, and the rat would divy up the prize.
The Feds Let the Game Play Out
That Friday, the FBI let the game play out. According to the filed affidavit, the rat and the brother-in-law did their dance at the truck stop, and Deputy Choice successfully drove away with the cocaine stashed in the trunk of his squad car: the feds busted Choice as soon as he drove into the parking lot of the Sheriff's Department.
What's the Sheriff's Department Saying?
Well, it's no surprise that the Dallas County Sheriff is labelling Deputy Choice as a lone wolf. According to the Dallas Morning News, Lupe Valdez has said: "It is extremely unfortunate that one person chose to ruin his career by making bad choices .... The acts of one do not reflect the acts of many."
Yeah, you'd think someone with the last name of CHOICE would know better.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/011309dnmetchoice.d2ad5.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/jail-watch-drop-in-bucket-as-cameron.html
A week ago Friday, before the bust, Standric Choice was a Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy with 8 years seniority and a previous record of working for the county as a jail guard. He drove a Sheriff's Department squad car, wore the uniform, and patroled South Dallas.
After the bust, on that same Friday afternoon, Choice became an inmate of the feds, wearing overalls and fabric shoes, with the prosecutors arguing he needs to stay behind bars until trial time because he's a high flight risk.
Deputy Standric Choice is facing a possible sentence of 80 years behind bars and a $250,000 fine.
What happened?
Well, the feds are at it again -- just like down in Cameron County (see the earlier post on that one) -- the federal government is busy investigating corruption in Texas policing agencies, and they're getting results.
Choice's undoing began on a Wednesday when an informant ratted to the FBI that there was a Dallas County Sheriff's deputy who would be "trading licks" that Friday.
Trading licks? That's the lingo for a con game where the deputy was going to help steal cocaine from a drug dealer. Yep, sort of a twisted Robin Hood game plan.
The FBI Cons the Con
The feds instructed the informant to go ahead and set things up with Deputy Choice and Charlie Hill (rumored to be Choice's brother-in-law). The rat allegedly told Hill that he was going to buy 4 kilograms of cocaine from the drug dealer on Friday afternoon, at the TA Truck Stop on IH 20 and Bonnie View Lane here in Dallas.
(Guess what? The "dealer" in this sting operation was really going to be a federal agent. Yes, just like on TV.)
Hill would watch the rat and the "dealer" meet at the truck stop, and Hill would call up Deputy Choice. Choice would barrel into the truck stop in his squad car, search the "dealer's" car and "confiscate" the coke. He'd also let the "dealer" go (not sure how this would be explained away) and then Deputy Choice, Hill, and the rat would divy up the prize.
The Feds Let the Game Play Out
That Friday, the FBI let the game play out. According to the filed affidavit, the rat and the brother-in-law did their dance at the truck stop, and Deputy Choice successfully drove away with the cocaine stashed in the trunk of his squad car: the feds busted Choice as soon as he drove into the parking lot of the Sheriff's Department.
What's the Sheriff's Department Saying?
Well, it's no surprise that the Dallas County Sheriff is labelling Deputy Choice as a lone wolf. According to the Dallas Morning News, Lupe Valdez has said: "It is extremely unfortunate that one person chose to ruin his career by making bad choices .... The acts of one do not reflect the acts of many."
Yeah, you'd think someone with the last name of CHOICE would know better.
Sources:
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/011309dnmetchoice.d2ad5.html
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2009/01/jail-watch-drop-in-bucket-as-cameron.html
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Jail Watch: The Public Needs to Understand How Parole Officials Can Trump Juries - The Injustice to Jimmie Lee Page
Jimmie Lee Page has served almost 20 years in jail after an Austin jury found him not guilty.
(The Austin American Statesman is doing a great thing in educating the public, by its recent re-publication of a story it first reported back in 2007 - telling the story of Jimmie Lee Page. Read the full article, it's worth your time, at the link shown below.)
How Can You Serve 20 Years in Jail After Being Found Not Guilty?
It's easy in this country. All you have to do is be on parole for something else, because those parole officials can trump a jury faster than Michael Phelps can win a gold medal.
In Page's case, the parole guys listened to one witness -- a police detective who told them that Page was "as guilty as sin" -- before they revoked Page's parole and sent him back to the slammer. Since then, they've just been denying Page a right to parole whenever his case gets rotated up for review.
What Did Page Do?
Thirty-two years ago, when he was a young man (Page is now 52), Jimmy Page killed a friend of his - and he pled guilty to that crime, got a life sentence, and served 11 years in prison before he was released on parole. Page returned to Nacogdoches, Texas, to live with his mother.
He'd done nothing to violate parole, by the way. Still hasn't.
Eight months later, Page was arrested for the local murder of a housekeeper. He insisted he was innocent, and instead of taking a plea, he went to trial where he was found innocent by a jury of his peers.
Importantly, Page's attorney ( a veteran defense attorney with 35+ years experience) tells reporters that while a lot of his clients are indeed guilty, he truly believes that Page is innocent of the murder for which he was charged.
What's the Evidence Against Him? The Only Key Evidence is Eyewitness Testimony of a Traumatized Boy Whose Credibility is Questionable
There was scant evidence against Page in the Nacogdoches murder case.
The key witness was an eyewitness -- a child who was also a victim in the crime. The boy did pointed the finger at Page in one line-up, but this traumatized boy also pointed the finger at another man in another line-up, and described someone who looked a lot different than Page to the police artist who drew up a sketch of the assailant.
Psychological experts kept the boy from the parole hearing - the child was too fragile to give any testimony to the parole officials. So, all they heard was from their one law enforcement guy.
Two Serious Threats to Justice Here That the Public Should Know About
Kudos to the Austin American Statesman for a great article (definitely read the whole thing, the link is shown below), and for getting the following information out to the general public:
1. The American Public needs to understand that once someone is on parole, there's very little to safeguard against injustice in parole board hearings, as the Page case typifies. These officials can trump a jury verdict without any of the evidentiary protections set in place in a criminal trial, and few know about this Star Chamber crack in the system; and
2. Eyewitness testimony in this country should not carry the weight that it is given in trials today. Countless studies have been done on how human beings do not remember things (or people) accurately and having someone point the finger on the stand should not be unilaterally taken as true. The child-victim in this case is a point in fact; psychologically harmed, he gave many different faces to his perpetrator, and as sympathetic as we all must be to his tragedies, his single voice should not be used to put a man behind bars -- especially when that eyewitness account is taken by a police officer and used, hearsay though it is, as his basis for telling the parole board that a man is guilty of a crime. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/archive/0415page.html
Stanford University - Journal of Legal Studies (The Problem with Eyewitness Testimony)
http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm
(The Austin American Statesman is doing a great thing in educating the public, by its recent re-publication of a story it first reported back in 2007 - telling the story of Jimmie Lee Page. Read the full article, it's worth your time, at the link shown below.)
How Can You Serve 20 Years in Jail After Being Found Not Guilty?
It's easy in this country. All you have to do is be on parole for something else, because those parole officials can trump a jury faster than Michael Phelps can win a gold medal.
In Page's case, the parole guys listened to one witness -- a police detective who told them that Page was "as guilty as sin" -- before they revoked Page's parole and sent him back to the slammer. Since then, they've just been denying Page a right to parole whenever his case gets rotated up for review.
What Did Page Do?
Thirty-two years ago, when he was a young man (Page is now 52), Jimmy Page killed a friend of his - and he pled guilty to that crime, got a life sentence, and served 11 years in prison before he was released on parole. Page returned to Nacogdoches, Texas, to live with his mother.
He'd done nothing to violate parole, by the way. Still hasn't.
Eight months later, Page was arrested for the local murder of a housekeeper. He insisted he was innocent, and instead of taking a plea, he went to trial where he was found innocent by a jury of his peers.
Importantly, Page's attorney ( a veteran defense attorney with 35+ years experience) tells reporters that while a lot of his clients are indeed guilty, he truly believes that Page is innocent of the murder for which he was charged.
What's the Evidence Against Him? The Only Key Evidence is Eyewitness Testimony of a Traumatized Boy Whose Credibility is Questionable
There was scant evidence against Page in the Nacogdoches murder case.
The key witness was an eyewitness -- a child who was also a victim in the crime. The boy did pointed the finger at Page in one line-up, but this traumatized boy also pointed the finger at another man in another line-up, and described someone who looked a lot different than Page to the police artist who drew up a sketch of the assailant.
Psychological experts kept the boy from the parole hearing - the child was too fragile to give any testimony to the parole officials. So, all they heard was from their one law enforcement guy.
Two Serious Threats to Justice Here That the Public Should Know About
Kudos to the Austin American Statesman for a great article (definitely read the whole thing, the link is shown below), and for getting the following information out to the general public:
1. The American Public needs to understand that once someone is on parole, there's very little to safeguard against injustice in parole board hearings, as the Page case typifies. These officials can trump a jury verdict without any of the evidentiary protections set in place in a criminal trial, and few know about this Star Chamber crack in the system; and
2. Eyewitness testimony in this country should not carry the weight that it is given in trials today. Countless studies have been done on how human beings do not remember things (or people) accurately and having someone point the finger on the stand should not be unilaterally taken as true. The child-victim in this case is a point in fact; psychologically harmed, he gave many different faces to his perpetrator, and as sympathetic as we all must be to his tragedies, his single voice should not be used to put a man behind bars -- especially when that eyewitness account is taken by a police officer and used, hearsay though it is, as his basis for telling the parole board that a man is guilty of a crime. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Sources:
Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/archive/0415page.html
Stanford University - Journal of Legal Studies (The Problem with Eyewitness Testimony)
http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm
Monday, January 12, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Galveston Judge Samuel Kent Still Set for Trial on Jan 26 But With Big New Charges
Okay - here's an update to an October 2008 post, and once again, I cannot make this stuff up.
It all began when the first federal district judge in our nation's history got indicted last year for sex crimes. And, sure - of course, it had to be some judge in Texas. Geez.
So, right now, over in the Houston federal courthouse, you've got District Judge Samuel Kent working away after being transferred to Houston from his longtime bench in Galveston after becoming this infamous, indicted judge. And, down the hall, you've got the very same District Judge Samuel Kent facing trial later this month for these various sex crimes.
Yep, in the very same courthouse.
And, if that weren't bizarre enough for you -- last Friday, Judge Kent got three new charges added to his indictment which brought in a second female court employee alleging that Judge Kent had performed acts that amount to aggravated sexual abuse and abusive sexual contact. Also added, an obstruction of justice charge.
It's reported that his attorney, Dick DeGuerin, says that these new charges aren't true but he can't say more than that, because there is a gag order in place.
The allegations are serious...
Gag order or not, the details of what Judge Kent allegedly did to the two women is being reported in the media (see sources, below, if you want to read all about it). Judge Kent has admitted to a single spurned kiss; the two women are claiming much more than that happened over a period of years.
This new Obstruction charge is a big deal.
Judge Kent can thank Enron and Martha Stewart for this new Obstruction of Justice charge. It's proven itself to be a powerful and successful tool in the prosecution's belt.
By adding this new spin to the indictment, Judge Kent not only has to defend against what two women are saying he did, but he's got to face off against investigators and the like, who are going to tell a jury that Kent lied to them about things, thwarting their efforts.
As Martha can tell you, under an obstruction charge, you don't have to be guilty of the crime being investigated to be guilty of obstruction. And you still face a significant punishment: on obstruction alone, Judge Kent could face 20 years imprisonment - and that's before you begin to consider the ramifications to his legal career.
Charging Obstruction of Justice is Dangerous to Justice
Charging obstruction is a scary thing -- regardless of how horrid the alleged conduct might be, having grand juries tack these charges onto indictments is getting to be pretty Big Brother-y for some: you've got the constitutional right not to incriminate yourself, but absent taking the 5th how much leeway does a defendant having these days in dealing with the legal authorities?
Creating criminal liability where there wasn't any beforehand is a danger to justice, and something we all need to be watching, as many scholars are warning against prosecutors' "creative interpretation" of the obstruction statutes.
Just something to ponder, regardless of how you feel about Ol' Sam Kent.
What's next?
Last anyone has reported, this case is still going to trial on January 26th. That's 14 days from now.
Meanwhile, Judge Kent is out on his own recognizance -- so when trial begins, he can just take the same morning route to the courthouse he's been taking everyday for over a year now and park in the same parking spot.
Sources:
Abilene Reporter News
(Details on Allegations)
http://www.reporternews.com/news/2009/jan/07/texas-judge-pleads-innocent-to-new-sex-charges/
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6199838.html
The Federalist Society
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/pubid.1037/pub_detail.asp
United States District Court Judges Roster -- Southern District of Texas
http://www.txs.uscourts.gov/district/judges/
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog - October 2008
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2008/10/judge-watch-galveston-federal-judge-sam.html
It all began when the first federal district judge in our nation's history got indicted last year for sex crimes. And, sure - of course, it had to be some judge in Texas. Geez.
So, right now, over in the Houston federal courthouse, you've got District Judge Samuel Kent working away after being transferred to Houston from his longtime bench in Galveston after becoming this infamous, indicted judge. And, down the hall, you've got the very same District Judge Samuel Kent facing trial later this month for these various sex crimes.
Yep, in the very same courthouse.
And, if that weren't bizarre enough for you -- last Friday, Judge Kent got three new charges added to his indictment which brought in a second female court employee alleging that Judge Kent had performed acts that amount to aggravated sexual abuse and abusive sexual contact. Also added, an obstruction of justice charge.
It's reported that his attorney, Dick DeGuerin, says that these new charges aren't true but he can't say more than that, because there is a gag order in place.
The allegations are serious...
Gag order or not, the details of what Judge Kent allegedly did to the two women is being reported in the media (see sources, below, if you want to read all about it). Judge Kent has admitted to a single spurned kiss; the two women are claiming much more than that happened over a period of years.
This new Obstruction charge is a big deal.
Judge Kent can thank Enron and Martha Stewart for this new Obstruction of Justice charge. It's proven itself to be a powerful and successful tool in the prosecution's belt.
By adding this new spin to the indictment, Judge Kent not only has to defend against what two women are saying he did, but he's got to face off against investigators and the like, who are going to tell a jury that Kent lied to them about things, thwarting their efforts.
As Martha can tell you, under an obstruction charge, you don't have to be guilty of the crime being investigated to be guilty of obstruction. And you still face a significant punishment: on obstruction alone, Judge Kent could face 20 years imprisonment - and that's before you begin to consider the ramifications to his legal career.
Charging Obstruction of Justice is Dangerous to Justice
Charging obstruction is a scary thing -- regardless of how horrid the alleged conduct might be, having grand juries tack these charges onto indictments is getting to be pretty Big Brother-y for some: you've got the constitutional right not to incriminate yourself, but absent taking the 5th how much leeway does a defendant having these days in dealing with the legal authorities?
Creating criminal liability where there wasn't any beforehand is a danger to justice, and something we all need to be watching, as many scholars are warning against prosecutors' "creative interpretation" of the obstruction statutes.
Just something to ponder, regardless of how you feel about Ol' Sam Kent.
What's next?
Last anyone has reported, this case is still going to trial on January 26th. That's 14 days from now.
Meanwhile, Judge Kent is out on his own recognizance -- so when trial begins, he can just take the same morning route to the courthouse he's been taking everyday for over a year now and park in the same parking spot.
Sources:
Abilene Reporter News
(Details on Allegations)
http://www.reporternews.com/news/2009/jan/07/texas-judge-pleads-innocent-to-new-sex-charges/
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6199838.html
The Federalist Society
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/pubid.1037/pub_detail.asp
United States District Court Judges Roster -- Southern District of Texas
http://www.txs.uscourts.gov/district/judges/
Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog - October 2008
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2008/10/judge-watch-galveston-federal-judge-sam.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
