Attorney Dorothy Savory's Twin Trouble

Attorney Dorothy Savory is in the news for showing up at a preliminary hearing for her client Darrel White, Jr. with his twin brother, Darrel White instead. Mark Morris's story in the KC Star is a good one and has a catchy headline: "Double trouble for KC lawyer who appeared with client's twin." Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said she is duty bound to report Savory to the Missouri Bar. "That's a responsibility I take very seriously and one I'm heavily reviewing under these circumstances." Russ Ptacek did a nice follow up for KSHB and reported that Savory had also made the news in the Baby Lisa saga and been accused of "fraud" and "mockery" in a custody battle.

Sisco found not guilty on all counts

Late yesterday, Anthony Sisco was found not guilty of murder first degree, armed criminal action, assault first degree and armed criminal action. The jury started deliberations on Monday at about 2:30 p.m. and, according to the jury, were 11-1 for acquittal when they broke at 5 p.m.

The jury thought the case was clearly self-defense, both because the purported victims had pointed an AR-15 at Anthony and because once Sylvester Sisco started shooting, a "reasonable person" would think he was in imminent danger of death or serious physical injury.

As previously noted, the KCPD, the crime lab and the prosecutors had managed to keep from four judges, one petit jury, and four grand juries the fact that their "enhanced" video showed the AR-15 being pointed at Anthony Sisco.

Discovery? What discovery?

So, after four days of trying to go to trial and getting a plea done, it's off to Independence after being ordered to appear for a scheduled show cause hearing in State v. Lopez. For the past eight months the prosecutor hasn't complied with discovery and its show cause day.

Or is it. The judge is in trial and, incredibly, decides that what would work best is for the defense to tell the Court (again) what discovery is missing! Does anyone else see something strange here? The defense is missing whatever discovery the State has not provided, and the defense doesn't know what that missing discovery is.

Which witness addresses have not been updated? Don't know.
Which witnesses have undisclosed arrests and convictions? Don't know.
What transcripts from co-defendants cases have not been provided? Don't know.

Oh well. Like so many cases in Jackson County, we'll sort it out in a post-conviction hearing . . . .

It took over six years, but Larry gets probation

Larry was charged with murder first degree for a drug deal gone bad. Problem was, he didn't have a gun, didn't plan a robbery, didn't shoot anyone, cooperated with the police, was nearly killed in the Jackson County Jail and sentencing was today in front of Judge Atwell.

After listening to the attorneys, and aware that Larry had spent over six years in the county jail (and almost been killed for cooperating), Judge Atwell gave Larry a twelve year sentence, but probated the sentence. He got 10 years on armed criminal action, but should have that time already done.

So, we were hired to try for a 15 year sentence, and Larry gets probation.

My best guess is that the six years in county cost taxpayers about $125,000 before tacking on the medical bills for the beating in jail--maybe another $300,000. Even with the waste in government, would think that money could have been better spent.

More Republic of Jackson County

Another day, another excuse. While in the rest of the state, prosecutors are required to file a response to a motion within 10 days, I heard yet another interesting exception in the Republic of Jackson County.
A motion to dismiss and notice of hearing was mailed to the prosecutor on November 2. A copy was received and filed by criminal records on November 4. The hearing was set for November 15 at 1:30 p.m.
No response filed by the prosecutor, but a new Court Rule was suggested by the prosecutor. The prosecutor was out of town and didn't get back until November 8. Since he didn't get the motion until November 8, no response is obviously due until November 18.
Did the prosecutor request an extension? No.
Did the prosecutor call defense counsel? No.
Was there a hearing? No.
Do the Supreme Court Rules apply in Jackson County? No.

23 year old gets 23 years. Go figure.

What do you say to a 23 year old client who gets sentenced to 23 years in prison?
It could have been worse. or You'll still be younger than me when you get out. or Maybe they'll change the 85% rule to 65% and instead of 19.5 years you'll only serve 15 years.
How do we justify a 23 sentence for a 23 year old?
This sentence will deter others. or This shows that we don't tolerate killing. or Next time, I bet you'll think before getting a gun?

All too frequent murder case. Bouncer kicks client out for something client didn't do, disrespects client, client gets gun and kills bouncer, another gunslinger shoots client in the balls.
Bouncer has wife, family, friends -- absolutely no sense in killing.
Client has strong family, many friends -- absolutely not in character to kill.
Sister of victim asks for forgiveness. Client apologizes (genuinely) to victim's family.
Plea agreement to a range of 10 to 23 years and Judge Youngs gives 23 years. (Might have to rethink pleading to a lid in Division 6.)

We spend a bazillion dollars on locking people up, but no one asks (and certainly doesn't attempt to answer) a pretty important question: How much time should we make someone spend in prison?
You would think that an informed answer to this question would be somewhat important. Each year we lock someone up, we taxpayers chip in about $25,000.00. As of June 2008, there were 2,310,984 people in prisons and jails. That comes to about $57,774,600,000.00 per year. $57 Billion dollars still seems like a lot to me.
Back in the day, people were interested in important things like recidivism (the liklihood that someone would re-offend), rehabilitation (hey-most are getting out some day), deterrence (how much punishment deters others), and other such things.
No more. Lock 'em up.
But for how long?
If, for example, we lock people up for a year more than is "necessary" then we've made a multi-billion dollar boo boo. Of course, maybe we should lock them up longer, but this lock-em-up-and throw-away-the-key approach doesn't seem to have been very effective over the past 30-40 years.