Unauthorized (and unethical) practice of law.

Just another day dealing with the bull that goes on in Jackson County. Shelley called our client's wife to talk with her, and was told that Marilyn from the Prosecutor's Office told her that she was not allowed to talk with us without prosecutors being present. Now, Marilyn presided over the prosecution mob in Monday's riot in the Courthouse. Now she's giving legal advise to witnesses. Makes me cringe to see my taxpayer dollars at work!

Another day. Another courthouse assault.

So, after yesterday's riot, it turns out that although four were arrested, no charges were filed! Guess it's o.k. to assault people in court, as long as you're invited by the prosecutors. One concussion, one with stitches, four to hospital for an assault ON VIDEO and no charges filed. Dan Ross covers something before Judge Sauer (same floor as yesterday's assault) and as he walks out of the courtroom, baby's mama (State's witness) attacks with a high heel shoe (certainly an article or substance capable of causing serious physical injury in the manner in which it was used). I arrive later and ask the deputy on duty if he was present. Yes. Did you arrest her? No. The escalating violence by prosecution fans is out of control. The police don't step in when it's an assault, and from past experience we know it will be worse on the street than in the courthouse.

Prosecution mob causes riot in court

Prior to arraignment, brother of victim had pointed gun at my client's mom and brother on two separate occasions. Of course, the police did nothing, even though victim's brother on felony probation. So, I show up for arraignment and the prosecution has gathered an impressive mob. The "victim advocate" has a group of about 50 in the courtroom, and my client's well-dressed, professional family and friends are woefully outnumbered. I let the sheriff's deputy know that we need more security, and she notes my client's name by writing it on her hand. Judge Torrence comes out, admonishes the crowd to be civil, calls our case first, and everything is fine. There's a big crowd outside, and another deputy offers to walk me out the back way. As we are about to the door, we hear the eruption in the hall and both go outside. It's a riot. My client's family and friends are getting a beat down, blood and hair flying, and there is no end in sight. The sheriff calls for backup, I move to break up one group and a female comes in with fists flying. I run into the courtroom and yell for more sheriffs. When I come out, the prosecution mob has my client's step dad down on the ground. He's not moving and they're stomping on his head. Still only one sheriff, and he's not doing anything. Back to the courtroom yelling for an ambulance. Attorney Dave Suroff comes out and starts yelling for people to stop, with a volume that was the "voice of god" and it had some effect. This had been going on for about 10 minutes, and a plain clothed detective sheriff came up from the 1st floor, and started telling people to calm down. I think the prosecution mob was just getting tired and running out of people to beat up. About that time, the elevator doors open and about a dozen KCPD officers come out, responding to an call for "officer assist." Only the shouting remained. And the blood. And teeth. And hair. And shoes. And other debris. My client's step-dad wasn't moving and was bleeding from his ears. He got up, in his work uniform, and was covered with blood. Uncle had a nasty gash on his cheek with blood everywhere. Even my client's mom--a classy professional--had a cut on her face. Downstairs, I'm told four got arrested, including the instigator. As he was being arrested, he pointed at my client's brother and said he was going to kill him. Lots of talk about getting their guns, etc. Ambulance comes, lots of cops, four arrests, four to hospital.

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.

Prosecutors caught cheating in Casey Anthony trial.

Remember all the evidence about Casey Anthony searching about "chloroform" 84 times? Certainly had everyone thinking that Caylee had been chloroformed, even though the cause of death was unknown.
Turns out the information was a fraud: a glitch in a computer program produced the bad information AND the prosecutors and police were alerted to the false data during the trial and did not correct it.

"Chloroform" had been searched for one (yep, that's 1) time, and then a web site was on the use of chloroform in the 1800s was accessed.

The programmer alerted prosecutors and police to the error and the correct data during the trial and the prosecutors did not alert the court and defense counsel.

“The prosecution is absolutely obligated to bring forth to the court any and all evidence that could be exculpatory,” Mr. Mason said. “If in fact this is true, and the prosecution concealed this new information, it is more than shame on them. It is outrageous.” Here's the link from the New York Times:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43807133/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/

Can I call the prosecutor as a witness?

So, I'm appearing in a rural county where the local sheriff has obtained a search warrant to search my client's farm. According to the affidavit, the sheriff received a call about a loud noise and went to investigate. Being the thorough investigator that he his, he decided to peek into the windows of an out-building garage and saw five marijuana plants growing. So, according to the affidavit, he then sought a search warrant and the rest is history. Anyway, I just returned from court and a meeting with the (very nice) prosecutor. During our chat, she asked me: "Do you really know why you're here?" Assuming that "because my client is charged with a crime" was the wrong answer, I shyly said: "Not really." The prosecutor then explained that my (stupid) client had had his neighbor mow the pasture. Again, feeling a little stupid, I asked if mowing the pasture was why I was "really" here (or there). She politely explained that the neighbor was a former Deputy Sheriff, and he had seen the marijuana plants and called the current sheriff. Soooo . . . the good news is that I now know why my client got charged. The bad news (or good news for us) is that the current sheriff filed a false affidavit about a loud noise and carefully left out the source of his information. So, the sheriff filed a false affidavit to hide the source of his information, but the person telling me this is the elected prosecutor. Is the prosecutor now my witness, or do I hope that the sheriff will tell the truth about his perjury? Just another day . . . .

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.

Trial--Day Four; No witness, so plead guilty?

O.K. A good result, but does this strike anyone else as odd?
Show up on Thursday. The State still doesn't have their witness. So, it would seem in the normal world, the State would have to dismiss.
Ah . . . but it's Jackson County, Missouri. The State would dismiss and refile the same case and, presumably, wait another 2 years and two weeks to find their witness and, if they didn't, just dismiss and refile again. In this insane system, you can be kept in jail forever by the State dismissing and refiling the same case.
In any event, plead to 10 years on voluntary, and client got two pending robbery first degree cases reduced to robbery second and 10 years, concurrent.
Good result, but it seems odd pleading guilty when the State doesn't have their necessary, sole witness.

Brother, Can I get a Trial?

Third day for trial, jury still not sworn, and the prosecutors have lost the witness they found on Monday. Judge recesses the case and jury sent home.
We had entered our appearance on this case about 5 weeks ago and, instead of having our client sit in jail for another year or two, kept the trial setting.
It seems easier to just go to trial than waiting several years for what may or may not be a reasonable plea offer. The offer in this case is 20 years on murder second degree. It's become a sad fact of life in Jackson County that you don't get good offers until trial.
Now, in trial, we still don't have a good offer.
And the State does not have their witness.

Poor Jackson County Jurors.

Murder trial with a Tuesday start. That's usually a good thing since we get to start jury selection right at 9:00 a.m. instead of waiting until the afternoon like on Monday starts. (Strange how jury selection starts Monday morning everywhere but in Jackson County.)
Alas, no early start. Jury panel arrives at 11:15. Jury isn't  picked until 7:00 p.m. That's a long day for $5.00 jury pay.
Prosecutor asks to not swear the jury until Wednesday and has "found" another witness. The witness they couldn't find for two years, two weeks and a day has been continuously working at ReStart since the shooting.

Oh No! Not Again!

Another day, another discovery violation.
Ever since Merriweather v State, it's been clear that the prosecutor's duty to disclose convictions of State witnesses is taken seriously by the Supreme Court. After all, only the prosecutors have access to computerized databases such as NCIC and MULES.
Representing a man on a post conviction hearing. There had been an undisclosed deal with a co-defendant (dismissal--pretty good deal!) but the prosecutor had, belatedly, disclosed convictions on four State's witnesses. Since convictions are so rarely disclosed, started looking at the four witnesses on case.net.
Oh No! The first witness had additional convictions, not disclosed.
Oh No.! The second witness had additional convictions, not disclosed.
Oh No.! The third witness had additional convictions, not disclosed.

Oh No.! The fourth witness had additional convictions, not disclosed.
A perfect record! All told, about 10 missing convictions.
Perhaps most alarming is that the prosecutor says that they ran the witnesses and the convictions didn't show up. Pretty good evidence that however the prosecutors are "running" their witnesses is being done correctly.
We'll see what happens now.

Why you should never talk to the police, part 1,234,873

The insanity continues. As KCPD laments their inability to solve murder cases, I experience yet another in the seemingly endless examples of how not to deal with witnesses and the public.

Client and friend are going to house where friend is going to pay back $50 to female friend. All above board: returning some borrowed money. Not for drugs or sex or bribery of public officials.

Client drives friend, who gets out and approaches female. Guys with female start arguing with friend and fight starts. Client is still in car, watching. During fight, gun comes out and one of the guys is shot and killed. Friend gets in car and client drives off.

Client didn't have gun, didn't anticipate any problems, didn't shoot anyone, didn't do anything more illegal than witness a shooting.

So . . . client gets charged with murder first degree! Amazing probable cause statement, tells straight story--no criminal activity, just a witness to a shooting. Now, it's alarming that a detective thinks that's a crime. More bizarre is a prosecutor signing off on probable cause. And a judge signed the complaint. And a grand jury indicted.

$500,000 cash only bond (reduced by Judge Youngs, who probably read the (lack of) probable cause statement. Now, realizing that no crime was committed by client, the prosecutor wants him as a witness.

Instead of dismissing and apologizing for arresting, charging and incarcerating a mere witness, the prosecutor is offering a "deal:" plead to a felony of hindering prosecution, take four years, be a snitch.

We have declined the offer.

And they wonder why the public doesn't want to cooperate . . . .

Oh No! Not Again!

O.K. In a most unusual happening, we have a post conviction case where the Jackson County Prosecutor appeared to have actually provided all discovery. Well, everything except what they say they don't have to provide.

We have this ongoing dispute, or actually a few disputes. In this case, the prosecutor cut a deal with a co-defendant. Jackson County Prosecutors think that it is O.K. to cut a deal and not tell anyone until the deal is done: I'll give a witness probation, but it's not a done deal until probation is given, so they claim they don't have to disclose the deal.

Or, the prosecutor sits in on a deposition of a witness taken in a co-defendant's case. So, there is a statement under oath by a state's witness, but the prosecutors think they don't have to disclose that.

ANYWAY, in this post conviction case, other than not disclosing a deal and not providing a deposition of a witness, the assistant prosecutor had apparently done pretty well.

The prosecutor had actually provided a list of witnesses with convictions!!! Now, of course, that is required by Supreme Court Rule, but in Jackson County the prosecutors just ignore that little detail. Even though the Missouri Supreme Court, in Merriweather v. State, said that the failure to provide convictions is a due process violation and automatic reversal, it is still something that Jackson County doesn't do very often.

Anyway, the prosecutor in this case had listed four witnesses with convictions. On a lark, I entered the first witness in casenet (the public website listing Missouri criminal cases). Now, casenet won't show all convictions, won't show closed convictions (like suspended imposition of sentence), but it's pretty good.

First witness . . . casenet shows two convictions not disclosed by the prosecutor.

Second witness . . . casenet shows five convictions not disclosed by the prosecutor.

Third witness . . . casenet show one conviction not disclosed by the prosecutor.

Fourth witness . . . casenet shows two convictions not disclosed by the prosecutor.

Don't know what database the prosecutor is using, but it makes you wonder if they EVER disclose convictions as the Supreme Court requires. Most bizarre is that they had disclosed out of state convictions and convictions from other counties, but had missed convictions from Jackson County.

Pre-Trial Publicity Stunts by Prosecutors

"More than 100 US mobsters arrested in "largest Mafia round up in history': US Attorney Eric Holder." N.Y. Post

WHY BOTHER WITH A TRIAL WHEN THE US ATTORNEY CONVICTS YOU IN THE MEDIA?

Some Constitution. A defendant is presumed innocent, until the prosecutor holds a press conference and proclaims guilt. There ought to be a rule prohibiting such pre-trial publicity stunts.
Oh. There is. Prosecutors just ignore it.

Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor
The prosecutor in a criminal case shall: (f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's actio and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial liklihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused, and exercise reasonable care to prvent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees, or other persons assistant or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extradjudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 4-3.6 or this Rule 4-3.8.

So, who prosecutes prosecutors when they violate the rules of professional responsibility?

Good question. If you find out the answer, let me know.

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.

Sometimes the system works . . .

So, the client had been in jail for over a year on some ridiculous bond that only Bill Gates could make. It had been specially set in February for a July 13, 2009 trial date. Speedy trial motion filed. (See July 13 rant.)
Anyway, bond hearing to modify bond conditions given that the prosecutor had blown the trial date with a record setting 418 pages of missing discovery. So . . . Judge Schieber very quickly remembered the case and ordered a signature bond with county house arrest.