So You Want To Know More About Palin?

Forget the 24 Hour news stations and the Rush Limbaugh morons of the airwaves...Read and learn about GOP VP pick Sarah Palin from the people that know her best...the people in her own state!

From The Anchorage Daily News:

"I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere," Palin told the cheering McCain crowd, referring to Ketchikan's Gravina Island bridge.

But Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.

The Alaska governor campaigned in 2006 on a build-the-bridge platform, telling Ketchikan residents she felt their pain when politicians called them "nowhere."

I've got the ADN saved in my bookmarks for my daily news fix.

Obama/Biden

How cool is this! F*cking text message scared the crap out of me at blasting in my bedroom at 1:08 in the morning!

from: 679382@txt.att.net
to: sancho@REMOVETHISFIRST!pdiblog.com
date: Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 1:08 AM
1:08 AM (16 minutes ago)

Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee. Watch the first Obama-Biden rally live at 3pm ET on www.BarackObama.com.
================================================================
This mobile text message is brought to you by AT&T

My Obama VP Picks

1. Caroline Kennedy

2. Joe Biden

Nuff Said.

Question From A Juror - Follow-Up

Okay, so thank you to the two anonymous yahoo's who helped in my weak and convoluted explanation of Jury Investigations with comments like, What he said and That's what I would have said. Very Funny.

I received a response from our California Juror who emailed me this email last week.

from Jury Duty ****@gmail.com

to Sancho <sanchoATpdiblog.com>
date Wed,
Aug 13, 2008 at 7:38 PM

subject Re: Question from Juror - Not one of
your cases

mailed-bygmail.com
Aug 13 (4 days ago)
Reply
Thank you for your response. It actually was really helpful, particularly the piece about how you obtain our personal information and what you're legally allowed to disseminate - or not as it seems. During voir dire, we all watched how the defendant and the lawyer worked together to select us, and the two of them had both our first and last names right in front of them the entire time. So, of course, we began to question the protection of our privacy from the beginning. The PI visits only made it worse. I had to laugh when you mentioned the "behind the scenes wrangling" to get evidence admitted. I think jury duty was probably the most inefficient experience of my life, and I fault the hour and half lunches that turned into 2 to 3 hours due to the wrangling. But I get the necessity. Thanks again for answering my email so honestly. As helpful as your answer was, I'm still not reconciled to the home visits. But your response is much appreciated.

I'm not sure if I was happy with his response but only because I wish I could have done a better job of explaining the defense position in a much shorter amount of words. Oh well...I'm always curious about the thoughts that go through juror's minds before, during, and after a trial so at least it was informative for the both of us.

A Question From A Juror...

I received the following letter last night, and although its waaaay past my bedtime, I decided to try tackling it with an honest answer. I'm sure I f*cked it all up and confused this juror more than I helped in answering his/her question but I will only blame my need for sleep and my need to have a new post on my blawg today. Someone throw me a bone and fill in the blanks that I know need filling in:

On 8/12/08, Jury Duty <*************@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi

I came across your blog and was wondering if you could answer a question for me.

I was recently a juror on a trial in ***************** County. The case is over, and we found the defendant guilty - it was a horrible, violent case. Ever since the verdict, my fellow jurors and I have been contacted by the investigator who works for the defendant (this person also testified during the trial). The investigator has called our home telephone numbers and even showed up on our doorsteps trying to speak to us.

How is this possible? I guess that's a stupid question with the Internet, search engines, etc. I guess my real question is how is it acceptable that an employee of the Defense has the home address of a juror? And why is it acceptable that our privacy be violated?

I've tried to contact the Public Defender's office directly, but they refuse to speak with me or answer this question unless I identify myself. So, here again my anonymity, my right to privacy is disrespected.

I would love to hear your thoughts? Is this something you do when the verdict doesn't go your way? Is this a common practice for PIs under the employee of the Defense?

Thanks,
Juror

Hi Juror!

I appreciate the email and I'm sorry you're having a hard time dealing with aftermath of the verdict on what was obviously a pretty serious case. I'll do my best to answer your question in the little time I have and I'll post your letter on my blawg (minus all identifying information of course) so maybe you can get a better response from the many other (smarter and better) investigators and attorneys out in the real world. Oh, and I apologize in advance for spelling errors and the grammatical horror which you are about to read...sorry...its late.

First off, I won't (and can't) make any excuses for the investigator (him/her) because I've had cases in the past that were also pretty serious that resulted in me having to make contact with the jurors at their homes and even places of employment after guilty or hung verdicts. Its part of our job.

You should understand that the investigator trying to make contact with you and the other jurors is not doing so at the personal request of the defendant on the case, he/she is not trying to intimidate you, and he/she is not doing it to satisfy his own curiosity. The only reason a defense investigator would attempt to contact a juror after a trial is because he has been requested to do so by the attorney representing the defendant.

The reasons for contacting jurors after a guilty verdict vary from wanting to know if it would have made any difference to the jury if a defendant had testified to asking if you would have considered a different verdict had you heard a piece of testimony or evidence that may have been excluded from the trial.

You may or may not be aware of it but A LOT of behind the scenes wrangling between the prosecutor, judge and defense team goes on regarding what evidence can or can't be used in court. A lot of times a jury will only see a small slice of the evidence or testimony from witnesses as a result of this legal wrangling.

Obviously, I don't know the details of your particular case so I can only speculate but for the most part, when I've been requested to interview jurors, I'm looking for any possible misconduct on the part of the jurors that occurred while deliberating or even while sitting at home watching the news with family and friends. Sounds crappy huh? Let me explain as best as I can...

I understand that 99% of jurors will follow the rules given by the judge on their case 100% of the time. I believe this! Unfortunately, I've gone to all day trainings involving Jury Misconduct that have shown that even with the good, honest citizens we have that serve on juries, even those who have the best intentions of completing their civic duty with some integrity and fairness....sometimes even those well intentioned people make mistakes...mistakes that cost people their lives and freedom.

One example: A PDI friend of mine recently completed a jury investigation on a multiple-murder case he handled. He made contact with two jurors on the case that explained to him that they felt they were bullied into agreeing on a guilty verdict when the truth was they were never certain of it. Not only were they not certain of it, but they named a couple other jurors that were also leaning towards a hung jury until the foreperson took it upon himself to hammer on these individuals verbally for not agreeing with him. They took his pressure for two days before caving in and delivering a guilty verdict.

Obviously this doesn't happen everyday but we would never have known about what was happening in the deliberations until we talked to people...the jurors who were actually present. The crazy part is that most of the other jurors didn't even recognize that this was going on right in front of them!

As far as your right to privacy goes (just from what you've told me), it is still very much intact. First, you should understand that you have every legal right to tell this investigator to piss off and you do not wish to have contact with him or anyone from his office. The investigator is obligated by law to abide by your wishes.

Simple as that.

IF you continue you be contacted by the defense investigator after you have clearly told him/her that you don't want to talk to him/her (and their office seems to be blowing you off) I see no reason why you should not contact the office of the judge that handled the trial you were on and see what they can do about it. As far as your right to privacy when calling a Public Defender Office, its hard to give sold answers when the people you are talking too, don't know what specific case you're calling about! If you're calling them with a problem about an employee of their office, it helps to explain the circumstances and this might mean giving them your name or at least the name of the case you served on.

As far as the investigator having your home address, most public defender offices in California (mine included) have access to most public records, records at the Department of Motor Vehicles and numerous private databases that are open to only law enforcement and a select few government agencies. We have the tools at our fingertips to locate anyone we need to in order to complete an investigation and represent our client to the best of our abilities.

That being said...

I can only explain that in the most simplest of terms, as an investigator for the defense (or Public Defender's Office to be more specific in my case), it is illegal for me to provide a client (defendant) with any contact information for a witness or a juror. Client's are many times provided copies of police reports and all identifying information must be redacted before it is handed over to them by our office. We would face stiff fines and possible jail time for violating this law...its happened before (Someone help me with the case reference...involved a Los Angeles County Public Defender?).

Although it may not make you feel any better, I'm certain that I can speak for all Public Defender Investigators (and PI's) when I say that we would never, under any circumstances risk the lives of anyone (juror, witness, family member) by divulging information to people who are simply not allowed or even supposed to have it.

Also, as much as I might really like a client, I would never consider risking my job, career, and reputation by doing something unethical or illegal...this includes divulging the address of a juror on his/her case. Just so you know, when I'm conducting jury investigations, the only person that actually sees the addresses and contact information for the jurors...is me. I've usually been the one to develop the addresses and I'm the one that takes responsibility for them.

Juror, I'm sure I haven't answered your question and I apologize...hopefully any attorney/investigator reading this blawg will post a stronger, clearer answer. I still strongly urge you to first try contacting the Public Defenders office again, this time being a little more up front about why you are calling and hopefully they can address the issue. If that doesn't work, I promise you that calling the judge that handled the trial will get you some answers.

Thanks and good luck!

McCain Reponds To Obama's Big News!

Unfortunately, to the great dismay of his campaign staff, Senator John McCain has responded to Obama’s announcement that he (Obama) will be letting his supporters be the first to know who his vice-presidential running mate is going to be…via text message!

Of course, I had to sign-up right away.  I realize that in the short term, this news really has no impact on me or other voters but I think in the long term it goes along the lines that Obama campaign is making us regular, non-political people feel like we’re part of something bigger and we all have an equal say. 

I love this stuff! Click here to sign-up yourself!

(Note:  Thank you Adobe Photoshop) 

Raising The Bar

Its good to see the much rumored television series (Raising the Bar on TNT) based on a group of young Deputy Public Defenders, Deputy DA's and their battles in and out of the courtroom has made it off the ground and is scheduled to make it to our local television screens on September 1st!

The best part of this is that one of our very own, David Feige (blawger at Indefensible and author of Indefensible) is credited alongside Stephen Bochco as one of the creator's!

This is so cool!

Also, as you can see in the image above that Mark-Paul Gosselaar is in the show (playing one of the good guys!). As a young Mexican kid watching Saved By The Bell, I can't tell you how many times I wished I could trade places with Slater (Mario Lopez) hanging out with my good buddy Zach (Gosselaar), trying to get into the pants of Tiffani Thiessen and Elizabeth Berkley....and NOW, he is one of us!

Ahhh...seems like just yesterday.

What? I was a lonely kid!

Its really just a thought, but I've got a sick feeling that the Deputy PD's will be doing their own investigations, miraculously without a trusty PD Investigator by their side but thats the way it goes in TV land I suppose. I trust with Feige involved in the show, it will stay as true to life as possible.

I'll just be keeping my fingers crossed, hoping that the show doesn't suck!

Cheerlosers

I hate to say it but if something terrible had happened as a result of the story below, I would have secretly been saying, It's plain and simple..these girls could have made history with the biggest group of simultaneous recipients of the Darwin Award!

I know, I'm an assh*ole.

(08-06) 13:26 PDT Austin, Texas (AP)
--
How many cheerleaders can cram into an elevator? Apparently not 26. A group of teenage girls attending a cheerleading camp on the University of Texas got stuck and had to be rescued after trying to squeeze into an elevator at a residence hall Tuesday night.

One girl fainted and was treated at a hospital and released. Two others were treated at the scene.The elevator doors refused to open after the pack of 14- to 17-year-olds descended from the fourth to the first floor, police said. Responding to a few panicked cell phone calls from the group, police and firefighters summoned an elevator repairman, who spent about 25 minutes extricating them.
Campus officials weren't amused. "It's dangerous, actually," said a school police spokeswoman, Rhonda Weldon. "They're lucky that that's all that happened."

I know, I know what you're thinking, They're young and impressionable how dare you say something like that! I just wonder when common sense starts to kick into kids brains.

2007 Investigator Of The Year...Here Is A Fist In Your Eyesocket

I've never known positive things to happen when a friend tries to help another friend out in a bar scuffle. Lets send some positive thoughts out to a fellow Public Defender Investigator from Iowa who is recovering from a beating he took in a bar fight:

An investigator with the Dubuque Public Defender's Office was assaulted while trying to break up a fight at a local bar Friday, according to a criminal complaint. Jared M. Heim, 22, of Dubuque, was arrested on a charge of assault with injury around 10 p.m. at Players Sports Bar, 1902 Central Ave.

Shane R. Flesher, 27, 151 Cherokee Drive, told police that he stepped between a friend and Heim after they started an argument. Heim stepped on his foot, and Flesher told him not to do that. Heim punched him twice in the face, leaving swelling and a cut below his eye.

In 2007, Flesher was named "Investigator of the Year" by the Iowa Public Defender's Association.

Let's hope this Jared Heim moron gets a shitty private attorney. Yup, thats all we can do.