APRIL 7: FEDERAL DAY TRAINING
THURSDAY, APRIL 8
8:30 - 9:00 am NDIA OPENING REMARKS
Welcome, Local Defender and NDIA Conference Committee
9:00 - 10:15 am PLENARY SESSION
National Academy Science Report: Litigation Strategies, Christopher McKee
10:30 - 11:45 am CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Challenging Crime Labs and Forensic Experts, Christopher McKee
Interviewing Reluctant Witnesses, Kevin Murphy
Eyewitness Identifi cation, Dr. Deborah Davis
Technical and Legal Aspects of Firearm Cases, John Paul Reichmuth
11:45 - 1:15 pm LUNCH
1:15 - 2:30 pm CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Gang Investigation and Developing a Defense, Ellen Barry, Terry Rearick
Mortgage Fraud, Doug Mitchell, Kevin Tate
Creating In-House Training for Interns and CJA Personnel, Brendan Wells
Culture Clash: Cultural Issues in Criminal Defense, Rene Valladeres
Sentencing Video - Hands-on; Part 1, Doug Passon, Michael Shewmake, Jan Kullberg, Nora Steele, Renee Rivera-Thomas
2:45 - 4:00 pm CONCURRENT SESSIONS
In-house Cell Phone Forensics and Investigation, Brendan Wells
Investigating Bank Robberies, Madeline Larsen
Capital Mitigation, Alicia Vicars, Jean Dittmeyer
Sentencing Video - Hands-on; Part 2, Doug Passon, Mike Shewmake, et al
4:15 - 5:15 pm GENERAL BUSINESS MEETING
6:30 - 9:00 pm PRESIDENT’S RECEPTION
FRIDAY, APRIL 9
8:30 - 10:00 am PLENARY
Junk Science & An Execution in Texas? The Willingham Case & Forensic
Reform, Sam Bassett
10:15 - 11:45 am CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Recent Developments in Capital Case Litigation, Russ Stetler,
DNA, Suzana Ryan
Working with Experts, Michael Charlton, Herbert Duzant, James Patton
Electronic Case Management Strategies, Doug Munro, Meredith McCarrey
11:45 - 1:15 pm LUNCH
1:15 - 2:30 pm CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Internet Sleuthing, Jonathan Lyon
Identifying and Investigating Intellectual Disabilities, James Patton
Client Centered Practice, Ron Tyler
2:45 - 4:15 pm PLENARY
Police Interrogation Techniques, Chuck Weisselberg
4:15 - 4:30 pm CLOSING REMARKS AND ADJOURNMENT
For information and registration call NDIA at 860-635-5533
E-Mail: ndia@cox.net
Friday, January 29, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
2010 State Of The Blawg
Ahhh, another year.
I’ve been struggling with my first real post of the year but lately I’ve been inspired by a newish Public Defender blawg, Public Defender Revolution.
It’s informative, funny, and thoughtful…everything I haven’t been for a few years now and MOST importantly, they update on a regular basis. I’m going to be including them on my Blawgroll soon and read them on a regular basis. I suggest you do the same.
Thanks to Dr. Moreau, a fellow PD Investigator and frequent contributor to the site, we have managed to continue getting visits to PDI Blog (due to some great posts) and managed to stay ranked up high in the Google Search results for Public Defender Investigator.
As many of you know, I stopped writing for a while due to “work issues.” What exactly do I mean? Oh, you know…like the possibility of getting shit canned for blogging…but it’s not as much of a concern anymore.
Nothing more needs to be said about that.
I’ve been staying busy with the usual caseload (not much new there, I know lots of busy PD Investigators) and honestly, I guess I’m still employed which is pretty awesome considering the despicable state of California
I’m eating a late lunch at my desk and typing these words...
The blawg will continue to live and I will resume posting.
As always…more later
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Not Investigation Related...
But fun regardless!
I am a poker play degenerate.
Well, not really but a man can dream!
I have registered to play in the PokerStars World Blogger Championship of Online Poker! This PokerStars tournament is a No Limit Texas Hold’em event exclusive to Bloggers, you too can take part by registering on WBCOOP
Registration code: 716096
I am a poker play degenerate.
Well, not really but a man can dream!
I have registered to play in the PokerStars World Blogger Championship of Online Poker! This PokerStars tournament is a No Limit Texas Hold’em event exclusive to Bloggers, you too can take part by registering on WBCOOP
Registration code: 716096
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Skippy Funiquatz* came into the office for an initial interview. He was charged with malicious property damage and communicating a threat of bodily harm to his live-in girlfriend. Skippy wasn’t too worried because, he happily informed me “We made up and she wants to drop the charges”.
“It’s not that easy, Skippy” I said, “At this point, even though your girlfriend is the alleged victim in the case, she’s simply a means to an end. The state is always reluctant to drop domestic violence cases because it looks really, really bad when the complainant winds up in the hospital or the morgue a week after the charges are dismissed.”
Skippy told me that it doesn’t make any sense. “We LOVE each other!” he exclaimed. “What if she doesn’t show up for court?”
I hate it when clients ask me this question. We all know that the state’s case is hampered when the victim disappears but it’s not up to me to help that process along.
“That’s all well and good, Skippy but you have to realize something,” I said, ignoring the question “but the complaint reads ‘THE PEOPLE v. Skippy’ not ‘SIGNIFICANT OTHER v. Skippy’.” I continued, “Your girlfriend went to the grand jury and swore you threatened to kill her. The cop who arrested you read his report into the record and took pictures of the broken furniture in your apartment. In effect, the DA really doesn’t need her to make their case.”
I don’t mean to imply that ADAs, especially those who handle DV and SVU prosecutions aren’t truly concerned about the welfare of the victims in these cases. I think many of them do lose sleep at night worrying, not about the political ramifications of a decision to decline prosecution but rather for the physical well being of the victim in a DV case that doesn’t go forward. However, those folks on the law enforcement side of the fence are required to the uphold law and sometimes, as in the case above, public policy takes precedence over what may be best for the parties involved in the case.
By contrast, criminal defense investigators and attorneys share a mandate to protect a client’s constitutional rights without regard to actual guilt or innocence. We have no choice in the matter and this relieves us of having to worry about divided loyalties, (i.e. the welfare of a victim versus the interests of the state).
On the other hand I doubt any one of us, in all honesty doesn’t occasionally think about what may happen in our client’s troubled relationship once we close our file on the case.
In the end, we can’t take responsibility for the actions of others. We can only strive to do our jobs and do them well. But if the realities of the work start to get you down, share your feelings with a friend who will understand where you're coming from
* This is a fictional case with fictional characters.
“It’s not that easy, Skippy” I said, “At this point, even though your girlfriend is the alleged victim in the case, she’s simply a means to an end. The state is always reluctant to drop domestic violence cases because it looks really, really bad when the complainant winds up in the hospital or the morgue a week after the charges are dismissed.”
Skippy told me that it doesn’t make any sense. “We LOVE each other!” he exclaimed. “What if she doesn’t show up for court?”
I hate it when clients ask me this question. We all know that the state’s case is hampered when the victim disappears but it’s not up to me to help that process along.
“That’s all well and good, Skippy but you have to realize something,” I said, ignoring the question “but the complaint reads ‘THE PEOPLE v. Skippy’ not ‘SIGNIFICANT OTHER v. Skippy’.” I continued, “Your girlfriend went to the grand jury and swore you threatened to kill her. The cop who arrested you read his report into the record and took pictures of the broken furniture in your apartment. In effect, the DA really doesn’t need her to make their case.”
I don’t mean to imply that ADAs, especially those who handle DV and SVU prosecutions aren’t truly concerned about the welfare of the victims in these cases. I think many of them do lose sleep at night worrying, not about the political ramifications of a decision to decline prosecution but rather for the physical well being of the victim in a DV case that doesn’t go forward. However, those folks on the law enforcement side of the fence are required to the uphold law and sometimes, as in the case above, public policy takes precedence over what may be best for the parties involved in the case.
By contrast, criminal defense investigators and attorneys share a mandate to protect a client’s constitutional rights without regard to actual guilt or innocence. We have no choice in the matter and this relieves us of having to worry about divided loyalties, (i.e. the welfare of a victim versus the interests of the state).
On the other hand I doubt any one of us, in all honesty doesn’t occasionally think about what may happen in our client’s troubled relationship once we close our file on the case.
In the end, we can’t take responsibility for the actions of others. We can only strive to do our jobs and do them well. But if the realities of the work start to get you down, share your feelings with a friend who will understand where you're coming from
* This is a fictional case with fictional characters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)