Skip to comments.Black and Whitey: How the Feds Disable Criminal Defense
Posted on 01/04/2013 10:23:39 AM PST by Slings and Arrows
Two remarkable legal proceedings are currently wending their way through the federal criminal courts. The cases involve very different parties: Conrad Black, one of the most consequential public intellectuals and businessmen of our era, and James Whitey Bulger, a Boston-based alleged racketeer and serial murderer. But both cases highlight some of the same profound problems with the way federal prosecutorial business is done these days.
In both cases, as in countless others, the feds have used certain techniques that virtually assure convictions of both the innocent and the guilty, the wealthy and the poor, the violent drug dealer and the white collar defendant, indifferent to the niceties of due process of law, particularly the right to effective assistance of legal counsel. In order to prevent a defendant from retaining a defense team of his choice, federal prosecutors will first freeze his assets, even though a jury has yet to find them to have been illegally obtained. They then bring prosecutions of almost unimaginable complexity, assuring that the financially hobbled defendants diminished legal team (or, as is often the case, his court-appointed lawyer) will be too overwhelmed to mount an adequate defense.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Was Alinsky a lawyer?
The plea bargain is where they get you.
There is no real choice, plead guilty and stay out of jail, or fight, and face 25 years hard time as punishment for not going along.
The concept of justice has been cast aside in the insane rush to establish unquestioned federal government supremacy over all aspects of our lives.
Libertarians warned that so-called "asset forfeiture" laws deprived defendants of life, liberty and property without due process, and also warned they would not be limited to drug dealers once they'd been demonstrated as effective prosecutorial tools.
They nevertheless had support from both sides of the aisle.
Rule of thumb: Any law that has "broad based bipartisan support" is a BAD IDEA.
I’ll say something on the thread, but have little idea what I could do about this (except something that would get me on charges...) to help that I’m not already doing.
“The plea bargain is where they get you.”
And thanks to a SCOTUS decision this year (Rehberg v. Paulk, 9-0) both prosecutors and police officers are immune from civil suit even if they knowingly lie on the witness stand.
And then there’s this:
“We do not see how the existence of a false police report, sitting in a drawer in a police station, by itself deprives a person of a right secured by the Constitution and laws.” (Pottawattamie vs. McGhee)
[that’s because it hasn’t been used at a trial yet; but it can
be used to force a plea bargain]
“A prosecutor ... may receive absolute immunity from suit for acts violating the Constitution in order to advance important societal values.” -Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, 2009
You thought you had constitutional rights and protections?
Conrad Black was hated by academic feminists more than any other group. He began advocating for conservative fathers’/family rights long ago, when living in Canada. He once owned the National Post in Alberta. He later moved to the UK and published from there. Feminists and homosexual activists of the divorce/cohabitation lobbies (including bar associations) dogged him in three countries.
I hear you. Anyone could be ruined by the fed judicial system. Even a fairly wealthy man cannot hope to counter the limitless resources of the fed agencies. Increasingly the targets are selected and destroyed for political reasons.
These kind of cases scream out for jury nullification.
Yes. Except like the case in Montana of a Med MJ grower busted by the fed, he was not allowed to tell the jury that what he was doing was legal under stste law. Or many gun cases where the defendent is not allowed to bring up the second amendment as a defense. If you are not allowed to mount a defense, it is hard for the jury to side with you.
In some cases jury instructions practically direct the jury to convict.
Happy New Year Dirt!
You too! Hope all is well out there.
The federalization of crime is truly one of the most despicable trends of the last 50 years. I hope all involved get their due when they meet their Maker.
Sure there is....
The Constitution and Bill of Rights just get in the way of a perfectly regulated society.
This, plea bargaining and Administrative Law should all be thrown out as unConstitutional. American law isn’t about practicality, but justice.
Louie Gohmert is my Rep and I just helped vote Ted Cruz in... That is where the change has to come from. After that there is only one thing left...
Hard to be optimistic anymore.
And where is the outcry over the poor schlep doing hard time for a vid because the Hildebeast had to divert attention away from her responsibility for the Benghazi murders?
The noble experiment of our Framers is not ending well.
We have a country taught by government employees to obey government from a young age. Government education is the #1 mistake America made.
God help anyone who falls under the Federal microscope especially after reading the article.
And I am sure some people in the gov’t would like to get rid of the 5th amendment.
> Anyone could be ruined by the fed judicial system.
Really. And a good number of
conservative authoritarians here champion this stuff as long as it is aimed at "them". They really believe they are so superior somehow that it could never happen to themselves.
The only real non-violent solution to this is if enough conservatives are elected so we can get the leftist judges impeached.
You reflect a sad truth. Our corrupted government for a corrupted people is one of force and not one of persuasion as envisioned by the Framing generation.
A government based on the will of the people, limited by a Bill of Rights and of enumerated powers could be nothing but a mild and guiding hand hardly known or felt by the vast majority. Generations of our students were taught the Bill of Rights in school, and the innate goodness of republican government.
My gosh, what happened? How did a largely virtuous people turn on themselves?
Exactly why we have a separation of powers and a bias toward protecting the accused - political prosecutions.
Maybe it’s time for a moratorium on Ivy-League grads sitting on our highest courts. Perhaps somebody from Texas A&M law school would see these things differently.
I suspect the fundamental problem is the people themselves. They’re wholly ignorant of anything except those things that stimulate or retard their pleasure centers.
How about a moratorium of any ivy league graduate having anything to do with Gov’t whether it is the courts or elected office. Any graduate from an East Coast ivy league school need not apply !
> Maybe its time for a moratorium on Ivy-League grads sitting on our highest courts.
That concept is moving to the state level. See George Zimmerman for a great example. Or the Duke Lacrosse kids.