Plan B Forum

Transcript reenacted by Rick and Morty.

LMAO

That was hilarious...

I had to look it up to make sure it was on the level. It is:

http://legal.blog.ajc.com/2016/06/23/ge ... -exchange/

The judge received an admonishment:

http://www.myajc.com/news/news/local/ju ... nge/nr7Hr/

The complete transcript of proceedings:
http://imgur.com/a/skffp#KSJBllW

I get the distinct feeling Allen was fucking with the Horrible J. Bryant Durham, Jr.

Question for our lawyery types:
At what point does the judge cross the line?

My guess is the "queer" line

Page 6, line 14 (suggesting he has prejudged the outcome of trial). I'd let him skate on everything else.

They are both repulsive

Sorry figured the NSFW would have tipped you off. Should have marked it NSFM too.

I appreciated the tip. That's why I didn't watch the video. Took a glance at the transcript. Decided they both belong in jail; ignorant twats

Sue U wrote:Page 6, line 14 (suggesting he has prejudged the outcome of trial). I'd let him skate on everything else.

I have to love pages 16 and 17; the judge just lost it there. I'd hate to have been the PD standing next to him.

I can't imagine either attorney keeping a straight face during that exchange.

Over my brief years of criminal practice I witnessed some pretty weird rambles from defendants at the bench but never saw a judge come remotely close to losing it like that. It would've been interesting to hear an actual recording rather than the annoying adult swim voices.

The defendant clearly isn't a model citizen, but all this just to try to get a new public defender?

It doesn't help that the judge clearly had no idea as to what kind of case this was- he didn't know it was a murder trial? Seriously?

I mean, he did have a point. One 4-page indictment as the only evidence for a murder trial? I'd have a hard time believing the Public Defender was doing his job with that kind of work. Kind of like he was phoning it in. The whole tirade began because he wasn't allowed to find a new (public) attorney.

But what is the Public Defender's role?

I've never sat on a jury- I was way in the back for the only jury selection I sat in for and wasn't selected, but that was another trial involving a public defender who looked like he had absolutely no interest in helping his client win the trial. In fact, he even TOLD the potential jurors that his only role was to assure the defendant get a fair trial (meaning make sure that procedures were followed). All I could think was, the defense looks like HE thinks the defendant was guilty. He asked the potential jurors if they thought it could be a fair trial if he called no witnesses for the defense.

This caused me to re-evaluate the role of public defenders. Is it to try to help the defendant win the case, or are they really just there to make sure that procedures are followed? I mean, defendants have the right to an attorney, but what really is the role when there isn't a person in the world that thinks the defendant is innocent? So what's the level of effort that a Public Defender should be required to make? I admit that I've always been prejudiced against private Defense lawyers who take on cases where the defendant is clearly guilty but is willing to pay whatever it takes to get off. But Public Defenders don't have a choice- they HAVE to defend the scum of the earth most of the time, they don't pick and choose cases.

datsun--my understanding is that indigent defendants are entitled to an attorney paid for by the state, but they are generally just given the one that comes up on the top of the list, and not entitled to pick and choose absent extraordinary circumstances where the attorney is conflicted out or cannot provide services.


As for the discovery, I don't practice criminal law, but I would be surprised if a murder suspect were entitled to copies of all crime scene and autopsy photos; indeed, given the predilections of many in jail, I wouldn't think that sort of material could be kept in one's cell. Could you imagine a pedophile charged with kiddie porn getting copies of all the images for him to look at late at night? Perhaps some who do practice criminal law could weigh in?

I know in the DYFS cases I work on the parties are generally not given much of the evidence directly--it is given to their attorneys who may show most of it to them but not give them copies.