COMMENTS AND REPLIES

As to the post about Mr. Clark spending 24 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, anonymous writes:

Please leave these sorts of stories and the attendant soap box preaching to the website of he who cannot be named. This blog and its focus on the Justice building is much more entertaining.

Rumpole Replies: Your point is noted, counsel. However, one thing that really gets us is wrongful convictions. As we have posted before, if 6% of all people on death row have been exonerated, and assuming death penalty cases get the most resources, best investigators, and best defense attorneys, then how many people are rotting away serving 20. 30, 40, or life sentences for crimes they did not commit? And since the most money allocated for post conviction relief is for death penalty cases, who is working on exonerating those unfortunate souls who have been wrongfully convicted of crimes other than murder?

To make the system work, we have to have vigilance from the top down, and that starts with Judges and Prosecutors who have zero tolerance for bad police investigations. If a prosecutor out of law school handling Domestic Violence or DUI cases learns to look the other way when the police make un-true allegations ( has any officer making a DUI arrest ever arrested anyone whose face was not flushed? We know that when we have had too much Chateau Miami River, our face does not flush) then what will that prosecutor do in several years when they are handling murder or robbery cases? The breeding ground for wrongful convictions starts when people who are charged with enforcing the law look the other way on the small stuff.

Woops, we forgot you do not like this.


On the Curious Judge Leban comment, anonymous writes:

Relative to the Judge Leban allegation-Rumpole, i am surprised at you-being the worldly Justice Building warrior you claim to be -you know perfectly well when in doubt go to the tape-try June 25,2005 Misdemeanor Bond Hearing where the defendant Roy Rogers, charged with trespass, appeared before His Honor and listen to what he said to him

Rumpole replies:
1) we smell a trap. We go and request the tape, and BAM our identity is revealed.
2) Assuming this is not a trap, you have a lot of info on this case. Was it your client? Also, this apparently occurred six months ago. Are you upset with Judge Leban? Are you upset he was recently elevated to circuit court?
3) We never claimed to be a REGJB warrior. We are just a humble little lawyer, occasionally cashing an SAPD check, and occasionally rising on our hind legs and objecting to an unfair comment by our learned friends across the aisle. Every now and then our defense of reasonable doubt ends in an acquittal, and we repair to our favorite watering hole and regale our comrades with exaggerated tales of our heroics.
4) Not to make light of this, we will endeavor to get to the bottom of Judge Leban's alleged comment. However, assuming Judge Leban made the comment, perhaps he regretted it the moment it left his mouth? Perhaps he made a mistake. No one else has come forward to suggest Judge Leban is anything but a fair and conscientious jurist.



On the issue of Judges punishing Defendants who go to trial, anonymous, in a stream of consciousness writes:

Of course it's true. But I don't see it necessarily as a sign of laziness. There has to be some sort of "jury tax" to keep a division's caseload down. Even the judges who love trying cases have to do it, or else everyone will demand a trial. So you have to do it just because of the math of it all. On the other hand, some do just want to get out of there early.

Rumpole replies: 1) What's wrong with everyone who wants a trial getting a trial? The defendant and the defense bar cannot be concerned with caseloads or funds available to try more cases. Our job is justice. 2) If a defendant who pleads no contest is helping the court, then shouldn't he or she be rewarded? In a felony case, there is nothing akin to the federal system's reduction in sentence for acceptance of responsibility. Not getting the maximum sentence does not seem like a great incentive to plea.

How come a person charged with a first offense for a third degree felony can get PTI, but a person charged with the misdemeanor offense of DUI cannot, even if it is their first offense? Politics and money.

This is the perfect comment for a member of the judiciary to emerge from behind their curtain, like the Wizzard of Oz, and make a comment. If you email us the comment, it arrives as "anonymous" and we know of no way to trace it.

Come on Judge, regale us with your views on sentencing. Hop in and join the debate, the water's warm and getting hotter.