Attorneys galore saw fit to comment on the number one problem in the profession of criminal defense in Miami: BAIL BONDSMEN who run cases to lawyers who split their fees with them.
Anonymous threw down the gauntlet:
Rump. If this blog and our profession are worth anything we should be able to show it now. Corrupt bail bondsman and their attorneys should be expelled from our community by the forces we control. if we do not defend our profession soon we will not be considered professionals. Rump, focus on this issue, make this one narrow issue an important one for the well-being of our profession, and your place in history will be yours forever.
Rumpole responds: Posts are coming in and people are naming names. But we are troubled by that. Its very easy to name a defense attorney, especially when the person is doing it anonymously, and claim the attorney named is splitting fees with bondsman. That could quickly turn this blog into a smear sheet, which we like to think we are not. So, dear readers, please help us. We propose this rule:
No post that names an attorney will be published unless that post comes from an email with that person’s name that can be verified. That means no secret accusations. This is our proposal, however we welcome comments. The problem is that it is not fair to make a secret accusation of this nature (note for you lunkheads who will whine…”rumpole you stay anonymous” the key phrase is "an accusation of this nature") with out it being verified. We are not the press, but we do take people’s reputations seriously. For instance, before posting the piece about Judge Slom, we had several email conversations with several people, including JC Planas.
This is a great topic for this blog. Maybe the prosecutors will read this and get off their duff and open an investigation. Quite frankly it would be hard to spit in Au Bon Pain without hitting an attorney who does this occasionally.
So email or post your suggestions about how to handle this potentially explosive topic.
In other major counties in the nation the bail bond function has been taken over by the government. Its profitable to the taxpayer and the private companies bring nothing of value to the equation. How archaic is it to have private citizens empowered to detain for profit? Write your commissioner!
ReplyDeleteRumpole responds: Posts are coming in and people are naming names. But we are troubled by that. Its very easy to name a defense attorney, especially when the person is doing it anonymously, and claim the attorney named is splitting fees with bondsman. That could quickly turn this blog into a smear sheet, which we like to think we are not.
ReplyDeleteCome on Rumpolestiltskin, this blog IS a smear sheet! You don’t make people list their names when they attack Bennett or Rory; why the change now? Unfortunately, the anonymous posts have forever stained their reputations.
Is it that you are finally concerned about the blogsters going too far and a subpoena being issued to your web provider pursuant to a defamation lawsuit?
If this blog has taught me anything, it is to warn my children to beware of participating on blogs where identities are not disclosed because, ultimately, good intentions or not, they become prone to take over by smear artists. Face it; yours has!
Rump, your place i history is near. But the need for a new bail reality is not the solution. The idea in bail is to guarantee the defendant's presence not the profitable to the taxpayer. Bail bondman measure risks and guarantee the defenadnt's appearance in court. 10% to the state would not allow more risk ladden defendants to be held due to greater risks. Neveretheless, they are aa cancer when they meddle in the attorney choosing process. we should not allow them to hang out at bond hearing and in the courts, we should not allow them to have convicted criminals called houseman working for them and directing collect calls clients to them. We should not allow them to act with the impunity they are presently acting with. Set them up, focus on their license status, take away the tool of their license in their trade and soon the problem will get better. Believe me. If 5 or 6 bondsman lose their license the rest of the pack will act in a more professional manner.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea is to raise the standard bond scheduale. This will take away the need to make something out of nothing IE if a bond is set at 1000 and the bondsman makes $100 for the bond (s)he may feel more pressure to refer an attorney than if the bond were set at $10,000 and the bondsman made $1000. The pressure to produce will be less. Also, make them pay the bonds if they come due. Its all a game. everyone has a nut to crack, either in their trade or leaning on our profession to get there.
I think it's about time we "take out the trash" regarding this issue. I like Rumpole's idea for no anonymous accusations. However, I would suggest one proviso: that any accuser should not only give his name, but also state how he knows that the attorney is corrupt. And he better have a darn good reason to think so. I would hate to see someone accused of corruption due to heresay or "I refused to give the bail bondsman a kickback, and then I saw my potential client hired Attorney X." Perhaps the client went to Attorney X without the help of bondsman...
ReplyDeleteJust a thought...
I have reported this kind of stuff many times to the SAO investigators and they never file charges.
ReplyDeleteClients get arrested. The jail people and bondsmen tell them that they must hire a specific lawyer. Client calls me and gives me the business card of the bondsman with the name of the attorney hand written on it by the crooked bondsman. I give it to the police. They do nothing.
Oh well.
I could name names but, you would block it.
Signed: Pissed off ethical defense attorney
I disagree. Rumpole on Rory and Bennett is different because he, nor have any of his faithful, named them in anything criminal minded that has not already been written in the herald or the new times.
ReplyDeletehighlighting rory's danish eating habits hardly compares to that of calling a fellow member of the bar a criminal. And you are correct, the blog could get sued in that case for slander and most people dont want that to happen.
Not only is it unethical to share a fee with a bondsman, but it is illegal to knowingly accept a referral from one, even if you do not pay any kick back.
ReplyDelete648.44. Prohibitions; penalty
(1) A bail bond agent or temporary bail bond agent may not:
(a) Suggest or advise the employment of, or name for employment, any particular attorney to represent his or her principal.
The above comment is correct. We started the Bennet issue by REPORTING on the confirmed settlement of a lawsuit. When Rory said we were liars, we challenged him to put down his danish and say what we lied about. But accusing (as opposed to reporting on a public settlement) an attorney (or anyone) of a crime, is a very very serious issue. That is why we are uncomfortable with anonymous accusations.
ReplyDeleteIn the northeastern cities with reformed criminal justice systems the bail bond racket was long ago exposed. The courts already refuse to give bond to people when they get an AC or a new case. So the courts define the available market as the lower risk people. Then the courts release the estrichers (sp?) and give the money back anyway as a matter of course. This is an area where the tax payer bears the burden of the risk anyway- the profit is expropriated to private interests by government definition of the market. We need the county to take over the bail bonds.
ReplyDeleteBail bonds are like drugs- they should be illegal not because they are intrinsically bad but because they bring blight and corruption.
it's unethical yes but not criminal. we expose unethical behavior on this blog all the time. therefore we must name names.
ReplyDeleteYou said" one thing that this blog has taught me... blah blah blah..." are you really that big of a pussy or do you have an agenda?
ReplyDeletehey fag, pay the vig in cash answer your phone and get rich. Why mess up a good thing.
ReplyDeleteps. I hope this is really anonymous, my kids have two more years at Ransom.
However, I would suggest one proviso: that any accuser should not only give his name, but also state how he knows that the attorney is corrupt. And he better have a darn good reason to think so. I would hate to see someone accused of corruption due to heresay or "I refused to give the bail bondsman a kickback, and then I saw my potential client hired Attorney X."
ReplyDeleteIs there really an attorney who can't spell hearsay?
Let's talk about solving the traffic problems in Miami, because that will happen quicker than exposing what everyone knows about the bondsmen/dirty cheap worthless "couldn't get a case otherwise" attorney corruption.
ReplyDeleteThe ONLY ways to figure this out are one: set up some fake cases with attractive bonds to see who solicits and where the bondsmen send the clients, and two: research court files of certain attorneys (that we ALL know) to see who the bondsman was. Find a couple attorneys who have many cases with the same bondsman, and there's a start.
Oh, and using the "defense lawyers are losing money over this," is a GREAT way to get the SAO to pay attention. They really care about defense lawyers making money..........
Doesn't it seems like Au Bon Pain's prices are getting more ridiculous lately? Their coffee is good, but its no Starbucks.
ReplyDeleteI find it rather sad this scheme works at all. If I'm looking to spend $25,000+ on a defense, why on god's green earth would I even consider a bondsman's recommendations?
ReplyDeletethat's because au bon pain has a monopoly on decent courthouse food... so just bend over and accept it.
ReplyDeleteConfirmed
ReplyDeleteCristina Mirranda v. Mindy Glazer.
Confirmed
ReplyDeleteCristina Mirranda v. Mindy Glazer.
WHAT ABOUT lEIFMAN V. sLOM IN THE WHO'S A REAL JUDGE RACE
ReplyDeleteMiranda, cute and rich, yeah baby!
ReplyDeletewhat?!? miranda is NOT cute. and what's up with those ridiculous plea agreements? does anyone take that shit seriously?
ReplyDeleteCan we get Bronwyn Millers opposition to run against David Miller?
ReplyDeleteDavid Miller is running against Farinia for Chief Judge
ReplyDeletesounds like the green code of silence has won out on this issue.
ReplyDeletewhy not name names rump? is it because you have been on the take at some point in your career? is
it really a smear to accuse these
jokers, when we all know who is
doing it?
isn't it obvious that you have lost your moral compass and have
resorted to survival mode? i think
you don't want to out anyone because they will know you are being a hypocrite on this issue.
sad day for us honest law abiding
defense attorneys when we have to
hide behind the green code of
silence.
i think this is pathetic. i again
think a poll should be implemented.
i agree... let people name names!
ReplyDeleterump, are you afraid to see your own name posted here? banning names makes you look fucking guilty.
name names then. you dont need a poll. but you better be right about the people you name or you might get sued. per se slander. no need to prove damages in florida.
ReplyDeleteGee, ya think the person above is a little scared???????
ReplyDeletename names puss. stop the chatter. i aint worried about sheeeet. im getting paid while you sleep. deal with it.
ReplyDeleteyeah, that's when the bondsmen are up getting cases for you sheeeeeethead
ReplyDeleteI will name ma name. Judge FArina, He is on the take for not putting an end to this. He should be prosecuting all of this bullshit with the bail bondmans
ReplyDeleteYes - Judge Farina - why are you nor prosecuting? Stop acting like the chief judge and start filing informations and offering pleas
ReplyDeleteUnethical behavior, no morales. Atty sleeping with bail bond employee while going through divorce. Bail bond employee referring clients to attorney. Win win for both. Ethics n morals need to be reinstated. This is why criminal attorneys have a bad rep. W
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete