Man arrested for shooting at Fiance's attempted kidnappers

[anotherlife]

It will not be interesting. Your claim that the system is not legitimate will have no bearing.

What does the system do with a defendant who refuses to give a statement, to speak to defense counsel or to assist either side of his prosecution or defense in any way?

Thats a fair game defendant, the prosecution puts them away immediately, and improves their book balance of successful cases.

 

[Anathema]

Thats a fair game defendant, the prosecution puts them away immediately, and improves their book balance of successful cases.

Interestingly enough, that phrase does not exist in Google. I find it difficult to believe that a prosecutor can somehow get a ruling of guilt without a,trial of some sort.

So you have a citation of some sort for how that works?

 

[anotherlife]

Thats a fair game defendant, the prosecution puts them away immediately, and improves their book balance of successful cases.

Interestingly enough, that phrase does not exist in Google. I find it difficult to believe that a prosecutor can somehow get a ruling of guilt without a,trial of some sort.

So you have a citation of some sort for how that works?

I believe it goes by common sense, if the defendant refuses council, then he must defend himself, at which point the prosecutor makes quick meal of him.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

These kinds of defendants don't refuse counsel. They will be happy to help sit at the counsel table attorney by his side. They just refuse to cooperate with the attorney. They smugly smile and won't talk. I've had plenty of clients like that. There are two choices, get the judge to permit an attorney withdrawal or continue with the case talking to other sources. Neighbors, family if they will talk, anyone who knows him and paid informants who know something. It isn't impossible to win such a case but it is really hard.

 

[Anathema]

I believe it goes by common sense, if the defendant refuses council, then he must defend himself, at which point the prosecutor makes quick meal of him.

I have a difficult time believing any judge is going to leave a silent defendant with no counsel at a trial.

 

[Anathema]

These kinds of defendants don't refuse counsel. They will be happy to help sit at the counsel table attorney by his side. They just refuse to cooperate with the attorney. They smugly smile and won't talk. I've had plenty of clients like that. There are two choices, get the judge to permit an attorney withdrawal or continue with the case talking to other sources. Neighbors, family if they will talk, anyone who knows him and paid informants who know something. It isn't impossible to win such a case but it is really hard.

See, with me I wouldn't talk to, or even ask for counsel. I would simply refuse to have anything to do with the entire process. Name, address, SSN. Nothing more.

 

[Correll]

His first shots fired could be defended. The 5 shots he fired at the fleeing criminals is where they got him. They were no longer a threat.

I would be very resistant to that line of argument, if I was on a jury.

 

[WinterBorn]

It will not be interesting. Your claim that the system is not legitimate will have no bearing.

What does the system do with a defendant who refuses to give a statement, to speak to defense counsel or to assist either side of his prosecution or defense in any way?

They give them a trial. If you choose not to speak to your attorney, you will likely be convicted.

 

[WinterBorn]

I believe it goes by common sense, if the defendant refuses council, then he must defend himself, at which point the prosecutor makes quick meal of him.

I have a difficult time believing any judge is going to leave a silent defendant with no counsel at a trial.

You are not speaking by your own choice. They would convict you.

 

[anotherlife]

I believe it goes by common sense, if the defendant refuses council, then he must defend himself, at which point the prosecutor makes quick meal of him.

I have a difficult time believing any judge is going to leave a silent defendant with no counsel at a trial.

That would most definitely happen though. The dependent has the right for a legal defence, but not an obligation. This is how usually mentally slow defendants go under too, regularly.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Thats a fair game defendant, the prosecution puts them away immediately, and improves their book balance of successful cases.

Interestingly enough, that phrase does not exist in Google. I find it difficult to believe that a prosecutor can somehow get a ruling of guilt without a,trial of some sort.

So you have a citation of some sort for how that works?

Quite simple, really: your trial is open-and-shut, you go away forever.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Here's why he was arrested.

- Much to the confusion of neighbors and the victim, deputies arrested Morin, saying he is affiliated with a gang and charging him with a deadly conduct with a firearm. They allege he shot recklessly into the neighborhood while aiming for the attackers.

This wasn't some random attack on an innocent woman. Her fiance is a gang member. Let the police do their job.

Even if he is a member of a gang he has the right to self defense.

Amen. A person's past or present should not matter The best way for evil for triumph is for a person to stand there and not do a thing about it.

God bless you and the man always!!!

Holly

 

[EvilCat Breath]

These kinds of defendants don't refuse counsel. They will be happy to help sit at the counsel table attorney by his side. They just refuse to cooperate with the attorney. They smugly smile and won't talk. I've had plenty of clients like that. There are two choices, get the judge to permit an attorney withdrawal or continue with the case talking to other sources. Neighbors, family if they will talk, anyone who knows him and paid informants who know something. It isn't impossible to win such a case but it is really hard.

See, with me I wouldn't talk to, or even ask for counsel. I would simply refuse to have anything to do with the entire process. Name, address, SSN. Nothing more.

Plenty of defendants choose that route. The attorney makes the case from other sources and tries to discredit the prosecution witnesses as much as possible. Surely you don't think you are the only one who exhibits such brilliance?

Defendants who choose this method of rebellion against the process are invariably proud of themselves for the degree of their non cooperation.

Still, they are better than the loudmouths. Usually black. They won't cooperate with their attorneys but they will act out in court. They will lunge at a witness, scream profanities, stare threateningly at the jury. They might stand up, turn around and throw gang signs at the audience. Nothing, not even innocence will keep that guy out of prison. The one thing the loudmouth and the silent smirker have in common, when they are finally put away they believe they were railroaded, deliberately given a bad attorney and want to find another attorney to sue for malpractice. The judge was unfair, the jury didn't like them.

It's a job. No matter how high the level of noncompliance the attorney doesn't care about you, the police don't care about you, the jury doesn't care about you and the prison guards don't care about you. Everyone goes out for a drink after work then goes home. You go back to your cell proud of how you fucked with the system.

 

[Anathema]

They give them a trial. If you choose not to speak to your attorney, you will likely be convicted.

They probably wouldn't get to the trial anyway. I'd probably have starved to death before my case came up on the docket.

 

[Anathema]

It's a job. No matter how high the level of noncompliance the attorney doesn't care about you, the police don't care about you, the jury doesn't care about you and the prison guards don't care about you. Everyone goes out for a drink after work then goes home. You go back to your cell proud of how you fucked with the system.

My other thought has always been to plead guilty on one condition.... immediate execution by hanging at the conclusion of the proceedings.

 

[WinterBorn]

They give them a trial. If you choose not to speak to your attorney, you will likely be convicted.

They probably wouldn't get to the trial anyway. I'd probably have starved to death before my case came up on the docket.

Cheaper for us. Thanks!

 

[WinterBorn]

It's a job. No matter how high the level of noncompliance the attorney doesn't care about you, the police don't care about you, the jury doesn't care about you and the prison guards don't care about you. Everyone goes out for a drink after work then goes home. You go back to your cell proud of how you fucked with the system.

My other thought has always been to plead guilty on one condition.... immediate execution by hanging at the conclusion of the proceedings.

They wont go along with it.

 

[Anathema]

They wont go along with it.

Then I guess it'll have to be starvation by refusal to eat/drink.

That or ensuring I don't get taken alive.

 

[WinterBorn]

They wont go along with it.

Then I guess it'll have to be starvation by refusal to eat/drink.

That or ensuring I don't get taken alive.

Ok. If that's what you want.

Personally, I always recommend that people not shoot people in the back when they are running away from you.

 

[WinterBorn]

What if the girl was kidnapped and her body parts scattered about the city or she was found, raped, bound, tortured and stabbed to death.

Aside from that this was a gang hit.

Yes, it probably was. And had he just fired from inside the house and then let them run away, he might have been ok. But running out and firing wildly in the direction of fleeing men's backs? Not so much.