Alaskablawg: Things I Wish My Clients Knew

While discussing Blondie, she has another installment of things she wished her clients knew, this time about double jeopardy. So what do I wish my clients knew? I wish my clients knew some of the rules of evidence. For example, I cannot count how many times I've heard, "But they have no evidence against me." By this, the client means there's no DNA, fingerprints, or other 'physical' evidence. However, as I explain to them, eyewitness testimony is evidence. So the fact that someone says that the client did it is enough, usually, to make them go through trial.

I wish my clients knew that their own statements, as a party opponent, are NOT hearsay, but instead are played and discussed many, many times throughout trial. Remember: you have the right to remain silent. EXERCISE THAT RIGHT! Police can and will lie to you to get you to talk and this is not only accepted, it is encouraged. Thus, do not believe them when they tell you that you need to cough it up to get a lighter sentence.

I wish my clients knew that they do not have to consent to a search of their person, car or premises. Here's a general tip good for anybody reading this: if a police officer asks you, "Can I look through your car, or your house, or your hotel room, or whatever", the answer should always be "Absolutely NO." If they threaten to get a warrant, then tell them to get a warrant. In Alaska, they're taping you anyway, so don't explain, don't justify, don't talk. Just tell them that you refuse to consent to any search.

I wish my clients knew that the system truly does not care about them, particularly if they are charged with a serious offense. No, the DA does not care if she breaks up your family. No, the judge does not really care about the hardships that the prison sentence will impose on your career. No, arguments appealing to pity, sympathy, or human understanding generally go nowhere (I say generally because every once in a while, it works out that way, but by and large, it doesn't). As such, while I understand and sympathize with your plight, if I seem to ignore the emotionally appealing aspects of your case, it is not because I have no pity. It is not because I don't care. Rather, it is because it is a waste of time and effort, time and effort that would be better spent preparing your case for trial, motion work, or sentencing, as the case may be.

I wish my clients knew that being right is no guarantee that they will prevail in court, that sometimes, despite all of our best efforts, life is not fair.

I wish my clients knew that I truly do not like giving them bad news, that I do not like telling them that they face a realistic possibility of dying in jail. I wish that they knew that when I tell them that they should take a plea, it is not because I am overbooked, or afraid to go to trial, or that I am paid by the State. Rather, it is because I've done this a lot and I have a pretty good idea based on the evidence that the outcome at trial is much more likely to be worse than the plea bargain, no matter how unpalatable that plea bargain offer is. And I take no joy in watching someone get a sentence substantially worse than the sentence offered as a plea bargain.

I think if my clients knew those things, the stress level for this job would go down. Maybe not a great deal, but enough to be noticeable. And I also wish to state that I am not thinking of any case in particular as I write this list, but more of a general, day-in, day-out type of situation of appointed counsel.

Comments

Truer words were never spoken. I'm currently being charged with a Violation of Third Party Custodian, under the updated version of the law passed last year by the Alaska State Legislature. It doesn't matter that there is NO definition of the term Third Party Custodian in the Alaska Court glossary. It doesn't matter that there is NO definition of 24 hour "sight and sound" in the Alaska Court glossary. It doesn't matter that the 24 hour sight and soundbox wasn't checked on my agreement with the court. It doesn't matter that the Judge never gave me verbal instructions as to what 24 hour sight and sound entails. It doesn't matter that all the Judge did was threaten me with the new "law." It doesn't matter that the victim/witness against me has such a long (violent) criminal record that the public defenders' office and the other one could not defend me because they've defended her too many times. None of this matters.

What matters is that DA Kari Brady helped Gov Murkowski rewrite the "law" to provide for greater enforcement of the "law," and the City of Anchorage needs to establish precendent case law for the new "law."

The city produced an audio tape at the last trial call of my arrest "interview" which they claim proves I was aware of my "duties."

My recollection of my arrest is the cop said "you're under arrest" and I responded "no I'm not."

The expanded use of 3rd parties in Alaska is clearly an expansion of Eurpoean and UN Communitarian Law, especially since the theory for protecting "victims" is directly connected to the UN Beijing Conference on Women. I wish my attorney had the time to study Communitarian Law. I wish there were but one attorney in the entire U.S. who had the time to study Communitarian Law.

Anyway, trial call is Friday and it looks like we're going to trial next week. I'm just another guinea pig for the communitarian court and their new "community" police.

Posted by: Niki Raapana | January 10, 2006 at 10:59 PM

Keri Brady was`run out of the`prosecutors office`because`of the`chaos she`created there. This woman should be` arrested herself for complete lack of proffesional ethics.

Posted by: ljett | September 14, 2009 at 02:45 AM