Category Archives: Georgia News

Fighting Dirty

You are all probably aware by now of the shooting of former boxing championing Vernon Forrest.  Shortly after the incident, word was leaked that the police arrested two individuals who they believed were involved in the murder.  The extent of either person’s involvement is unknown.  What is clear from reports accompanying the arrest, however, is that neither person was directly involved in the shooting.  Instead of conducting a thorough investigation to determine the exact role each individual played in the murder, however, the police have resorted to its usual tactic of distortion and deception, by outing the names of both individuals with as much fanfare as possible.  It is true that they would have eventually been brought before a judge at which time their identities and stories would have become part of the public record.  But to achieve this result through the backdoor as the police have done makes them no better than the ones they seek to prosecute.  Regardless of the extent of their involvement in the Forrest shooting, these two individuals will now have to contend with the stigma of having been associated with the incident, a stain that will be nearly impossible to remove, particularly in the age of Google and online criminal histories.  And the message being conveyed is clear: some members of our community are of lesser value than others, especially those who are suspected of being involved in criminal activity.  Of course, in parading the arrestees before the media, the police are seeking to reassure the public as to their efforts in prosecuting the case, which, according to conventional wisdom, acts as a security blanket for residents.  Yet all that is debatable: who knows if they police are just willy nilly picking up individuals, preferably ones with long rap sheets, to satisfy the mob mentality of catching someone, anyone, upon whom the crime can be pinned.  (To its credit, the family of Forrest has not taken such a stance and have instead asked for that the shooter surrender.)  And it makes  the community no more safer when cops are simply plucking people off the streets on dubious grounds.

What will happen is that the unjust actions by the police will breed more resentment among those who are already at the brink, which, in turn, will result in more criminal activity.  But don’t just take my word for it.  Take a look around you.  How much safer do you feel?

“Cadillac Defense” or Benz Prosecution

Yesterday, the AJC had a story on the legal defense bill of Brian Nichols, the man who wreaked havoc in downtown Atlanta after escaping from custody and killing a judge among other officials, and was ultimately sentenced to life in prison rather than death.  According to the article, the bill is upward of $3 million, and growing.  But it was the statement of Mike Mears, who is described by the AJC as “a veteran death penalty lawyer who initially oversaw payments to the defense” that has the community, including the Georgia criminal defense bar, of which I am a member, riled up.

Here is what Mears said:

“It was a Cadillac defense,” said Mears, who was director of the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council at the time. “They had a judge sitting on the bench who I would describe as a … dream judge. He was a judge who was willing to give them whatever they wanted without too many restrictions.”

I won’t go into details but the general sentiment among the criminal defense bar here was (1) shock and anger at Mears and (2) praise for Judge Fuller.  I have never practiced nor do I know Judge Fuller, so I cannot speak to the latter.  As to Mears’ comments, I can see how someone, especially those of us who spend the bulk of their professional and perhaps personal lives defending individuals like Nichols, would take exception and voice disapproval.  However, I am rather dubious of the quotation snagged and reported by the AJC, and would not be surprised if it was taken out of context (the usual charge, I know, but still, it merits an explanation).

As for the notion of a Cadillac defense being somehow detrimental to the well-being of the public and our system of justice, let me just say that anyone charged with having committed a criminal offense is entitled to a fair trial, which, in criminal defense parlance, means the vigorous defense of the client.  I can only venture to guess that many of those criticizing the cost o Nichols’ defense would demand an equally spirited defense if faced with the same predicament.  Moreover, you can bet that the prosecution won’t think twice before spending your hard-earned taxpayer dollars in trying to secure a conviction.  By sanctioning  that approach but denying the accused the same resources, which, it should be noted, already happens in perhaps the bulk of criminal matters, we only breed greater distrust of our criminal justice process, which, in turn, leads to tragedies of Nichols-ian magnitude.

Rags to Riches: Judge Allows 1st Amendment Claim by Prison Newspaper to Go Forward

This story received scant media attention.  Here is what the AP had to say:

A federal judge says a lawsuit alleging unconstitutional censorship at the Fulton County jail can go to trial.

U.S. District Court Judge Charles A. Pannell Jr. on Monday denied motions for summary judgment from both sides of the lawsuit filed in October 2007 by a monthly publication on criminal justice issues.

Prison Legal News claimed the jail had a policy prohibiting prisoners from receiving books, magazines or newspapers other than religious publications.

Pannell found the same policy unconstitutional in 2002, but when former Sheriff Myron Freeman took office in 2005 he retained it. The publication says material sent to Fulton County prisoners was rejected or destroyed. The mail policy was dropped after PLN filed suit.

I had to do a double-take when I read that the sheriff retained the policy despite its having been ruled unconstitutional.  But, then again, why should I be surprised?  Back in the day, slaves were beaten and/or tortured by their masters if they were caught reading.  Not that I’m equating slavery with incarceration.  But one has to think that similar motivations and intentions are at work here in denying prisoners access to certain publications which prison officials may deem suspicious and subversive.

The Daily Dispatch has a story on prison newspapers here.

Judge Pannell’s opinion on the Prison Legal News matter can be access by clicking the following link:

07CV2618-Prison Legal News

Who’s Your Daddy? Invisible Man, of course.

The AJC has an interesting and disturbing story about Frank Hatley who was ordered to serve time for failing to pay child support for a son that was not his.

Here’s how the story begins:

Frank Hatley has languished in a South Georgia jail for more than a year.

The reason? He failed to reimburse the state for all the public assistance his “son” received over the past two decades.

The problem? Hatley is not the biological father — and a special assistant state attorney general and a judge knew it but jailed Hatley anyway.

This is one of the few situations where the involvement of a lawyer actually helped.  According to the story, only after a sheriff spoke to an attorney on Mr. Hatley’s behalf, did this story come to light.  And, let’s admit it, airing the story in the court of public opinion is often if not more important than trying it in a court of law.   After all, Mr. Hatley cycled through several attorneys, some of whom actually aided him in material aspects of the case, but nevertheless failed to resolve the critical issue of why he remained in jail despite not having done anything illegal.  This story was also picked up over at Simple Justice, here.

Today, however, Mr. Hatley was finally released from jail, with the aid of his new attorney, Sarah Gerahty from the Southern Center for Human Rights.  Mr. Hatley’s sentiment post-release?

“Out of it all, I just feel like justice should be served for me in this case.  I shouldn’t have to keep being punished for a child that is not mine.”

Immigrants to Gwinnett County: Deport This!

ICE-criminal-alien-deportation-graphic

The "Three Pillars" of ICE policy to ID and remove "criminal aliens" - courtesy of ICE Website

The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that Gwinnett County officials may be unable to carry out their efforts to deport illegal immigrants from the county jail due to budget problems.  Here is an excerpt from the article:

The program, called 287(g), trains deputies to screen inmates to determine their immigration status. Inmates who are in the country illegally are turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation.

The Sheriff’s Department estimates 18 deputies will be needed to staff the program. It was unclear Monday whether the county can afford to bankroll that many deputies due to its current budget crunch.

Bannister said Monday he was “still very much in favor of the program.”

“I’m quite certain the funding for that program will stay,” he said.

Gwinnett is one of four counties in Georgia that participate in the so-called 287(g) program, the others being Cobb, Whitfield, and Hall counties.

The situation in Cobb is so bad (read: hostile toward immigrants) that attorneys have begun advising their clients to simply stay away from the county.

The Obama administration, represented by new Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano, has sought to reign in the excess of the program.  In fact, Napolitano issued new guidelines last week just for that purpose.  Read the press release here.

Gwinnett officials claim that their goal is to deport incarcerated illegal immigrants to free up jail space for other inmates.  In actuality, however, Gwinnett’s participation in the program will probably make jail conditions worse.   With officers now being given the power to expedite the deportion of illegal immigrants, is it really a stretch to imagine that they won’t be out there arresting anyone they think are eligible for deportation.  And with more arrestees, jails will become more, not less, crowded, which, in turn, will present an even greater financial strain for Gwinnett.

Again, an example that popular laws make bad policies.

To Protest is a Sin

Photo courtesy of WSBTV News

Photo courtesy of WSBTV News

Yesterday, a jury in Fulton County Superior Court handed down a death sentence for Cleveland Clark in a murder-for-hire case that had all the intrigue of a potboiling mystery novel.

The story, which by now may be familiar to many of you, is that Chiman Rai, a native of India, hired Clark to kill Sparkle Rai, Chiman’s daughter-in-law, because he did not want his son marrying an African-American woman, which Sparkle was.

I didn’t follow the case so I cannot comment on the validity of the verdict or the sentence.  However, I do want to dispel the notion, perpetuated by the press and prosecution, that a man protesting the injustice of a system which has condemned him to near certain death, as Clark did during yesterday’s proceedings, is the equivalent of evil personified.

One of the prosecutors, Kellie Hill, commented after the proceedings that “the jury got to see the killer that Sparkle has to face, when they saw his outburst today.  That’s exactly what they saw.”

That couldn’t be farther from the truth.  Murderers come in all shapes and sizes, as do cabdrivers, cooks, plumbers, and yes, even lawyers.  Clark’s decision to voice his disapproval by shouting, swearing, and banging a table, is proof of nothing else but his frustration, anger, and disappointment, perhaps at himself, perhaps at the prosecution or judge, or perhaps at everyone and everything. After all, the man was, up until that point, facing the possibility of death in a system that has historically and disproportionately sent blacks to death row.  To conflate a protesting man with a murdering man makes the condemner no better than the condemned.  It is egoism and racsim at its most extreme.   I doubt Clark himself knows his true self, let alone the prosecutors or the press, who, assuredly, have had little if any contact with him.

It is truly the height of injustice if a condemned man cannot speak his mind without being vilified for it.