Hello all,
The following is a cross post from (see header below):
=========================================================================== 
BBS: Peachy Keeno Inn BBS
Date: 09-27-95 (17:46)             Number: 61
From: DON HERMAN                   Refer#: 1138 
 To: JANE KELLEY                   Recvd: NO
Subj: Citizens For Justice           Conf: (61) CN_Legal_A
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Jane,
Thank you for the reply.
JK>DH>our Appeals system.  One prisoner writes us that the Department of
JK>DH>Justice estimates that one-half of one percent of those convicted are
JK>DH>innocent, while James McClosky of Centurion Ministries estimates 10% 
re
JK>DH>innocent.  Either way, that accounts for thousands each year
JK>DH>nation-wide.
JK>Get back to me on this after the decision in the Simpson trial.  If he
JK>walks, then tell me what percentage of those who are blatently guilty
JK>manage to do that with good attorneys.
No reason to wait until O.J. Simpson is aquitted to reply.  You see, one
case hardly creates a trend.  Some people will say that too many
guilty people are not convicted of their crime(s) and get off.  This is
the kind of language which does absolutely nothing to improve the
system.  Moreover, it is a basic principle of American law to the effect
that it is better to let ten guilty men go free than to condemn an
innocent man.  The language of the day goes against the grain of this
principle and it undermines any positive effect the judicial system
might otherwise have in the society.
Johnny Cochran is right, and may have even understated it when he
indicated the kind of corruption  shown in the Simpson case and sloppy
work of authorities is rampant in every major city in this country.  The
plain fact is every accused person is entitled, by law, to a defense
which is equal to that of the prosecution and it is a part of the rules
of ethics for attorneys to the effect that they defend their clients
with every means available to them.  But what is are the realities?
I have before me a letter from an attorney dated September 25, 1995.  It
was written on behalf of his client, a former prisoner.  The attorney is
currently representing this person in a Federal Civil Rights action and
the Washington State Attorneys General office is representing the
defendants, two prison authorities.  The names are omitted to protect
the ongoing litigation and attorney-client confidentiality concerns.
The letter is addressed to "contract attorneys" who are supposed to
represent prisoners in legal matters of various kinds.  The letter
states, in part: 
       "...It is my understanding from [State's Attorney] that you 
       already have discussed the substance of your legal work 
       performed on behalf of [former prisoner] with [State's 
       Attorney], including statements regarding your conclusions as to 
       the merits of the legal claims [former prisoner] brought to your 
       attention.  If [State's Attorney's] statements to me are true, 
       then it appears that you already have violated client 
       confidences without first seeking the client's permission to 
       disclose privileged information to an attorney known by you to 
       be representing an adverse party."
 
       "You voluntarily provided a declaration in a case involving a 
       former client to his adversary.  You provided that declaration 
       with knowledge that it would be used to the detriment of your 
       former client's case.  You made no effort to determine whether 
       your former client had objections to your actions.  you went 
       beyond your own personal knowledge, to the detriment of your 
       former client, to state that 'there is no limitation placed on 
       access to attorneys for inmates who are at the [location 
       omitted].'  There is no way for you to know what barriers and 
       retaliation befall inmates who seek to vindicate their rights 
       before the courts by any means."
 
       "You have a contract with the Department of Corrections to 
       provide legal services to inmates.  Your action in volunteering 
       testimony to your client's adversaries for the benefit of the 
       agency with which you have a pecuniary relationship is 
       instructive."
 
       "Please be advised that, based on the facts and circumstances 
       known to me, I believe I am compelled to bring these matters to 
       the attention of the Washington State Bar Association.  Perhaps 
       there are facts and circumstances unknown to me which would shed 
       a different light on the matter.  If you believe that to be the 
       case, I invite you to bring such facts to my attention."
Anyone who reads this can rest assured that in case there is a response
from the "contract attorneys" in this matter, I will post them
immideately.  I do not believe I will have to do so.  What we have here
is a lot like having rats, i.e., if you see one - there are one hundred.
This situation is not a matter of money, nor is it a matter of not
having good attorneys.  It is a plain and simple situation of corruption
which transends everything this great country stands for.
Don
JK>Poor people go to jail and rich people stay free.
JK> * SLMR 2.1a * Therapy helps, but screaming obsenities is cheaper.
JK> - JetMail v1.20*6 - Unregistered QWK Mail Door for Spitfire
- JetMail v1.20*6 - Unregistered QWK Mail Door for Spitfire
--- FreeMail 1.10 alpha-3
---------------