Virginia Alcohol Laws that Apply to Life

There are all sorts of laws out there that apply to alcohol, covering everything from its sale to its manufacture to its use. I've been asked recently to review those criminal laws which affect those who actually purchase and drink beer, wine, or ardent spirits in Virginia and after a quick review I came up with these.

DUI

The one everyone knows is what most people cal DUI, or driving under the influence.  However, in Virginia the crime does not occur when a person drives a vehicle, it happens when a person "operates" one.  Thus, if a person is behind the wheel, with the keys in the ignition, she is guilty. The statutes forbid a person under the influence of intoxicants to operate a motor vehicle, engine, train, or moped (18.2-266) and watercraft (29.1-738).  Generally, operating a vehicle under the influence is punished by up to 12 months in jail and up to a $2,500 fine, with various amounts of incarceration being mandated depending on certain factors (ie: presence of a minor in the car or level of alcohol in the driver's system).  If a person operates a vehicle under the influence three times in a ten year period, the third is felony with a maximum punishment of 5 years.

Where It Can be Consumed

It is generally illegal to drink in public (4.1-308) or be intoxicated in public (18.2-388) and doing either can result in a $250 fine.  As well, if one gives alcohol to guests visiting his home, the alcohol must be consumed in the residence (4.1-200).

Involving Minors

It is illegal for anyone under 21, interdicted, or intoxicated to buy, or be sold, alcohol (4.1-304).  It's also illegal to buy alcohol for someone you know (or should know) is a minor.  Obviously, it is illegal for a minor to drive with any alcohol in his system (18.2-266.1).  It is also illegal for a school bus driver to drink or possess alcohol while driving the bus with kids on it (4.1-309.1).

Interdicted

Anyone who has been interdicted cannot be sold alcohol (4.1-304) and cannot possess it (4.1-322).

Disorderly Conduct

It is illegal for someone, while under the influence, to disrupt a funeral, government meeting, religious meeting, school, or school activity (18.2-415).

Concealed Weapon

It is illegal to carry a concealed weapon while under the influence and it is illegal to drink alcohol at a place which serves it while carrying a concealed weapon (18.2-308).

Hunting

It is illegal to be under the influence of alcohol while hunting (18.2-285).

Baby

If, within 6 weeks of birth, a doctor diagnoses harm to a child that was caused by prenatal use of alcohol he must report it (63.2-1509).


-----------

Yes, I know there are probably a dozen - if not dozens - of other laws out there which apply to the consumption of alcohol.  However, these are the ones which popped out at me.  If any others pop into your head feel free to add them in the comments below.

Ambush in Bartlette: Chapter 13

[Chapter 1] . . . [Chapter 2] . . . [Chapter 3] . . . [Chapter 4] . . . [Chapter 5] . . . [Chapter 6] . . . [Chapter 7] . . . [Chapter 8] . . . [Chapter 9] . . . [Chapter 10] . . . [Chapter 11] . . . [Chapter 12]


Saturday morning Jerome woke early. To be more accurate, from the moment he got into bed at about one thirty he tossed and turned in the bed, troubled; he dozed off a couple times, but each time he started awake, torn between the need for sleep and the certainty of a visit if he slept before making a difficult decision. Finally, he got out of bed at about five and spent an hour or so praying the rosary. This calmed him down considerably and he put some thought into what actions he should take today.

He needed to tell someone what Deputy Carr said the night before. However, from the things the Deputy's brother said, it could be disastrous to talk to any local police. He recalled that some of the news reports he read about the ambush stated the FBI was providing "technical support" in the investigation, but he did not know what that meant exactly. Would the FBI be the right people to go to and how could he get in contact with them anyway? Even if he could get in contact with someone there, how should he approach this situation? He thought about it for a while longer and decided that his best option was to call the Bishop's office and see if they could help him contact the FBI.

Jerome had the Bishop's "direct line", which actually went to whichever young priest had been pressed into service as the Bishop's aid this year. He called and a bleary voice answered. After identifying himself, Jerome explained that he needed help contacting the FBI. That woke the man up on the other side of the phone and after a little scrambling Father Ostrowski got Bishop Mannion on the line.

After Jerome explained the situation, the Bishop promised that he would have someone (that meant Father Ostrowski) contact the FBI and make sure an agent was talking to him by noon. Then Bishop Mannion gave Jerome his marching orders.

"When the secular authorities contact you, you will make it clear to them that the Church, and you as its representative will not cooperate in the murder of another. You know where the Council of Bishops, and the Church as a whole, stands on this issue."

Holding his phone, Jerome began to consider the possible outcomes of that order. "How far do you wish me to push the secular authorities on this, Your Excellency?"

"You must look to the Lord as he leads you in this matter. The taking of a life is a highly immoral part of the culture of death. We resist that with as much strength as the Lord gives us."

"Yes, Your Excellency, I understand." And Jerome did. That was a highly worded and spiritually grounded way of telling him to endure jail if he must, but not to cooperate with the FBI until such time as he had assurances that the death penalty was off the table.

For the next couple hours, Jerome prayed some and considered what he would say or do once the FBI called. While at BC Law, he only took two courses on criminal law. However, he distinctly remembered one of his professors adamantly telling the students that officers could lie at will to get the information they needed, but that if a federal agent could construe something you said to him as lie you got convicted of a felony and went to federal prison. He got the computer out that the Bishop's office had given him and researched these points, confirming both rather quickly. However, her also tripped across another fact: a prosecutor was ethically forbidden to lie. Armed with that bit of information, he called Richmond back and spoke to Father Ostrowski again.

By this time, Martin Ostrowski was already a very frustrated man. Apparently, the FBI was not being cooperative. He had finally been able to get into contact with someone in the Richmond office, but they would not tell him the name of any FBI agent involved in the Bartlette County investigation, much less how to contact one. Now, Jerome was adding another level of complexity. He told Ostrowski to make sure that any FBI agent who wanted to question him came to the meeting with a prosecutor.

Faced with the extra task, Father Ostrowski, to his credit, did not whine or make excuses. He took the message and told Jerome that he would pass it on if he could ever find a means to contact someone to pass it on to. Then Jerome let the young priest get back to his mission, smiling slightly at the exasperation he heard in the man's voice.

At a quarter past eleven, Jerome got a call from a man identifying himself as Special Agent Carlos Mazzota. The initial conversation was very short. The agent asked what Jerome needed to speak to him about and Jerome told him that while he was visiting Deputy Carr, the deputy woke up and made a statement which seemed to indicate who the attackers were. Special Agent Mazzota immediately asked whom Deputy Carr identified. When Jerome refused to give him that information the special agent did not get angry or loud; in fact, his voice flattened and fell into a practiced, cold rhythm.

"Father Tolton, under federal law concealing evidence of a felony is a crime and you could spend five years in prison for it."

Jerome's nerves spiked at the threat, but he clamped down on them. "I'm not hiding evidence Special Agent Mazzota. I am merely refusing to reveal that which was obscured by circumstances."

"Sir, you are concealing your knowledge of a felony from a federal officer. That's obstruction of justice. It may also be misprision."

This time Jerome's nerves did not jangle quite as much. "You can threaten me all you want. However, until such time as I talk to a federal prosecutor and sign a letter of use I will not turn this information over. I will not lie to you, nor will I hide something you could have otherwise found. I simply won't cooperate."

There was a pause from the other side. "Okay. I'll see if I can scare up one of the A U S A's. Understand something though, I don't like the idea of putting a priest in prison, but I will if I need to. You need to cooperate. It's time to render unto Caesar."

If he had heard that once, Jerome had heard that a thousand times. Every public official who wanted him to do something quoted that line and hearing it again actually put him back on more comfortable ground. "I am offering to pay unto Caesar, but the rest of that sentence requires me to pay unto God what is God's. All I am asking is that someone who can guarantee certain conditions be present so that I can do both."

With that the FBI agent grunted, told Jerome that he would call back as soon as he could, and hung up without any exchange of pleasantries. Jerome sat there for a moment before starting his computer back up. He needed to do some more research. Could he be thrown in prison for simply not telling an FBI agent something? And what in the world was 'misprision'?"

About ninety minutes later Special Agent Mazzota called back. He told Jerome that he had located a federal prosecutor and they would meet Jerome at the federal courthouse in Abingdon, Virginia at three. It took Jerome ten minutes to find directions to the courthouse on his computer and then he cranked up his truck and was on the road. As he drove, he called the Bishop's office and spoke to Father Ostrowski yet again. He filled the aid in on what what he was doing; he also told Ostrowski that he thought there was a good chance he would be in jail before the day was over. Ostrowski reciprocated by telling him that Special Agent Mazzota called about an hour earlier and spoke to the Bishop. Father Ostrowski was not privy to the conversation, but the Bishop was perturbed enough that he had Father Ostrowski calling around in an attempt to find a criminal defense attorney who would answer his phone on a Saturday. None had so far, but Ostrowski promised a call to Jerome as soon as he had more information. Jerome arrived in Abingdon with dark thoughts of an impending imprisonment at the forefront of his brain.

And promptly drove right past the courthouse - twice. To be fair, he expected a big marble building with columns or something of the like. He finally figured out that a short, brick building which looked like a post office was actually the courthouse. Then, he drove around a bit to find someplace to park, eventually leaving the truck in the parking lot of some sort of center for the arts on the other side of a large, fancy hotel from the courthouse. He arrived ten minutes late to find an annoyed looking man in his mid-thirties and a woman who appeared to be in her forties waiting for him. Both were dressed in perfectly tailored suits which looked like they had just been dry cleaned.

They recognized him as he walked up - not too hard since he was wearing the collar. Of course, the man was Special Agent Mazzota. The woman introduced herself as Assistant United States Attorney Ann Taylor. Jerome apologized for being late and the woman smiled at his explanation.

"Yeah, we get that a lot. The first time people come looking for the courthouse they expect something big and impressive and they get . . ." She let her voice fade as she waved her hand at the building. "The funny thing is that apparently there used to be a unique and impressive courthouse, but they tore it down and gave us this. Not sure why - before my time."

With that, she turned and walked in the glass doors, followed by Mazzota and Jerome. Inside, they were met by a man wearing khakis and a polo shirt which had a five pointed star in a circle embroidered over his heart. Ms. Taylor stopped to introduce him.

"This is Marshal Bates. He's here because somebody has to make sure we don't plant bombs in the courthouse and because if we aren't able to trust local law enforcement - something your actions have made Carlos suspect might be true - then we may have to lean on his people for muscle."

The four of them walked down a hall and went into a small room with a table and several chairs around it. As soon as they sat down Special Agent Mazzota turned to Jerome.

"Okay, you've got us all here. Tell us whatever you thought was so important it couldn't wait until Monday."

Instead of answering him, Jerome reached into the manila folder he had brought with him and pulled out a piece of paper. He handed it to Mazzota. "Here's the letter of use which I told you I needed a prosecutor for. Once I have a signed copy of this I will tell you what I know."

"This is garbage. You can't expect to be able to tell us . . ." In mid sentence, the FBI agent stopped when the prosecutor put her hand on his arm and motioned him out of the room. She excused herself as well and the marshal followed her. Jerome found himself sitting in the room alone.

It seemed like he waited for an eternity. Jerome did his best to stay as calm as possible, but his body had definitely decided this was a fight or flight circumstance and the adrenaline pumping into his system was not helping his nerves. He tried to say the Prayer to Saint Michael, which he had memorized specifically for this situation, but he kept foundering after "Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio." This was probably because the rest of the prayer was about rebuking and defeating the devil and Jerome was actually dealing with people of good intent. Perhaps they had been misled down a wrong path, but he did not think of any of them as actively pursuing an evil intent. In the end, he fell back on an old favorite.

"Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love.
Where there is injury, pardon.
Where there is doubt, faith.
Where there is despair, hope.
Where there is darkness, light.
Where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,
grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console;
to be understood, as to understand;
to be loved, as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive.
It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.
Amen."

The Prayer of Saint Francis summed up the driving forces of Jerome's personal theology. It always comforted him and provided a reminder of Christian purpose. He repeated the prayer twice, said a decade of the rosary, and returned to his original prayer. His head remained bowed in prayer when the federal agents came back into the room.

He finished a last few lines of the prayer before raising his head. The attorney and marshal looked uncomfortable; the FBI agent looked skeptical. After a moment, they continued into the room and sat down. This time the prosecutor took the lead.

"Father, we've just spent a good bit of time talking to your boss. You realize that he's willing to sacrifice you in order to make a point? He doesn't like the death penalty, so he's willing to let you go to jail?"

"Ms. Taylor, we are both willing for me to make that sacrifice. Both of us serve God and God does not favor the destruction of any of his created, even those who have committed grave sin."

She nodded her head and gave him a look that mixed exasperation with irritation. "Yes, I thought you might say something like that. So, I also spoke to my boss and he approved the agreement. Here's a copy of your document. Understand, if you balk any further we will consider the agreement null and void and you to have obstructed justice. We will prosecute if you do not live up to the agreement you have made."

With that, Ann Taylor handed over a copy of the paper in her hand to Jerome and others to the the FBI agent and the marshal. Jerome took it and checked it over to make sure it was the same paper he handed to Ms. Taylor. It was simple to check because the entire agreement because it consisted of a single sentence:

"The United States government agrees that neither it, nor any of its political subdivisions, shall seek the death penalty for any deaths related to the firefight and explosion which took place on the 18th day of July in this year of Our Lord."

Below the sentence was Jerome's signature and Ann Taylor's along with a line where Ms. Taylor had written in the date. It was all there and everything was in order as far as Jerome could tell. He settled back and described the events of the night before. They had him repeat it at least ten times, asking him questions about it each time. Most of them wanted answers that Jerome did not have. He did not know where the deputy's brother lived. He did not know who "Brownie" was exactly. He did know what a "melungeon" was when the prosecutor asked, but only because he had looked it up on the internet: "a tri-racial, micro-minority group found exclusively in the Appalachian Mountains."

The questioning drug on for well over an hour before the meeting finally broke up. Everybody shook hands and the federals walked Jerome to the front door of the courthouse. At the door, the FBI agent told them he wanted to talk to Jerome alone for a second. The prosecutor asked if it was something she needed to be part of, but he told her it was just about security concerns and she stayed inside as the agent walked Jerome out.

"Father Tolton, what you've given us probably isn't going to break the case wide open, and it certainly doesn't justify what was signed away today." He raised his hand to halt Jerome before he could interrupt. "Yeah, I know. You have obligations to your church and she's probably right," he nodded his head back toward the prosecutor, "when she says the current administration wasn't going to sign off on this as a capital murder case over Catholic and liberal opposition." Special Agent Mazzota's tone left no doubt what he thought about that. "Anyway, you should not go back to Bartlette County. If local law enforcement is involved in this, you will not be safe. They probably don't know about this yet, but eventually, we'll have to involve at least Virginia State Police and there will be leaks. Too many of the troopers and locals have worked together for too long for it not to happen."

"I can't." Jerome began. "I've got . . ."

Mazzota cut across him. "Don't give me that 'man of God' crap. That collar doesn't make you bullet proof. This is starting to look really bad and if they get wind of you they won't hesitate to make a Black, Catholic Yankee disappear, whether he is a priest or not."

Jerome fixed the FBI agent in his gaze and spoke more firmly. "I am going back to Bartlette. I will be careful about it, but I will not flee. I have both a duty to the Church and to God and I will neglect neither."

The two men stood staring at each other for several moments before the FBI spoke. "I ought to put you in protective custody right now. Everybody in the world would go nuts if I did though. Besides, it would tip our hand too early." He reached into his pocket and pulled a card out of his wallet. "Here. That's got my direct number on it. If anybody from law enforcement other than FBI shows up, you call me before you go with them. Avoid local law enforcement as much as possible. We don't know exactly what's going on yet, so we don't know who all is involved. You're being an idiot. I can't stop you from being an idiot. All I can do is try to mitigate the damage." With that, the special agent turned and walked back to the courthouse door. A second later, Jerome started walking back to his truck.

Sunday passed uneventfully. In fact, Jerome spent most of the day in another parish. The priest in Holy Family parish was visiting a sick relative so Father Gabe covered his Saturday vigil masses at Saint Joseph in Grundy and Saint Mary in Richlands and Jerome agreed to cover the Sunday masses. This meant that Jerome was up six in the morning and on the road by seven. He arrived at Saint Elizabeth in Pocahontas, Virginia at eight-thirty. At nine he held mass for twenty-three people. Maybe that was a normal turnout; maybe it was extra because people wanted to check out the visiting priest. Jerome never could tell in these rural towns and it made little difference. The Church took its duty to minister to rural areas seriously and if this church only served ten people that would be ten people who would be abandoned by the Church otherwise. Consequently, individual churches here in the mountains were not parishes unto themselves; they were all part of a larger parish and the priest rode a circuit, driving from county to county, town to town in order to have mass at each church. The only problem with this system was that it meant the priest had to leave fairly quickly after mass ended at one church so that he could get to the next church in time and he was always a little late at the next church. Jerome stayed to shake hands and exchange pleasantries with the parishioners at Saint Elizabeth for about fifteen minutes and that was exactly how late he was in getting to Saint Theresa in Tazewell. The parishioners took it in stride and five minutes later he got mass started. After that mass there was a parish lunch which Jerome stuck around for and it was well after four by the time that he got back to the rectory of Saint Berlinda in Bartlette County.

On Monday morning, Special Agent Mazzota called Jerome at seven in the morning. Mazzota told him that two agents, one from the FBI and one from the State Police, would come around at eight and drive him to the State Police office in Wytheville, Virginia. At five before eight a man walked in with in a well worn jacket and tie and introduced himself as Special Agent Gilliam of the Virginia State Police. He showed Jerome his badge and identification and they left immediately - barely giving Jerome time to yell to Father Gabe that he was going. In the SUV Jerome was introduced to FBI Special Agent Slemp. The three of them left on the two hour drive to Wytheville.

The building they finally came to was a square red brick edifice with inset glass windows that looked like they were tinted black. The agents walked him into the building and left him in a conference room with no widows. Just short of twenty minutes later two different men walked into the room. The first was Special Agent Mazzota and the second, older man introduced himself as Captain Fraley, the division commander in the Fourth Division. Jerome had no idea what the Fourth Division was, but since the Captain came in with the lead FBI agent, he assumed the police man must be fairly senior.

"Sorry to drag you out here, Father, but we had to get you out of Bartlette. We had some things happened on Sunday which are going to cause more things to happen in the next couple days and you were in too much danger to leave there."

As Jerome started to speak the man raised both his hands in a halting gesture. "I understand that you don't want protection. Unfortunately, things are too dangerous right now for us to pay that much leave. Whether you want to be or not, you are in our protective custody until further notice."

With that, the older man turned Jerome back over to the two agents who had picked him up at Saint Berlinda. Jerome had pictures of being locked in a jail cell dancing through his head, but protective custody eventually boiled down to him being put up at a hotel with the agents in the room next door. The telephone in the room was disconnected and they took his cell phone. Jerome was reduced to watching television or praying. After watching a half hour of people screaming at the screen "No Whammy" and hitting plungers for random prizes, he concluded that television was just as worthless as it ever had been and settled down to read from the bible that the Gideons had so helpfully left in the drawer of the bed stand. That Monday was passed in prayer, reading, and eating whatever fast food the agents brought him. By eight the tension of the early morning followed by the monotony of the rest of the day combined and he fell into a sound sleep.

Tuesday morning, he woke at seven. It was the longest he had slept in years and he would have slept further except one of the agents had come into his room through the adjoining door. "Sorry to wake you Father. I thought you would want to see what's going on in Bartlette County." With that, he flipped on the TV and changed it to one of the news channels.

" . . . started early this morning and has been going on for several hours now. I've got to say, Darlene, that I've never seen such a concentration of federal law enforcement before. There seem to be at least a hundred marshals and FBI agents. They are all over the county knocking down doors and arresting people. So far, we think they have arrested at least four law enforcement officers and several civilians. The FBI spokesman, a Special Agent Mazzota, is refusing to comment as to whether this has something to do with the so called "Ambush in Bartlette" which took place a couple weeks back and led to the death and injury of several law enforcement agents and civilians."

They sat watching the television, flipping from news channel to news channel. All of them were filled with talking heads who had some basic information, but not much in the way of accuracy. About eight-thirty, one of the channels reported a rumor that there had been a shootout at one of the houses the federal agents raided. By nine-thirty the news channels were reporting all sorts of rumors about firefights as federal agents tried to arrest local law enforcement officials. One channel even reported a rumor that there was an armed standoff in Yared where the police had holed up in their station and were refusing to come out.

By eleven, federal officials gave in to the pressure of the escalating rumors and held a press conference. The United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia spoke from a federal office in Abingdon flanked by high ranking men from the FBI, DEA, Federal Marshals, and Virginia State Police. The only person that Jerome recognized was the State Policeman; Captain Fraley of the Fourth Division stood there in his highly pressed gray and black uniform with highly polished silver bars shining from his collar. The only person who spoke was the U.S. Attorney.

"I have a prepared statement and will take no questions. At four this morning a joint task force of DEA, FBI, Marshals, the Virginia State Police, the Chicago and Detroit Police Departments, and the Florida Bureau of Investigations cooperated in Operation Ever Halt. This operation was a multi-state effort to stop a major pipeline for illicit drugs, primarily abused opioids and benzodiazepines. We took down major sources of the drugs in Florida, Chicago, and Detroit as well as a major warehouse for it in Yared, Virginia."

"In the Yared portion of the operation, we arrested a number of individuals, including three senior police officials in Yared and two deputies in the Bartlette County Sheriff's Department. Several other individuals in Yared were arrested for their part in the conspiracy to distribute drugs. Additionally, search warrants were served on the houses of each of these individuals, the Yared Police Department and the Bartlette Sheriff's Department."

"There are several rumors about supposed gunfights. Only one event involving the use of a firearm occurred. When the police entered the residence of one of the deputies the man ran to his closet. As the agents entered his bedroom the man had just grabbed the rifle and when he refused a command to drop it they tazed him. The rifle went off, but it shot into the ceiling, injuring no one."

With that, the U.S. Attorney shut down the press conference, promising a full press release by four that afternoon. A few reporters shouted questions, but the Attorney and other men simply turned and walked out of the room.

The next day his keepers drove him back to the red brick building, depositing him in the same conference room as before. This time Captain Fraley was alone when he came into the room. The Captain explained that they were going to release Jerome today because they thought they had everyone significant under in custody. Then he got to the meat of the matter.

"I understand, from Special Agent Mazzota, that your Bishop sent you down here to figure out what happened to Father Pahl during the ambush?" When Jerome nodded he continued. "Okay. I can't tell you much in the way of specifics, but here's a general summary of what happened."

"It was a multi-state drug ring, dealing mainly in pills. The pills were coming from several places around the country and were being stored in Yared. It was a really old-fashioned model of drug distribution which we don't run into often with pills. Anyway, the bad guys were tapped into the Sheriff's department and Yared PD. On top of that, while the Sheriff wasn't taking a payoff or anything, he turned a blind eye to their activities for years. However, they had a problem. Sheriff Minton has had a three heart attacks in the last four years and he probably won't run for office again."

"Everyone expects Captain Robert Ross - you probably know him as 'Bo' - to become the next Sheriff and he is honest and entirely too competent for these guys. So they decided to take him out. The firefight in the alley at the back of the courthouse was their second attempt; the first was aborted because Deputy Ross showed up at the ambush sight with a State Trooper in tow."

"At the courthouse, the two deputies escorting the Pahl brothers were supposed to stop in the alley with the prisoners and let them have a smoke. The attorneys and priest weren't supposed to be there. When Deputy Ross came out to get them moving again, the men in the car at the end of the alley were supposed to fire shots over everyones' heads and in the confusion the deputies in the alley were supposed to kill Ross and the two brothers."

"When the gunfire began, Ross ran to get the door to the courthouse open and one of the deputies in the alley shot him in the back. In fact, he seems to be the only person the ones in the alley shot. Everyone else was hit by gunfire from the end of the alley."

"The propane gas explosion was done on purpose. The guys at the end of the alley meant to kill everyone, including their co-conspirators. They shot a hole in the propane tank and threw a flare into the resulting cloud. They thought there would be a little explosion and they would then go down the alley and kill the people while they were stunned. Instead, they got a big explosion which blew half the Sheriff's Office down. They panicked and fled through the woods."

When Jerome tried to ask questions, the State Police Captain made it clear that he had given all the information he was going to about the ambush. He was not going to tell Jerome anyone's name or explain how the police got their information. And that was fine. While Jerome was curious about the ins and outs of what was going on, he had no actual need of that information. He knew, and could tell Bishop Mannion, why Father Ted Pahl was dead: he was killed by drug dealers because he was somewhere he was not supposed to be.

Outlier: Yankees kill Strangers and are Okay with Adultery?

"The triumph of a culture of honor helps to explain why the pattern of criminality in the American South has always been so distinctive.  Murder rates are higher there than in the rest of the country.  But crimes of property and "stranger" crimes - like muggings - are lower. . . The homicides in which the South seems to specialize are those in which someone is being killed by someone he knows, for reasons both the killer and victim understand. . . The statistics show that a Southerner who can avoid arguments and adultery is as safe as any other American, and probably safer."

Malcolm Gladwell, Outliers.

So, lets look at the implications in there for Yankees.  Apparently, y'all steal a lot of property from people you don't know and kill random strangers.  You also seem to be okay with people sleeping with your wives.  So now everyone know that when some random internet pop-up offers them the chance to sleep with cheating wives, they should make sure she's in New York City and go out of their way to introduce themselves to her husband beforehand.  Go ahead.  It's perfectly safe - the book says so.

This book has some really good points and a bunch of flights of fancy.  It's an argument that while nature has some effect, nature and chance are triumphant.  At its core it espouses a formula that goes something like this:

Adequate Talent + Upbringing that Teaches Social Interaction and Situational Mastery + Exceedingly Great Amount of Practice + Blind Luck = Becoming the Best of the Best.

or put more succinctly

Nature + Nurture + Opportunity = Success

I must admit that I'm not particularly shocked by this.  It's a pretty normal formula and he fleshes it out fairly well in parts.  The part about intellect alone not being enough to make a person successful is rather obvious, although he does point out that intellect needs to be above a certain point (nature).  The part about differences in behavior between parents of higher societal strata and lower is something I suspect most of us have observed (nurture).  The part about the rise of Joseph Flom, and Skadden Arps, because opportunity was left sitting on the table for him to grab by more prestigious firms was interesting and rang true (opportunity).

Yet, in other parts the book goes off the rails.  Most obvious is Chapter 6, in which the author starts out telling a well written and interesting story about a Harlan, Kentucky feud. He expands that to describe the many feuds of the past in the mountains.  Then he goes on to trace this to the group of immigrants which settled in the Appalachian Mountains.  This group of immigrants is held out as the reason that an "honor culture" developed in the mountains.

At this point he had me interested.  How was this leading to success?  Or, how was it changed to lead to success?  However, he never goes anywhere near either of these points.  Instead, he conflates the "honor culture" in the Appalachian Mountains with culture of the entire Southern United States and speaks of a couple of tests which test the behavior of Southern males.  It added nothing to the book's argument as a whole - or at least nothing that wasn't better explained in the next chapter about Korean Air's change from a very bad airline to a very good one via cultural changes - and it had the whiff of Northern bias.

The attempt to state that extremely successful Jewish lawyers were proximately caused by their parents' being successful in the garment industry doesn't quite make its case.  While this is is almost certainly correct in the but / for sense (parental success led to money and thus more opportunity for their kids), the attempt to connect lessons learned through success in the garment industry is tenuous at best - it seems the classic case of correlation not meaning causation.  I am proceeding here from a position of ignorance, but I do wonder whether the garment industry was the primary concentration of wealth in the Jewish community in the United States - or at least the primary concentration of wealth in the Jewish community which would see becoming a lawyer as a step up.  For instance, one could see bankers - to pick another stereotypical Jewish trade - thinking it more prestigious to bring their sons into the family business than making them lawyers.

The most far-flung would seem to be the "the reason that people with Far Eastern ancestors are better at math is that their ancestors raised rice" hypothesis.  He starts with some rational and interesting points.  Chinese numbers, written as words, are shorter and thus more easily remembered.  Additionally, the way Chinese numbers are said in their numerical progression is simpler and more logical.  Then he goes on about how difficult it is to raise rice and how serfs in Europe just didn't have to have much skill and precision in raising wheat (I am assuming that when he says "corn" he is adopting the European definition of the word).  He glamorizes Far Eastern serfdom as promoting skills compared to European serfdom, which crushed peasants.  None of it hangs together very well (except perhaps the first two points raised above).

All-in-all, the book's a mixed bag.  The core of it is interesting, but the fleshing out is flawed.  I give it a 3.5 out of 5.

Interesting Virginia Legal Opinions of 2012: Three Cheers for Justice Powell

Right now, I'm in the middle of catching up on my analysis of various crimlaw legal opinions which have precedential value in Virginia. I've caught up on the US Supreme Court and the Virginia Supreme Court and I'm about half way through the Virginia Court of Appeal's opinions.  As usual, there are a number of opinions which I disagree with, but that's fairly normal.  You see, I have this weird thing about consistent application of the rules of interpretation and I despise when courts interpret a statute "to further its legislative intent" (in other words, adding something the legislature did not put in there).

Anyway, the most interesting Virginia set of opinions this year was a tight race between the Baker and Foltz sets of opinions.  In both, there is badly flawed reasoning by both the Virginia Court of Appeals and the Virginia Supreme Court.

Baker v. Commonwealth, NOV12, VaSC No. 120252:

Baker is entirely Virginiacentric (unlike Foltz, discussed infra).  It concerns the ability to charge a felon who is constantly in possession of a particular firearm over a period of time with more than one violation of Virginia Code 18.2-308.2(A).  In other words, can a felon constantly in possession of a firearm be charged with possessing it more than one time?  Baker was convicted of possessing a pistol three times: the day he stole it, a later date when he tried to sell it, and a third date (the next day) when he actually sold it.


The pertinent part of the statute is 

It shall be unlawful for (i) any person who has been convicted of a felony . . . to knowingly and intentionally possess or transport any firearm.

There's a lot more to the statute, including some fairly hefty mandatory minimum sentences, but those aren't the parts which apply to Baker.


In 2011, the Court of Appeals ruled that it was okay to convict Baker of all three possessions because they were in different particular time periods.  The Virginia Supreme Court rejects the Court of Appeal's rationale, but it then goes on to pull an unsupportable switch. While interpreting the charge of possessing a firearm, the VaSC suddenly switches to talking about transporting a firearm.

If the statute was meant to restrict the offense only to the receipt, initial possession, or even extended possession of the weapon, such a specific reference to the transporting or carrying of that weapon would be a frivolous and unnecessary addition to the statutory language.

 Remember, Baker was convicted of three possessions, not three transportations.  He would be clearly guilty of transporting the firearm three times (as he stole it and both times when he took it someplace to sell); he just wasn't charged with that.  It's a different crime.

Having linked the interpretation of "possess" to the interpretation of "transport" the court then creates from whole cloth a purpose (gravamen) which it assigns the statute in the name of the General Assembly.  The statute's purpose "extends to the prevention of the heightened danger each new instance of possession create" and therefore "a new offense of possession can be established with each separate act or occurrence that can be proven by the government."  Since possession continues even if the defendant does not have immediate, actual, physical possession of a firearm, See Wright v. Commonwealth, NOV09,VaSC No. 090308 (possession of firearms five miles away from defendant's location of arrest), what "act or occurrence" probably means is "if it is transported" and it most likely also means "if it is displayed."  Note that neither of those qualities are necessities of possession (and thus not part of its gravamen).

The Dissent (Justice Powell):

Justice Powell's dissent rips the Court's decision to shreds.  She points out that the Court entirely ignored the rule of lenity, that it apparently can't tell the difference between a disjunctive and a conjunctive (possess or transport), that possession is a continuing offense, and that there is a ton of case law contrary to the Court's decision.  It's well thought out and well written and (at least for the moment) makes Justice Powell my favorite Justice.

Personally, I'd like to take all the credit. During my years of standing in Chesterfield Circuit Court arguing cogent and well reasoned legal points for defendants I represented, some of it must have sunk in.  Of course, none of it worked at the time.  I generally remember Judge Powell regarding me with a look that seemed to say "What kind of malarkey and tomfoolery are you trying to sell me today, Mr. Lammers?"  Except, I just can't picture then Judge, now Justice Powell, ever using the words malarkey or tomfoolery.

Hi, Justice Powell!  Just kidding. (I figure I better include the disclaimer just in case she has Google tracking her name and telling her when bloggers in the deep, dark depths of the Appalachian Mountains are writing tomfoolery about her).


Foltz v. Commonwealth, SEP12, VaSC No. 110832:

The Foltz series of opinions consisted of a panel decision from the Court of Appeals in 2010, an en banc Court of Appeals decision in 2011, and a Virginia Supreme Court decision in 2012.  In Foltz, the courts found themselves on the horns of a painful dilemma.  There is absolutely no doubt that Foltz is a serial rapist whom the police caught in the act.  However, an unconstitutional use of a gps tracker on his car led to his capture and prosecution.  The police used a gps tracker on his car and when it indicated he was the rapist they started following him in person.  While tailing him they saw him put on a mask and attempt to rape a woman (they intervened).  The initial panel ruled that there is no societal interest in protecting the privacy of those activities that might occur in a car's bumper and upheld the conviction.  In 2011, the en banc Court of Appeals, sensing which way the wind was blowing on this constitutional issue ruled that even if the gps tracker on the car was unconstitutional, police engaged in personally tailing Foltz saw him trying to commit rape and therefore the constitutionality of the gps tracker was moot.   Of course, all this was before U.S. v. Jones, Jan12, USSC No. 10-125.  By the time the Virginia Supreme Court got its hands on the case Jones had made it extremely clear that gps trackers attached to chattels require a warrant.  Faced with this circumstance the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that all that testimony which was developed because the officers used a gps tracker was harmless error because the victim testified that Foltz was the person who tried to rape her.

The key problem the Foltz opinion has is that the victim would not have been able to identify Foltz without police intervention.  He was wearing a mask. Surely, if the mask came off during the attempt or the victim observed some other clearly identifiable trait that would have been mentioned somewhere in the facts presented.  The police intervention would not have occurred without the unconstitutional use of a gps tracker.  However, I do not have a transcript of the case.  Maybe there are independent facts supporting the VaSC's assertion of harmless error. It would just be nice if they were in the opinion.

US Supreme Court, The Right to Confront & What the Heck?!?

Okay, I'm researching double jeopardy rules and I trip across Williams v. Illinois.  I don't know how I missed this when it came out, but here's my summary:

Williams v. Illinois, JUN12, USSC No. 10-8505: (1) FOUR JUSTICES ONLY: At least in bench trials, inadmissible out of court statements (DNA analysis) which an expert talks about in explaining the basis for his opinion are not offered for their truth and therefore are not subject to the confrontation clause. NOTE: This relies strongly on Federal Rule 703 which does not track with Virginia Rule 2:703(b). (2) FOUR JUSTICES ONLY: Statements which fall under the confrontation clause have two characteristics. (a) They involve out of court statements having a primary purpose of accusing a defendant of a crime. (b) They involve formalized statements such as affidavits, prior testimony, or confessions. (3)(a) A DNA report from before the offender is identified is non-testimonial because its primary purpose was not to obtain evidence for the trial of the offender, but to catch an offender. (b) DNA evidence is not inherently inculpatory; it exculpates everyone but the offender. (c) Requiring the technicians who worked on preparing a profile to testify is economically expensive and would discourage the use of DNA in favor of less reliable evidence. (d) The defendant is not prejudiced because he can subpoena the technicians who prepared the profile. (4) JUSTICE THOMAS ONLY, rejecting both above but concurring: (a) A rule of evidence does not trump the right to confront, especially one that was created contrary to the common law rule it replaced. (b) The confrontation clause regulates only those statements with indicia of solemnity so that they are formalized testimonial materials, including depositions, affidavits, prior testimony, or statements from formalized dialogue such as custodial interrogation.

Okay.  Now, in case any of you missed it, there are five votes against the two rationales that were announced for upholding the denial of the applicability of the right to confront by four of the five justices who upheld the trial and appellate courts. And then there's an opinion by one guy who doesn't agree with anybody, but determines the outcome of the case. Sometimes I wonder whether those folks in the big stone building in D.C. realize that the rest of us have to try to actually figure out how to apply the obtuse obfuscations they send down from the mount.


In Williams, there was an unidentified rapist.  A DNA sample taken from the victim was sent to a out of state lab.  When the result came back it was compared to DNA samples that the state had previously taken from convicts and analyzed at the state lab.  There was a match.  Illinois provided both the person who performed the test on the sample taken from Williams after the prior conviction and the person who compared the results, determining that they matched.  However, it did not call anyone from the out of state lab to testify about that sample.  Williams cried foul, claiming a violation of his right to confront the person who did the analysis in the out of state lab.


There's a very strong argument that Williams should be entitled to examine the analyst from the out of state lab under current constitutional jurisprudence.  The DNA analysis from the out of state lab is vital to the case and Williams would not have even been a suspect without it.  However, the above opinion holds otherwise.  Look, I'm a prosecutor and predisposed to the introduction of these forms, but those rationales are poor.  Mayhap, Oh Great Supreme Court Justices above us all, you might try a justification such as this:  (1) The analysis of the DNA is done by a machine.  (2) A machine cannot be examined or cross examined.  (3) The work done by a machine is not testimonial.  (4)  The technicians that put the item into the machine, take the item back from the machine, and get a copy of the result from the machine are merely extensions of the machine's workings. (5) The comparison of the two results from machines by a human being is testimonial and that person must testify.    


Yes, there are issues with (4), but there has to be a point where you draw a line.  There's always one more person down stream whom the prosecutor has not brought to court. If the prosecutor provides the analyst and the technician then the defendant can complain that the person who maintains the machine has not been called.  If the prosecution provides the analyst, technician, and maintenance man, then the defendant can complain that the person who designed the machine has not been called. et cetera. et cetera. et cetera.  A line has to be drawn somewhere and the technician / analyst line seems to be a logical place.  This, of course, does not address chain of custody issues - only the right to confront.


Instead we get the "because it passes Federal Rule of Evidence 703 it is constitutional, especially in front of a judge" argument.  That argument is pretty threadbare and Justice Thomas deals with it without breaking a sweat.  Virginia Practitioner's Note: Be advised that our Rule of Evidence 703(b) does not track with the federal rule; we stuck with the common law:

(b) Criminal cases. In criminal cases, the opinion of an expert is generally admissible if it is based upon facts personally known or observed by the expert, or based upon facts in evidence.

Therefore, in Virginia the expert cannot rely on inadmissible evidence and therefore could not talk about it in his explanation of the basis of his opinion.  Therefore, this should never be an available argument in Virginia.


As for the primary purpose test, (3)(a) above does make an arguable point as to the primary purpose of the of the analysis.  However, it's a microscopically thin hair they're splitting there.  Yes, the primary purpose was to catch the rapist, but the primary purpose of catching him is to prosecute him (this does not appear to be a serial rapist case with a desperate need to find the offender before he strikes again).  Catching the offender and prosecuting him are events of a continuing purpose and intimately intertwined.  It makes no sense to separate the two.


The rest of the Four's argument is specious.  Despite what (3)(b) states, if something exculpates everyone else it is clearly inculpatory evidence against anyone it does not exculpate.  The fact that a requirement will lead to increased cost, per (3)(c), does not mean that the constitutional requirement can be bypassed.  I'm fairly certain that if we took thieves out the back door of the courthouse and executed them the moment they were convicted it would be much cheaper than allowing them appeals and maintaining prisons to house them; nevertheless, we obey the constitutional mandates.  Arguing that the defendant's right to confront is okay as long as he could subpoena a person to court, as in (3)(d), would relieve the prosecution of any duty to provide anyone; after all, if the defense did not want the prosecution to be able to rely on the police report as proof of an illegal act, it could have subpoenaed the officer.


As for Justice Thomas' rationale for upholding the introduction of the DNA test results, I must admit that it has a superficial attraction.  At first it appears to be a more bright line rule.  However, after examining it a little more closely, I think there would be some problems.  The obvious one is the one Justice Kagan raises in her dissent: if statements can get in just because they are not formalized then law enforcement agencies, legislatures, and prosecutors are going to go out of their way to stop getting things formalized.  Whether a certificate of analysis from the state lab has an attestation on it is a formality only; presumptively, the lab will do the same work either way and it will carry much the same weight with the finder of facts.  Does anyone truly believe the jury goes back to deliberate and spends time examining the notarized seal on the report?


I'm also concerned as to what "statements from formalized dialogue" means exactly.  As "custodial interrogation" is pointed out, we know it is covered, but what about a 9-1-1 call?  Or even an interview of a witness?  Are they formalized because they are noted and reported?  Or are they lacking formality because they are not done in a custodial environment or in a particular fashion set forth by an agency policy?  That's a nest of vipers I don't particularly want to get thrown into.  In the end, Justice Thomas' solution seems too readily circumscribed and thus unworkable.


Here's the rule as I see it for those of us practicing in Virginia, applying the rule of the Four and the rule of Thomas and considering Virginia's Rule 703(b):

Rule of the case:  A non-formalized statement which has as its primary purpose the catching of an offender who has not been specifically identified when the testing is done can be admitted at trial.

If the statement makes it through all those hoops it has the support of five justices.  Mind you, this is tenuous as all get out.  A portion of the rule I just laid out is opposed by five justices.  The other portion seems to be opposed by eight.  Nevertheless, if you tack windward you have the number of votes needed to support the rule.


And, good luck explaining all this to your trial judge during a two minute bench conference in the middle of your next jury trial.  You can do it.  I have faith in you.

Prosecutors in Korea

Here's what I know about what happens to you if you break the law in Korea: you either get prosecuted by an uber rich party girl who has a way overdeveloped, inappropriate  fashion sense or you get prosecuted by vampire.  Personally, I'm not sure which is worse.

Somehow, Netflix has decided that I am Korean and keeps recommending Korean TV series to me.  So far, I have only watched two, Prosecutor Princess and Vampire Prosecutor.  I'll let you figure out which one centers around a fashion maven and which one has a troubled stalker of the night fighting against his primal urge to snack on the people around him.  Well, okay, maybe I'll fill in a few details for those of you who can't figure it out on your own.

Prosecutor Princess starts out cute as we see the normally stoic, reserved and cookie cutter prosecutors having their lives disrupted by this out of control party girl who wears suits that each cost more than a prosecutor earns in a single year.  It develops into a decent drama involving the manipulation of this girl by outside forces using her as a pawn which becomes increasingly aware of her situation as things play out.

I have not finished Vampire Prosecutor yet, but it's about a guy who has been turned into a vampire and now uses his powers for good.  In some ways he's the typical modern tortured-soul vampire we've been seeing in modern TV at least since Angel in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  He fights off his urge to eat somebody in just about every other episode and he is haunted by something that happened in his past.  On the other hand, he doesn't seem to be affected by sunlight in the least and he has some nifty powers I've never seen in a vampire before.  He can come to a crime scene and just by looking see from the moment that the first drop of blood hit the ground to the moment that drop of blood left the body.  If he actually drinks some of the blood he can even see back further and gets glimpses of the perpetrator or other important bits of evidence.

To be honest, I enjoyed Prosecutor Princess more than Vampire Prosecutor - although that may be because I watched Princess a while back and have forgotten its flaws and I am currently working my way through Vampire.  Anyway, there seemed to be actual character development in Princess as the main character realizes there is more to life than fashion and then begins to realize even more.  In Vampire the only character who seems to grow is a female assistant prosecutor whose main purpose in many of the episodes is to run around filling in time with a fruitless investigation until Vampire Guy can swoop in to save the day.  Oh, and she's also one of the girls who gets tied up every second or third episode.  Koreans don't seem to be particularly shy about that sort of thing; it's almost like one of those old Detective Magazines.

Beyond the stories, we also get a glimpse of what being a "prosecutor" is like in Korea.  It seems quite different than what we have here in the States.  The prosecutors seem to be more along the line of investigators, calling in victims and suspects to question or even going to crime scenes to try to figure out what happened.  As a side note, it appears that defense attorneys are specifically disallowed while the prosecutor questions the suspect in Korea.  In fact, it appears that the prosecutor gathers all the evidence, makes a determination of the facts, and offers a disposition.  After that, if the defendant ne suspect rejects the deal he can have a defense attorney.  I'm not sure if I've gotten that exactly correct, but it appears to be the way the process works.

There does not seem to be a jury, although it appears that there are three judges in a trial.  I don't know if they rule by majority vote or whether unanimity is required.  In the shows the only person who talks much is the man I assume is the chief judge (the judge sitting in the center of the bench).  Other than that, the process seems to progress much as a bench trial might here.  However, there does not appear to be double jeopardy in Korea.  In at least one of the Vampire episodes a person is brought back before the judges more than once after they dismiss the charge.

All-in-all, the two series are worth taking the time to watch.  So far, Netflix has pointed me toward British and Korean lawyer dramas.  I wonder which ones it will pop up for me next.  Indian?  Brazilian?  Egyptian?

An Ambush in Bartlette: 12

[Chapter 1] . . . [Chapter 2] . . . [Chapter 3] . . . [Chapter 4] . . . [Chapter 5] . . . [Chapter 6] . . . [Chapter 7] . . . [Chapter 8] . . . [Chapter 9] . . . [Chapter 10] . . . [Chapter 11]

If there was a Hell, the last month was surely its attempt to manifest itself in Bartlette County. And, much like one might expect from Hell, just as you started to have some hope that things were getting better that hope was snatched away and more pain was piled on. This week had been filled with shock and pain. It was eight on Friday evening when Yusif found himself mulling over these dark thoughts. He was still at the courthouse. He stared at the bricks in the wall of his office trying to process everything that had happened.

It started the Friday before because Father Tolton went to question the ambush victims who were in the hospital and he claimed that Mark Carr woke up and told him that Sergeant Ian Minor was involved in the ambush. Instead of coming to the Sheriff or Brad about this, Father Tolton had somehow gotten in contact with FBI agent investigating the attack. On Sunday, Dave Jordan, an Investigator for the Sheriff's Department and the Sheriff's stepson, drove to Roanoke and beat the living tar out of the attorney who had come to Bartlette and had that enigmatic conversation with Yusif. The photos showed a man who had his face beaten so badly his eyes were swollen shut and several teeth were gone. Monday Morning Squire died unexpectedly when something went wrong after his surgery. Later that day, Ed Boyd died less than an hour after the hospital unhooked him from life support. Meanwhile, both Brad and the Sheriff had gotten wind that something was going on between the Father Tolton, the FBI, and the State Police; however, neither of them could get answers from anyone about what was going on.

Tuesday morning they found out. Sometime between four and five in the morning a large number of State Police, FBI agents, and Federal Marshals arrived in Bartlette County with both search and arrest warrants. They arrested the other two investigators from the Sheriff's Department, Jeff Sanger and Ian Minor, as well as the Chief of Police for Yared and his two senior officers. They searched all of their houses, the houses of everyone caught in the ambush, the offices of the Yared Police Department (three rooms in the town hall), and the new Sheriff's Office which had been set up in the abandoned stores across from the courthouse. The initial warrants were federal, but State Police agents went to the magistrate's office that morning and got murder and drug distribution charges in Virginia as well. Everyone was in shock; even Brad had seemed at a loss as to what he should do. However, Brad never remained quiescent for long. By noon, he was calling people and demanding answers. When federal and state agents proved intransigent, Brad started calling political allies both in the Virginian and federal government. Yusif had known that Brad was politically well connected, but even he was surprised at the breadth of those connections. Before the day was out, Brad got a United States Senator to call the FBI and several Virginia Delegates and Senators to call both the Attorney General and State Police headquarters. Faced with this pressure, the agencies had agreed to brief Brad on what was happening, but they absolutely refused to bring the Sheriff into the loop; they even made Brad sign non-disclosure documents which forbade him from talking to anyone in general and specifically forbade him from talking to the Sheriff or anyone in law enforcement. Yusif knew this because when he pressed Brad to tell him what was going on Brad showed him the documents. Brad spent most of his Wednesday and Thursday out of the county, getting briefings. This left Yusif to handle court, help Paula prep for the hundreds of cases being presented to the next grand jury, answer the calls from upset citizens who did not understand what was going on, and fend off the press. The ambush and explosion had gotten national attention for a day or two, but Brad handled most of that. The story of lawmen killing lawmen and a county basically being invaded by federal agents made the press rabid. It seemed like every five minutes a different news agency was calling and one twenty-four hour channel even sent a team to ambush Yusif as he left his house Thursday morning.

On Thursday, Mark Carr died. Despite increased observation after Father Tolton talked to the FBI, the deputy never woke again. The only person who could confirm the Father's statement about what happened in the Veteran's Hospital was Andy Carr and he had dropped off the face of the Earth.

On Friday, the plan was to bring the accused lawmen to court for their pretrial hearing. Unlike other states Virginia does not do an early arraignment. However, defendants still have to be brought before a judge within a certain amount of time after they are charged so the judge can make sure they know what they were charged with, assign them attorneys if they cannot afford one, and perhaps adjust their bond. The State Police were going to bring the three investigators from the Sheriff's Department and the three officers from Yared one at a time to the courthouse from the various regional jails where they were stashed. None of them were being housed at local jails and no more than two were being kept at the same jail, segregated from each other even there. The State Police intended to bring the accused to court one at a time, staggered at hour intervals throughout the entire day. They would not even release a list of which defendant was coming to court at what time.

Things started falling apart immediately. At nine-fifteen three troopers showed up with Deputy Chief Haley from Yared and went to escort him in the side door through which prisoners always went. They found the door locked and a sign on it noting that entry through this doorway was limited to court security officers approved by the Sheriff. The troopers tried knocking on the door, but they got no answer. Then they took the prisoner around to the front door of the courthouse and found eight deputies waiting for them. The deputies informed them that because the Sheriff's Department was solely responsible for security at the courthouse only deputies were allowed in the courthouse under arms. The troopers refused to give up their firearms and after a short standoff returned to their cars. Of course, the entire thing was filmed by two different news channels and a bunch of people with cell phones. It was all over the internet within minutes.

The state police tried to get someone to order the Sheriff to allow them into the courthouse with their pistols. By one in the afternoon Brad had refused to involve the Commonwealth Attorney's office in an argument between the state police and the Sheriff and Sheriff Minton had told the Virginia Attorney General that as a constitutional officer the Sheriff did not take orders from the him or anyone else in Richmond. A lawyer from the Attorney General's office in Abingdon was on his way and expected to be at the courthouse by two.

In the meantime, their carefully planned schedule fell apart. The back parking lot was filled with state police cars and the four with the defendants in them were purposefully parked so that they were in different parts of the lot. Thinking back on it, Yusif marveled that no one had thought to call the oncoming troopers and tell them to go back - or at least to divert to someplace secure. The back parking lot may have been reserved, but it was in no way secure. Two of its sides had woods right up to the pavement. On top of all that, newsmen and plain old regular citizens kept putting videos of the troopers back there on the news and internet. It was almost predictable that something would go wrong.

At around one-thirty it did. Andy Carr came out of the woods and unloaded a revolver into the front window of the nearest car with a prisoner in it. Most of the bullets were stopped by the window glass and the two that got through lodged in the empty driver's side seat. The prisoner in the back, Lieutenant Mickelson from the Yared police department, did not even have time to duck for cover before all the shots had been fired and Andy ran back into the woods with six troopers in pursuit. Ten minutes later they had him under arrest and took him off to jail to face attempted murder charges. Then, they also started driving the prisoners back to the jails.

By three some lady who was an assistant attorney general showed up and Judge Isom got her, the state police first sergeant, the Sheriff, and the county attorney in his chambers and the yelling was loud enough and the old walls thin enough that it could be heard out in the courtroom. The words were not quite discernible, but it was very clear that the judge was reading them all the riot act. When they came out of the judge's office all of the people who went in were steaming. The assistant attorney general and first sergeant went to one table in front of the bench; Sheriff Minton and the county attorney went to the other. Judge Isom went straight to his bench, sat down, and immediately announced his decision.

"This Court finds that the special circumstances in these cases merit the following special conditions and behaviors. At any time one of the following six defendants - Mike Haley, Oscar Mickelson, Charles Poplin, David Jordan, Ian Minor, or Jefferson Sanger - are in the courthouse the Bartlette County Sheriff's Department shall maintain its duty as the primary security force for the courthouse. However, the Virginia State Police shall maintain its self-imposed duty as the primary security force dealing with the prisoners. To achieve both of these missions, the Court hereby orders that on any date when any of these defendants are in the courtroom there shall be one bailiff from the Sheriff's Department and one bailiff from the State Police in the courtroom from eight a.m. until all of that day's cases are completed and the courthouse closed. As well, the front door of the courthouse shall be guarded by two deputies and two state policemen during that same period of time and whenever one of the defendants is brought into this courthouse or before this bench he shall be escorted by one deputy and one state trooper. At all times each deputy and state policeman who enters the courthouse or provides security at its front entrance shall be in uniform - not tactical gear or civilian clothes - and carry only a pistol and no other weapons. No other individuals, whether they are law enforcement or not, shall be allowed to enter this courthouse under arms. This Court also orders that the defendants be brought before the General District Court in the next two hours for their pretrial hearings."

With that Judge Isom stalked from the bench back to his chambers. He had never even allowed all the people in the courtroom who were ordered to their feet when the judge came in to sit down. Yusif was watching from the back of the courtroom and he was pretty sure that if the door to the judge's office had been without a spring the judge would have slammed it behind him.

The State Police got the cars headed to the jails turned around and found an adequate number of troopers to set things up as the judge ordered. To make it work, the first sergeant actually served as the bailiff. By five, the defendants started being brought before Judge Fleming, who stayed late so that things could be done as Judge Isom had ordered. The troopers would drive one defendant into town, have his pretrial hearing, and then drive him out of town as the next defendant was being driven in. Yusif and Brad sat through every hearing and watched as a defense attorney stepped forward for each defendant and Yusif repeated by rote that the Commonwealth opposed any bond.

By six forty-five it was all done. Brad stepped out to talk to the media, giving some sort of general statement about how the citizens of Barnette County believed in law and order. As soon as the press dispersed Brad went straight to his car and left. Yusif stayed in the office, but he did not stay to do any work. He just sat there playing bloon tower defense on his computer and thinking dark thoughts until he was sure that everyone was gone. When he finally got up to leave he swore that he was going to leave this damned county and not return a second before he had to on Monday.