01 June 2004

Other Voices Around the Web

Southern Appeal offers an opinion on the Federal Supreme Court's decision that a trial court could legitimately think that a kid isolated in small room in a police station and accused of a crime would know he has a right to leave.

I respectfully dissent talks about the difficulties of getting a client out of prison after his conviction was overturned on appeal.

Public Defender Dude:
Remember, we are advocates for our clients, but not necessarily for their actions, or against their accusers. There is a fine line that we have to walk in advocating for our clients, and I wince when I hear people go beyond the line. What is the line? Not totally clear.
. . .
[Regarding a particular rape case], go ahead and say she's lying, point out her inconsistencies, show bad things she may have done, but don't become a sermonizer on the virtues of the people you are in litigation against.
The Volohk Conspiracy points to a case wherein the defense is post traumatic slave syndrome: masters beat slaves, so [an African-American] was justified in beating his son.

Criminal Appeal points to a California opinion which forbids the prosecution from arguing poverty as a cause of the crime.

Crime & Federalism asks the question: "I receive federal Stafford loans. Could Congress make it a crime to assault me, on the ground that it is necessary and proper measure to ensure that I remain healthy and thus able to repay their loans?"

Southern Appeal on "Click It Or Ticket."

No comments: