From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 04:22:38 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Jim Bell defense fund
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970601131447.006b15c0@postoffice.pacbell.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Has anyone talked to Jim to find out what he wants? I wouldn't be surprised
if he wants to represent himself without the assistance/interference of an
attorney. (I think that'd be a big mistake, but he's an adult and should be
allowed to make his own choices.) 

Is he currently represented by a court-appointed attorney? Are they working
out of the federal public defender's office, or are they in private
practice? I'm not familiar with the Tacoma federal PD's office (nor am I
sure that one exists) but the federal public defenders in Oregon typically
did a pretty good job for their clients, frequently better than that
available from the cheaper/less experienced end of the spectrum in the
private bar. A court-appointed attorney may also be more familiar
with/comfortable with clients who want to take an active part in their
defense. (Sometimes, defendants will choose to represent themseves, but
with the aid of an attorney to help them understand courtroom
protocol/procedure, and to give help/advice with the trickier issues.)

It's also possible that organizing only a small defense fund will turn out
to be worse than no defense fund, if it eliminates his eligibility for an
appointed attorney but fails to generate enough money to attract a good
private attorney. If the government really wants to screw him, forcing him
to represent himself or be represented by someone inexperienced or
uninterested or underfunded seems like a good way to do that. My hunch is
that an attorney from the private bar will want somewhere between $15K and
$30K to take this to trial, could be higher. Someone who asks for a lot
less probably doesn't intend to do very much work, unless they're doing it
on a pro bono basis. 

If people are serious about this, I suggest getting in touch with Jim or
his family to see if it's actually helpful/useful, and setting it up such
that any money raised goes directly to the attorney, not to Jim or his
family. (not because I don't think they're trustworthy, but because gaining
extra cash/assets may make him ineligible for a court-appointed attorney -
but if the cash/assets aren't available to him because they're being held
by some unconnected cypherpunk, it'd be much harder/impossible to deny him
appointed counsel.) Also, given Jim's tax status, it's possible that the
IRS will try to seize/levy against any funds that come into Jim's control,
which would turn the "defense fund" into the "pay Jim's taxes fund". 


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles@netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.
                            |