From: frissell@panix.com
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 10:49:25 +0800
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: An end to "court appointed attorneys"
In-Reply-To: <25723.872103623@zelkova.qualcomm.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970820223440.03e9f9bc@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12:14 PM 8/20/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>I don't buy this. You are, of course, welcome to join Patrick Oonk in
>funding lawyers for those unable (or unwilling) to pay. Demanding that I
>pay for your charitable desires is, of course, theft.
>
>Why should those who managed to save money, for example, subsidize those
>who did not? Jim Bell, for example (but not to pick on him...but he's the
>current example), is almost as old as I am. And yet he made choices in his
>career which left him indigent, or unable to pay for a legal defense. So
>why should I and other taxpayers, including those working for $7 an hour at
>Taco Bell, subsidize his lawyer-in-training?

Besides, as Bell & McVeigh found out free lawyers are worth what you pay 
them.  Most felons could do a better job in their own case (or at least no 
worse) than these two did.  Besides, if you have a lawyers, you are usually 
prevented from using some of the more creative defenses because a lawyer has 
too much to lose.

Note what happened with Kevorkian's lawyer the last time he and "Jack the 
Dripper" were in court.  This lawyer has over the years changed from being a 
lawyer to being a total partisan for his client.  After his opening statement 
a few months ago on the latest of the Good Doctor's prosecutions for assisted 
suicide, the judge granted a mistrial because the statement was so 
prejudicial.  The DA later announced that he would not refile because they 
couldn't stop the lawyer from doing the same thing again.  Anyone can do this 
sort of thing and get at least one mistrial but ordinarily a lawyer won't do 
it because it will cause him problems.

Jury nullification and aggressive attacks on the judge and the prosecutor are 
just a few of the defense strategies that a lawyer won't indulge in but a 
client proceeding in pro per is free to use.

DCF

"I respectfully request that your Honor recuse yourself because you have a 
financial interest in the outcome of these proceedings.  Your salary is paid 
from tax monies and if my arguments on the tax system are accepted, your 
income will be cut off.  I request appointment of a judge who does not 
receive payment from taxation."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM/upP4VO4r4sgSPhAQHm7gP8CHCKx1l0ob5ldcglz5oTmnz56YRk6ZAi
zgNvOJm10oKdwBKfLccEilrQn6zBHuUbLshOyFJwVOZYD4BK1Gde1iFPsOFeIYkL
338dAJIEgA1Yy05ncdI9wIwWTqFIoC4xDL0xa37gOAOSBGQgxtMVn8c/ZE4PNptx
CCr48DvGaMk=
=Ve7H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----