Sunday, June 07, 2009

Facebook and DWI: A Defense Attorney's Nightmare.

Chicago IL. Criminal Defense Attorney Steve Komie is doing a bang up job in the case of an 18 year old who was allegedly drunk and killed a motorcyclist. Unfortunately the woman, now 20 can't get out of her own way long enough to help him out.

Komie has proved that Town of South Elgin Police destroyed the blood test prosecutors hoped would prove Erika Scoliere was drunk when she collided with motorcyclist Frank Ferraro. Without the test and sample, the defense cannot test the blood nor can it test the accuracy of the test at trial. That any evidence in an on going case is destroyed is a mystery, that the "best evidence" against a murder suspect is destroyed, right before trial, should lead potential jurors to wonder if the test actually showed ANY proof of alcohol at all.

The lead story in the news Friday should have been about how police malfeasance is causing Scoliere to get less than a fair trial. BUT NO!!

Seems that Scoliere or one of her inane "friends" posted asinine pictures of her on Facebook guzzling Tequila at a college party(in violation of her terms of release.)

Now first off, how did this young woman GET INTO a college to begin with? I mean what kind of brain damage do you have to have to realize that you killed someone and people are not happy with you? Prosecutors are looking for a reason, ANY REASON to convict you, and you decide it is a good idea to be in a place known for alcohol and stupid decisions (sorry Frat parties are Frat parties)?

Secondly, you are out on bail with an order to "call in" to probation while you are allowed to attend your "out of state" private college and go on vacations with your family. How do you "misunderstand" that Court Order?? ( I have to ask though why no one from probation notified Komie that his client was missing calls.)

The damage here is not that Scoliere now must wear a SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor.) It is that instead of being viewed as the victim of police, and a rush to judgment by an angry and hostile prosecution, she is seen as a ditzy, spoiled, bratty kid who needs to be taken down. She is the poster child for the over-indulged college student. She pushed the story of the lost evidence off of the headline and reinforced her image of being the "Paris Hilton" of Kane County. (Piece of unsolicited advice for Steve Komie, you may need to hire this client a PR consultant with a brain.)

We are now in the days of everyone, friends and foes, being able to record every waking moment of our lives. It is time to get smart. Ms. Scoliere's parents need to smarten up too. Get her into the house and keep her there until her trial takes place. How about considering placement into a rehab? It doesn't matter how unhappy she is. Drive her to Mr. Ferraro's cemetery plot every day, and remind her how unhappy his family must be. Have her leave a flower on the grave, a stone on his tombstone, and a prayer for his and her soul.

To my friend and colleague Steve Komie: Keep up the good work. You have a tough client there, but you represent all of us when you work to keep the government honest. Good Luck.

Hattip Avvo Legal News
Hey guys next time dig a little deeper, your article missed the "real story" the one about the Police destroying evidence!!

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I could not disagree with you more...why would the police do something like this on purpose to this young woman? I know people that know her, in fact if the people of of St. Charles had any conscience they would come forward and tell all. The parents and their kids that were there with her-partying it up and YES she was drunk-I believe it! I wish I could do something about it from my end but I was not there, everything I "heard" was from others that heard it from others, phones were ringing all night/morning long the night this happened. This girl is guilty as sin and regardless if she gets away with it she will have to live with it for the rest of her life on earth. I wonder if she goes to church? She better, as you said, she needs to pray for her soul! I will be praying for justice. She has a right to a defense and a good one at that but someone lost their life due to her actions. This is one time that I am not happy with our due process system.

That Lawyer Dude said...

First, Thank you for your comment. I wish you had left a name or nickname, but I want to thank you for coming by and taking the time to leave a message.

As for our due process system, I know you are frustrated, but I see that you also realize that in order for due process to work it has to help all people. Like you said, you weren't there and don't know what happened. Maybe she wasn't drunk but was sick, possibly she sobered up. Possibly the blood sample they obtained would have failed to show she was intoxicated.

Why do police testify falsely? There are a lot of pressures on them to solve cases, punish people others perceive to be guilty, sometimes they get to personally involved with the investigation or the family of the deceased.

What bothers me more though is the thought that justice for a victim can only come through the criminal justice system. Her conviction is not a "win" for the victim. It doesn't bring him back, provide for his family or even lessen their pain of loss. Some of that can be accomplished in the civil law system, however it is important we keep that kind of sympathy issue out of criminal law cases lest we convict an innocent person because we feel bad for a victim or their family.

The Police had an obligation to preserve the evidence here. They work for you and I. They act in the name of the People of the State. When they screw up, it is far more egregious because of the power and respect we give them in our society than is the deadly screw up of a silly girl. Failure to hold them to the highest standard destroys our system of justice and way of life which is built upon that system. If she is guilty, she takes one life, If we let police do shoddy work, we give away a lifestyle and a society.

Again thanks for stopping by and taking the time to comment.

Anonymous said...

Hello, It’s Anonymous again. It's not that I want to make a debate out of this with you but you seem like a level-headed person and there are no other comments since mine anyway. It is well appreciated that you understand my frustration knowing what I know and believe it to be the truth. Her friends are the ones that "let the cat out of the bag" about what happened that night and apparently the Facebook also. With the Facebook pictures it angers me to the core that it seems there is absolutely no remorse.

I would like to throw this back your way...

You first mention in your response “Maybe she wasn't drunk but was sick, possibly she sobered up. Possibly the blood sample they obtained would have failed to show she was intoxicated.” 1.She was not sick (in the head maybe due to the alcohol). 2. She did not pass the blood test. 3. If like you want to suggest she was sobered up possibly…why did she, her family and her attorney not demand a retest on the blood immediately? Why drag this out for 2 years? If I were “innocent”, I would have done that instead of putting my family and my reputation through so much unnecessary legal garbage, expense and embarrassment. What about victim’s family and heartache they have had to endure when this could have been over just as soon as it began. You’re a lawyer (right?) and you know the answer-they hoped for something like this-it is the perfect defense-prove the blood evidence…

You also mentioned a rush to judgment with the police and from what I’ve been told, she was laughing very hard about the way she was treated. They felt nothing but compassion for her that night, she was hysterical and being drunk would have escalated the appearance of that, would you agree? Her parents were called to the actual scene not to the police department to support their "traumatized" daughter. The rush to judgment was put on the motorcyclist, most people (in my opinion) do not like them and see them as a road hazard (probably police officers the most) it was his fault just for not being in a car. It was hours after the crash when her parents were the ones to take her to the hospital for the blood test. She was only charged after the results came back in Sept. that she was over the legal limit. Where is the rush to judgment toward her? This was not "big" news until she started screwing things up for herself and getting this into the news about her horrible behavior. She already thought she had beat the system and her selfish actions reflect that, going to college, taking vacation and not honoring her bail commitments. She is hoping/thinking her wealthy family will get her out of a mess that she created that night.

The last thing that I wanted to bring up is that you said " If she is guilty, she takes one life, if we let police do shoddy work, we give away a lifestyle and a society." It seems to me that you feel it OK for this man to be collateral damage for this messed up legal system to continue on. . Maybe it is time that some things need to change in our legal system. People that are truly innocent do end up in jail, which is absolutely wrong. But even more so I believe it is wrong to let people that are guilty go free because of a loophole or an error made by the police or someone else involved in a case, especially one that is of murder.

Nothing will bring this man back, money or your reference to a civil law case would never lessen the grief for this mans family and loved ones. I think it is a shame that people feel that way...What is the price for a human life? What if she walks on this and kills someone else will money make that family feel better also?

If she does get away with this murder, I hope she pulls an “O.J.” and gets busted for a crime worth prison time other than another murder and ends up where she rightfully belongs.

That Lawyer Dude said...

I don't think the victim as collateral damage. I think that I am not willing to sacrifice a system of laws that far better protect the innocent because a couple of cops failed to do their jobs right AND that a bad decision may come of that in one particular case.

You seem to have much more information on the case we are discussing. I have read what I could but like in most cases, the press is not exactly accurate or for that matter truly forthcoming with background. For example I didn't see the stuff about her folks taking her to the hospital. That leads to some interesting issues (did she drink in the car with her folks to "steady her nerves?" Did the test take place within a sufficient time period to render the test accurate (I am speaking about a rising Blood-Alcohol curve).

I am not trying to suggest that we find excuses, it is just that we have a standard, "Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt." The issues I raise and the inability of the government to defeat all of them to proof beyond a reasonable doubt should acquit "Ms. Tequila Shots." The photos shouldn't be the story. Nor should they be in the jury pool's mind when the case goes to trial.

Now as for my seeing the deceased as collateral damage, I do not. I see that using his situation to lessen the burden of preserving evidence and making it easier to convict innocent people is a huge mistake. Given the choice between a guilty party going free, and an innocent man going to prison for a crime he didn't commit, I would chose liberty. I would free the guilty first.

Addtionally, I worry about our use of the criminal justice system as a sword of the alleged victim and not as a tool for society to rehabilitate and correct.

If in fact the deceased and his family have a "right" to a verdict, why do I have to pay for that? I am a taxpayer. If what they want is so important let them provide the prosecutor. If revenge is the name of the game, let them pay to jail the guilty for as long as their money holds out. I don't want to pay for that.

In the name of bad policy and lazy politicians and "leaders" we have lost the ability to see what the difference is between acting on behalf of the People of the United States and acting on behalf of the victim. If we prosecute on behalf of the people, then the people have to have a benefit. If we prosecute and give contol over to the alleged victims, well then there is no reason for the people to pay for that.

In summation, it is interesting you should bring up OJ Simpson. In fact I think both of those cases (the Criminal and Civil) came out perfectly correct. It was the civil case however which had more far reaching effects on OJ and the victim's families. The civil case took his real life away. It was only then that he was driven to commit the crime in his second (Las Vegas)Case.

Maybe our forefathers had something in this idea of two different systems after all...

Once again. Thank you for stopping back. I appreciate the give and take.

Anonymous said...

I was really looking forward to a response to my last reply that I left yesterday.
Very disappointed...

That Lawyer Dude said...

I think the response above is a response to the last reply I received from you. Again. Why not chose an identity?
Also please do understand, I blog and twitter and write articles out of interest. I practice law for a living. I do try to get to this everyday, but sometimes life gets in the way.
TLD

Anonymous said...

It is a good thing I spell check in Word before I submit an entry and saved this one, however I did not notice that it can't be over 4096 characters so I am sending in 2 entries, I guess I have a lot to say about this. Sorry, I like being Anonymous. But I like this little discussion we have had about this...

Entry 1.
You did not address the issue of retesting the blood before this started costing you as a taxpayer, all this money for a prosecutor. She should have nothing to hide...we both know why.

To even suggest that her parents gave their under age daughter something to drink to "steady her nerves" on the way to take a test to remove any doubt that any illegal activity occurred, is out of this world. Do they drive around town prepared with a bottle of booze in their vehicle in case they or someone they know kills someone and are a nervous wreck? Also to suggest that the test would not be accurate by the timing of it being taken, I would think that hours passing by would support your initial comment of having the time to "sober up". You say you are not suggesting coming up with excuses but that is the job of her defense team. They are paid to do exactly that.

What about the rush to judgment by the police on her that you also suggested happened? By what I said, there was not a rush to her, it was put on the motorcyclist.

As far as the O.J. thing, I am not sure that the verdict was correct. At the time, given the "new" DNA evidence would have proven his guilt more easily now. Your blood is your blood and victim’s blood is victim’s blood.A type of evidence has freed people that are wrongly convicted now that is more easily accepted. Were mistakes made-YES! Do I believe beyond a “reasonable” doubt he was guilty YES! Would I have convicted him-I do not really know, I was not a juror. But regardless of the right the victims’ family had to civilly sue him, I'm sure they would rather have their loved ones alive and with them more than any money that “took his real life from him” as you said. He did take the victims "real lives". What about the cop that was killed last week? The two "alleged" murders they have in custody made the news again because one of them was arrest in 2007 for FELONY possession of an ILLEGAL firearm and was not jailed by an easygoing judge? Only to now have killed someone a couple of years later? There are repercussions in probably every situation. With you being a lawyer you know it is like a “game” in the courts now a days. The person with the most money/resources, if they’re lucky enough, mistakes made, they are the WINNER! The attorneys are the WINNERS also, it is the lawyers that gain a WINNER reputation, being for the prosecutor or defense. I view cases like this as a loss for our entire country.

Anonymous said...

Entry 2.

I do not believe that our forefathers could have foreseen all of the in and outs that have been created since this process began hundreds of years ago. I highly doubt they thought it better to hit someone in the pocket book for a crime rather than a punishment that fits the crime. No, this case should be noted to all people young and old that to commit a murder with a vehicle while driving under the influence of ANY illegal substance should set as a standard that enough is enough. Do you know the average numbers of lives that are taken each year by this-it is in the 10’s of thousands. Police gear up at holidays and weekends but it occurs every single day. I am an avid True TV watcher, forensic files and the like. Another situation was on 20/20 last Friday about two “best friends”, one drove drunk and the other was killed because the drunk lost control of the vehicle. She (the driver) feels that no good would come of her sitting in jail when she can “spread the word” of her “mistake” and the “overwhelming guilt” that she feels. Well, everyone is taught the dangers of drinking and driving. Talking about it does not help after the fact, if it did it, it would not happen as often as is does. People do it everyday and feel they have a right to do it if they just do not get caught. The message being sent is clearly wrong, especially to the younger generations!

I guess with me knowing people that know “Ms.Tequila Shots” and what I have been told by them, my points of view are completely different on this regardless of how we view the laws and the standard of “Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”.

Anonymous said...

maybe they need to prosecute the parents at the home where e.s. consumed the alcohol. she left their home to drive her friend home. it was then the accident occured. she was also known for bringing alcohol to high school and drinking during the day. she continues to drink. she needs HELP! she will probably drink until she gets help to cope with this tragedy.