Well in a few hours our nation celebrates its Independence from the Tyranny of the British Royal Crown. A few years after the decision to cede from British rule and after a war, we finally settled on a Constitution (there was a loose confederacy of states before that but we ultimately chose a federal system of government)to govern us. This Constitution tried to embody as much of the Declaration of Independence as it could, however the original document was thought lacking by the Declaration's author Thomas Jefferson, so he persuaded his friend John Madison to lobby through an embodiment of the Rights of Man our American Bill of Rights.
Jefferson wanted to preserve the fervor and feelings of his Declaration of Independence which begins with a statement about the self evident nature of the rights of man (meaning God Given rights) but he was well aware that tyrannizing politicians could do away with these rights as the King did to the Colonialists. Jefferson, wary of a big federal government wanted to limit the abuses that could become our government if Monarchists ever obtained an upper hand in our government.
In a large sense however, the Monarchists may have won if the goal was a large centralized government and a federal presence in the decisions of our daily lives such that the states have little to say about how they run themselves and we as citizens have little access to our Representatives. Our leaders appear only on news shows and before reporters who will report their views their ways and will not ask hard questions. Both major parties favor large government when it suits them and states rights when it doesn't.
For example Republicans favor states rights on Abortion and Immigration policy because they can't seem to get control of the federal government long enough to shove their view down our throats.On the other hand, they want a federal standard if a state doesn't follow their lead on an issue. In other words "States who agree with us get rights the rest of you be damned."
Democrats want state government to decide issues such as gay rights and gambling because they can't get the votes to work these out to their constituency favor on a national level. They favor state rights to decided what a marriage is, but would not allow states to determine what a "life" is.
I don't care where you stand on the issues of Abortion, gay marriage, Internet poker or the like. I care that things are actually interpreted by our Constitution with a view toward the Jeffersonian approach to our government. I'd also like to see a sense of shame when a party acts hypocritically.
Here is how some of this would shake out under my view of the world. Interstate commerce and Immigration policy are national in scope as are issues of Defense. These areas are reserved for Federal control. The Internet is also a federal issue, why? Because it is EVERYWHERE!
Health, Sex, Gambling, all criminal activity except for terrorism, treason, bank/mail/and wire fraud are state issues. There is an exception to that and that is that the Fraud must not just use the wires or mail to be committed, but must be committed against citizens or corporations on a national scope. Hence just because someone in NY calls someone else in NY to commit a fraud on a NY corporation, that use of the phone would not make for a federal case just because the phone line routed the call through a national grid of phone lines etc.
In my world, elementary education would be left up to the states, civil rights are federal. Secondary education (High school and up would be a mixture of Federal and State control depending on the issue however as somethings (like law or science) are things that need to be shared nationally we do need some national standards.
The feds could set standards that each state need to meet in the area of dealing with the imprisoned or the poor, but it would be up to the states to implement the standards. Economic Policy is a shared item as well. National Parks need to be part of a 3 way discussion Fed, State and local governments need to participate together. OTOH, the feds need to stay out of our homes, our hotel rooms our bank accounts and anything else that concern us as individuals.
Anyway, I could go on, and I will, but I want to know what you think of this whole concept of Independence. What does it mean to you, not personally, but as it relates to how we as citizens obtain a government that will uphold our right to live and conduct ourselves in the freest of fashions.
Edited to add a couple of links and clean up some spelling errors.
Showing posts with label Fifth Amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fifth Amendment. Show all posts
Sunday, July 03, 2011
Monday, November 01, 2010
Queens District Attorney Brown wants to Silence the Judge so he can make the Defendants talk: Another attack on Miranda
Prosecutors hate quiet defendants. In fact they will go to great lengths to get them to talk, especially to confess. In New York City over the past few years, Assistant District Attorney's will go into the holding pens known as Central Booking and actually interview these arrested folks, telling them that this is their only chance to talk to a prosecutor before arraignment and that it may result (during a blue moon)in a dismissal of their case. Certainly the Prosecutor will check out anything they tell them (like their alibi which really means he will send a detective down to take partial statements from alibi witnesses and screw up a defendants alibi allowing them to convict many more innocent people.)
The way these interviews begin is for the prosecutor to tell their spiel to the defendants BEFORE THE DEFENDENTS ARE GIVEN THEIR "MIRANDA" RIGHTS.(Miranda warnings give a defendant their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney.) After they have promised them to listen to their stories then give Prosecutors read in the rights. It is a "Bull Shit" way to use gentle coercion to get a confession or admission. (Pardon the language but really can you think of a more blunt way to say it??)
What do I mean? Well, the ADAs are promising to listen to them, but in reality, the ADAs want to convict them (I know DA Brown will say that isn't true but if that were the case, why not let them speak to their own attorneys first and then let the lawyer decide if is in the best interest of the client to speak to the prosecutor. After all that is how they show it on Law and Order.)These ADAs are overcoming arrestee's will to assert their rights by promising something may happen for them if they do not assert their rights.
Remember where these people are when this is done. They are completely at the hands of the government. They have no advocate of their own there and are not entitled to one. If they don't speak to the prosecutor they don't have to, but they aren't going to see a judge until they have gone through this little ritual.
Holding pens in NYC hold defendants for 24 hours or more. After a few hours smashed in with 20 other people, with nowhere to sit without access to family or lawyers, these folks will do anything if they think it will get them out faster.
One Queens judge has threatened to look into the ethics of this behavior. The Honorable Joel Blumenfeld has a decision coming that may discuss among other things the legal ethics of a prosecutor saying and doing the things that the prosecutor says in Queens County NY. Now Courts look at ethical issues all the time, but DA Brown doesn't want Joel Blumenfeld, a former criminal DEFENSE Attorney to rule on that issue. So DA Brown has brought an order to show cause against the good judge to stop him from discussing the ethics behind the activity IN HIS JUDICIAL DECISION!!!
Unbelievable. Absurd. Legal ethics and violations thereof are perfectly good reasons to suppress evidence. (For example if a defense attorney "Friends" a victim on Facebook by pretending to be someone other than himself, the evidence he gets from that is not usable in the case. That isn't because it isn't good evidence, it is because such behavior is unethical for lawyers to engage in.)
On the up side, it is unlikely a fellow jurist will tell Blumenfeld he can't write his opinion the way he wants. It is supposed to be an INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY!
Oh did I forget to mention, DA Brown USED to be an Appellate Division Judge. I wonder how he would have taken to being told he couldn't discuss an ethical issue in a decision.
As for you readers out there I cannot point out how important it is to get a lawyer for your friends who are arrested or if you are arrested how important it is not to speak to ANYONE without first speaking to your OWN lawyer. Most of the people who give statements give them because they are waiting for LEgal Aid or an 18b lawyer (free lawyer from the court) to be appointed. DO NOT WAIT!! Get yourself a good lawyer right away and have him notify the prosecutor that you or your friend is represented by counsel and may not be spoken to by them without that lawyer being present.
IF you need a lawyer even in the middle of the night, I will take this opportunity to remind you that you can call my office 24/7/365 and speak to a lawyer if you or a friend or loved one has been arrested and is awaiting arraignment. You can reach us at 516-741-3400. DAY OR NIGHT. Weekday or weekend, holidays too!!
Hat Tip: The NY TImes
The way these interviews begin is for the prosecutor to tell their spiel to the defendants BEFORE THE DEFENDENTS ARE GIVEN THEIR "MIRANDA" RIGHTS.(Miranda warnings give a defendant their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney.) After they have promised them to listen to their stories then give Prosecutors read in the rights. It is a "Bull Shit" way to use gentle coercion to get a confession or admission. (Pardon the language but really can you think of a more blunt way to say it??)
What do I mean? Well, the ADAs are promising to listen to them, but in reality, the ADAs want to convict them (I know DA Brown will say that isn't true but if that were the case, why not let them speak to their own attorneys first and then let the lawyer decide if is in the best interest of the client to speak to the prosecutor. After all that is how they show it on Law and Order.)These ADAs are overcoming arrestee's will to assert their rights by promising something may happen for them if they do not assert their rights.
Remember where these people are when this is done. They are completely at the hands of the government. They have no advocate of their own there and are not entitled to one. If they don't speak to the prosecutor they don't have to, but they aren't going to see a judge until they have gone through this little ritual.
Holding pens in NYC hold defendants for 24 hours or more. After a few hours smashed in with 20 other people, with nowhere to sit without access to family or lawyers, these folks will do anything if they think it will get them out faster.
One Queens judge has threatened to look into the ethics of this behavior. The Honorable Joel Blumenfeld has a decision coming that may discuss among other things the legal ethics of a prosecutor saying and doing the things that the prosecutor says in Queens County NY. Now Courts look at ethical issues all the time, but DA Brown doesn't want Joel Blumenfeld, a former criminal DEFENSE Attorney to rule on that issue. So DA Brown has brought an order to show cause against the good judge to stop him from discussing the ethics behind the activity IN HIS JUDICIAL DECISION!!!
Unbelievable. Absurd. Legal ethics and violations thereof are perfectly good reasons to suppress evidence. (For example if a defense attorney "Friends" a victim on Facebook by pretending to be someone other than himself, the evidence he gets from that is not usable in the case. That isn't because it isn't good evidence, it is because such behavior is unethical for lawyers to engage in.)
On the up side, it is unlikely a fellow jurist will tell Blumenfeld he can't write his opinion the way he wants. It is supposed to be an INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY!
Oh did I forget to mention, DA Brown USED to be an Appellate Division Judge. I wonder how he would have taken to being told he couldn't discuss an ethical issue in a decision.
As for you readers out there I cannot point out how important it is to get a lawyer for your friends who are arrested or if you are arrested how important it is not to speak to ANYONE without first speaking to your OWN lawyer. Most of the people who give statements give them because they are waiting for LEgal Aid or an 18b lawyer (free lawyer from the court) to be appointed. DO NOT WAIT!! Get yourself a good lawyer right away and have him notify the prosecutor that you or your friend is represented by counsel and may not be spoken to by them without that lawyer being present.
IF you need a lawyer even in the middle of the night, I will take this opportunity to remind you that you can call my office 24/7/365 and speak to a lawyer if you or a friend or loved one has been arrested and is awaiting arraignment. You can reach us at 516-741-3400. DAY OR NIGHT. Weekday or weekend, holidays too!!
Hat Tip: The NY TImes
Monday, November 30, 2009
Does Anybody Out There Ever Read The US Constitution (besides lawyers I mean): Why Tiger Doesn't Talk
Short post:
Everybody has a theory on why Tiger Woods is not being given the "third degree" by Florida Police.I have heard his money is buying him out of it, that he has important politicians on his side, that he has a bad attitude and a lot of other things mostly not complementary to either Mr. Woods or the Police. People think he was running from his wife, that he was drunk, that he was high, that he was sneaking out to see a girl and his wife was waiting 5 Iron in hand. I have heard the old tried and true "if he has nothing to hide, why hide???" God If gossip reporters were not bad enough, now we have sport reporters who think they are owed an explanation. It should be required that before one gets a press pass they pass a test on basic constitutional law. If you want to read some weird stuff look here and here and this video from Wanda Sykes which at least was funny.
Here is the reason Tiger Woods is not speaking to Florida Police and why they haven't hauled his rear end down to sweat him for a confession:
DRUM ROLL PLEASE
The Fifth amendment of the United States Constitution gives a person the RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. HE is exercising the right and there is nothing that police or Mike Lupica can do about it. (no I am not linking you to Lupica, he gets enough publicity all by himself)
Moreover it is the smart thing to do. There is no upside to him saying more. It was a one car accident. He will probably get another car tomorrow from Cadillac, his sponsor, and he will at least keep his privacy. Once he speaks, whatever he says is now food for the fodder. He can't stop speculation but he needn't add to it either. Anything he says will not be believed by some portion of the public and finally, the police do not need to know what precipitated the crash as there is no damage to anyone but Tiger and what they don't know or what they don't write in a report can't hurt anybody.
So Woods did the smart thing. I wish more clients and their families would follow suite and STOP talking to police. It isn't that I want to make the jobs of law enforcement harder, it is just that I do not have the obligation to make it any easier. Usually when clients speak to police without an attorney being present, they make if far worse for themselves even when "they speak the truth and have nothing to hide."
Okay so there you have it. Mr. Wood's lawyer has a smart client. Mr. Woods has a good lawyer, and the gossips of the world will be able to join the conspiracy theorists and debate what happened until OJ Simpson finds the person who killed his ex-wife.
Everybody has a theory on why Tiger Woods is not being given the "third degree" by Florida Police.I have heard his money is buying him out of it, that he has important politicians on his side, that he has a bad attitude and a lot of other things mostly not complementary to either Mr. Woods or the Police. People think he was running from his wife, that he was drunk, that he was high, that he was sneaking out to see a girl and his wife was waiting 5 Iron in hand. I have heard the old tried and true "if he has nothing to hide, why hide???" God If gossip reporters were not bad enough, now we have sport reporters who think they are owed an explanation. It should be required that before one gets a press pass they pass a test on basic constitutional law. If you want to read some weird stuff look here and here and this video from Wanda Sykes which at least was funny.
Here is the reason Tiger Woods is not speaking to Florida Police and why they haven't hauled his rear end down to sweat him for a confession:
DRUM ROLL PLEASE
The Fifth amendment of the United States Constitution gives a person the RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. HE is exercising the right and there is nothing that police or Mike Lupica can do about it. (no I am not linking you to Lupica, he gets enough publicity all by himself)
Moreover it is the smart thing to do. There is no upside to him saying more. It was a one car accident. He will probably get another car tomorrow from Cadillac, his sponsor, and he will at least keep his privacy. Once he speaks, whatever he says is now food for the fodder. He can't stop speculation but he needn't add to it either. Anything he says will not be believed by some portion of the public and finally, the police do not need to know what precipitated the crash as there is no damage to anyone but Tiger and what they don't know or what they don't write in a report can't hurt anybody.
So Woods did the smart thing. I wish more clients and their families would follow suite and STOP talking to police. It isn't that I want to make the jobs of law enforcement harder, it is just that I do not have the obligation to make it any easier. Usually when clients speak to police without an attorney being present, they make if far worse for themselves even when "they speak the truth and have nothing to hide."
Okay so there you have it. Mr. Wood's lawyer has a smart client. Mr. Woods has a good lawyer, and the gossips of the world will be able to join the conspiracy theorists and debate what happened until OJ Simpson finds the person who killed his ex-wife.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Nassau DWI Arrests Spike on Thanksgiving Eve: Some Thoughts From That Lawyer Dude
Nassau County Police announced that their DWI arrests spiked by 300 percent. Nassau Police usually average about 10 arrests a night however on November 25th police arrested 35 people in Nassau County alone. Suffolk County numbers are not available.
Nassau Police are targeting bars and restaurants in Nassau over the Thanksgiving Holiday season. They have increased patrols and are "sitting" on bars waiting for patrons to stop.
Attorneys in Nassau have told me, (and I have heard from prospective clients) that Nassau police are stopping cars as they leave these bars and restaurants frequented by students. After the stop, if they do not suspect a DWI they let the drivers go.
What is the probable cause for these other stops?? While it may be important to keep drunk drivers off the road, it should not be done at the cost of liberty for those that are not drunk. It is often said that DWI appears to be an exception to the US Constitution for police and prosecutors.
If you are stopped for at either a DWI Checkpoint or by a police officer "sitting" on a bar or restaurant whether you have been drinking or not, I tell my clients:
1. Be polite. Sit in your car and roll down your window. Allow the officer to speak and if asked be ready to produce your License and Registration quickly. Police take fumbling as a sign of intoxication.
2. If asked if you have been drinking, and if you have been drinking, ask if you are under arrest. If the answer is no, then ask if you may leave. If the answer is no then refuse to answer the "have you been drinking" question without first speaking to a lawyer. (Invoking your 6th amendment right to counsel.)Whatever you do, DO NOT SAY HOW MUCH YOU HAVE BEEN DRINKING. Remember it is not illegal to drink and drive (unless you are under 21 years old). It is however illegal to drink and drive drunk. DO not offer to give any amount of drinks. It will not help and always ALWAYS hurts.
3. If asked to get out of the vehicle to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST), again ask if you are under arrest. If the answer is no, then politely tell the officer you do not want to participate in those tests. If you are told that the officer is conducting an investigation, you should again tell the officer you do not wish to participate in these tests as a violation of your 5th amendment right to remain silent.
4. If you do take the SFST listen to the instructions carefully. An SFST is a series of tests. So even if you do well on one or two you can still "fail" the test. Also Remember: You will fail the test even if you do everything the officer said to do, if you do not do it exactly as he says to do it. REMEMBER, YOU ARE NOT ONLY BEING JUDGED ON WHAT YOU DO, BUT ON HOW YOU DO IT. THEY WILL FAIL YOU FOR THINGS THEY DO NOT TELL YOU ABOUT.
For example, they will fail you if you use your arms to steady yourself even though they do not tell you that. They will fail you if you do anything they do not tell you specifically that you can do. In other words, even though they seem to be testing your ability to do certain tasks, they are really testing your ability to do ONLY the task the way they want you to do it. Any change in the way they tell or show you to do the test will result in your failing the test.
5. If asked to follow a pen or pencil or light, refuse the test under your fifth amendment right. You are not required to provide evidence against yourself. You do not have to participate in the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN)exam. It is not an accurate test. Do not take the test as there is no record of how you did on it except for the police officer's recollection. This is exceptionally unfair. Do not take this test.
6. If arrested or detained, you do not have a right to refuse the actual breath test. However, do not take a portable breath test. It is so notoriously inaccurate that it is not allowed as evidence at a trial. IT IS Allowed in during a pre-trial hearing or even a bail hearing. It is better to refuse the Portable test (which is a hand held device not connected to a bigger machine)and take the actual Intoxylizer or Breathylizer test.
7. If you are in a car accident and THINK you will fail the test, . I recommend to my clients that they DO NOT TAKE IT. Yes you will not have a license for 1 year, and yes you will not get a plea offer in Nassau or Suffolk, but, if you are in an accident you will not get an offer anyway and you have a better chance of winning at trial if you do not have a Blood Alcohol Content (B.A.C.) reading above the limit which is .08 If you have been drinking and are in an accident and do not want to have a criminal record, plan on going to trial. Yes it is costly, so is having a criminal record and so is being convicted of a driving arrest. Going to trial is in the long run less expensive. You have a good chance of winning your case if you go to trial despite what the media and the "Mothers" (MADD) say.
IF you want to increase your knowledge of your BAC log on here
8. Finally, the faster you get a lawyer the better. Once you are arrested, the police will take your cellphone from you so having a lawyers number in your phone will not help. Either memorize the number or put the number in your wallet or purse. (I advise my clients to tattoo it to their feet.)JOKE!! (kinda)
9. If you do not have a lawyer and are arrested in NYC (you know, Manhattan, Booklyn, Queens Bronx or Staten Island) or on Long Island
(Nassau or Suffolk Counties) or even anywhere else in the state of New York, you are welcome to call me at 516-741-3400 I am at 180 Froehlich Farm Blvd Woodbury NY 11797 and this paragraph is a legal Advertisement.
You can follow my daily tweets on Twitter by logging into www.twitter.com/thatlawyerdude (no spaces). If you don't know what I am talking about, Find out about twitter.
Nassau Police are targeting bars and restaurants in Nassau over the Thanksgiving Holiday season. They have increased patrols and are "sitting" on bars waiting for patrons to stop.
Attorneys in Nassau have told me, (and I have heard from prospective clients) that Nassau police are stopping cars as they leave these bars and restaurants frequented by students. After the stop, if they do not suspect a DWI they let the drivers go.
What is the probable cause for these other stops?? While it may be important to keep drunk drivers off the road, it should not be done at the cost of liberty for those that are not drunk. It is often said that DWI appears to be an exception to the US Constitution for police and prosecutors.
If you are stopped for at either a DWI Checkpoint or by a police officer "sitting" on a bar or restaurant whether you have been drinking or not, I tell my clients:
1. Be polite. Sit in your car and roll down your window. Allow the officer to speak and if asked be ready to produce your License and Registration quickly. Police take fumbling as a sign of intoxication.
2. If asked if you have been drinking, and if you have been drinking, ask if you are under arrest. If the answer is no, then ask if you may leave. If the answer is no then refuse to answer the "have you been drinking" question without first speaking to a lawyer. (Invoking your 6th amendment right to counsel.)Whatever you do, DO NOT SAY HOW MUCH YOU HAVE BEEN DRINKING. Remember it is not illegal to drink and drive (unless you are under 21 years old). It is however illegal to drink and drive drunk. DO not offer to give any amount of drinks. It will not help and always ALWAYS hurts.
3. If asked to get out of the vehicle to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST), again ask if you are under arrest. If the answer is no, then politely tell the officer you do not want to participate in those tests. If you are told that the officer is conducting an investigation, you should again tell the officer you do not wish to participate in these tests as a violation of your 5th amendment right to remain silent.
4. If you do take the SFST listen to the instructions carefully. An SFST is a series of tests. So even if you do well on one or two you can still "fail" the test. Also Remember: You will fail the test even if you do everything the officer said to do, if you do not do it exactly as he says to do it. REMEMBER, YOU ARE NOT ONLY BEING JUDGED ON WHAT YOU DO, BUT ON HOW YOU DO IT. THEY WILL FAIL YOU FOR THINGS THEY DO NOT TELL YOU ABOUT.
For example, they will fail you if you use your arms to steady yourself even though they do not tell you that. They will fail you if you do anything they do not tell you specifically that you can do. In other words, even though they seem to be testing your ability to do certain tasks, they are really testing your ability to do ONLY the task the way they want you to do it. Any change in the way they tell or show you to do the test will result in your failing the test.
5. If asked to follow a pen or pencil or light, refuse the test under your fifth amendment right. You are not required to provide evidence against yourself. You do not have to participate in the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN)exam. It is not an accurate test. Do not take the test as there is no record of how you did on it except for the police officer's recollection. This is exceptionally unfair. Do not take this test.
6. If arrested or detained, you do not have a right to refuse the actual breath test. However, do not take a portable breath test. It is so notoriously inaccurate that it is not allowed as evidence at a trial. IT IS Allowed in during a pre-trial hearing or even a bail hearing. It is better to refuse the Portable test (which is a hand held device not connected to a bigger machine)and take the actual Intoxylizer or Breathylizer test.
7. If you are in a car accident and THINK you will fail the test, . I recommend to my clients that they DO NOT TAKE IT. Yes you will not have a license for 1 year, and yes you will not get a plea offer in Nassau or Suffolk, but, if you are in an accident you will not get an offer anyway and you have a better chance of winning at trial if you do not have a Blood Alcohol Content (B.A.C.) reading above the limit which is .08 If you have been drinking and are in an accident and do not want to have a criminal record, plan on going to trial. Yes it is costly, so is having a criminal record and so is being convicted of a driving arrest. Going to trial is in the long run less expensive. You have a good chance of winning your case if you go to trial despite what the media and the "Mothers" (MADD) say.
IF you want to increase your knowledge of your BAC log on here
8. Finally, the faster you get a lawyer the better. Once you are arrested, the police will take your cellphone from you so having a lawyers number in your phone will not help. Either memorize the number or put the number in your wallet or purse. (I advise my clients to tattoo it to their feet.)JOKE!! (kinda)
9. If you do not have a lawyer and are arrested in NYC (you know, Manhattan, Booklyn, Queens Bronx or Staten Island) or on Long Island
(Nassau or Suffolk Counties) or even anywhere else in the state of New York, you are welcome to call me at 516-741-3400 I am at 180 Froehlich Farm Blvd Woodbury NY 11797 and this paragraph is a legal Advertisement.
You can follow my daily tweets on Twitter by logging into www.twitter.com/thatlawyerdude (no spaces). If you don't know what I am talking about, Find out about twitter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)