What Defense Lawyers Are Up Against

Law Practice

Witness tells Cop that she saw a photo of guns in Defendant's house a year ago, and thinks she saw guns there at one point more than a year ago.

Cop tells judge, in warrant application, that Witness says that Defendant is currently an arms trafficker. It is undisputed that Witness did not say that — that Witness did not say a blessed thing about Defendant selling or transferring guns.

Judge issues warrant.

We challenge warrant.

Reviewing judge says that Cop's statement — that Witness said Defendant was engaged in arms trafficking — is just an "exaggeration," not a false statement vitiating the warrant.

That. That right there. That's what it is like.

Last 5 posts by Ken White

22 Comments

20 Comments

  1. Dan Z  •  May 25, 2012 @3:34 pm

    The game is rigged.

  2. Z  •  May 25, 2012 @3:36 pm

    I'm working on a paper about interpreters in court. Didya know that whether a translation is accurate or not doesn't matter as long as its "substantially the same thing"?

  3. firehat  •  May 25, 2012 @3:38 pm

    Why do you want the nation's children murdered in their beds and grannies raped on the way to church on Sunday morning?

  4. Z  •  May 25, 2012 @3:41 pm

    @firehat, going home from church is okay too. I'm not implacable.

  5. Windy Wilson  •  May 25, 2012 @4:05 pm

    But "Arms Trafficking" is a term of art; No one would say that Big Five, or Dick's Sporting Goods, or Cabela's is an "arms trafficker", even though they've each sold more guns in a month that this unfortunate sold in his life.
    Was the warrant issued only because of "arms trafficking"?

  6. shg  •  May 25, 2012 @4:25 pm

    A material falsehood is in the eye of the beholder, who is usually the same as the judge who signed the warrant in the first place. It might have mattered more if he read the papers first.

  7. Peter H  •  May 25, 2012 @4:33 pm

    I hope you can introduce the warrant application at trial to impeach his testimony if it goes to trial.

  8. Dan  •  May 25, 2012 @6:24 pm

    So… how many guns were in the house? Ah, sorry, my brother's a cop. It's hard to shake my bias.

    But, seriously, he had like five dozen fully automatic guns in the house, right?

  9. Scott Jacobs  •  May 25, 2012 @8:28 pm

    Yeah, I think I just decided to not aim for law school…

    There is no way I would not have sworn at the judge…

  10. Robert Hewes  •  May 26, 2012 @6:01 am

    Is that the type of thing with which you could win an appeal?

  11. perlhaqr  •  May 26, 2012 @7:07 am

    Good lord.

    Well then, by God, bless you for your work then. I know I couldn't do it. I suspect asking the judge if he might be able to see the difference between the two better if he pulled his head out of his ass would not be conducive to a long and successful career.

  12. Jess  •  May 26, 2012 @8:08 am

    The cop has contracted a disease known as "noble cause corruption". He, the entire police department, and the judge need to be innoculated against it post haste.

  13. Frisco Scooter Trash  •  May 26, 2012 @9:38 am

    So Dan – "But, seriously, he had like five dozen fully automatic guns in the house, right?"

    How exactly is that a bad thing?

  14. Pete  •  May 26, 2012 @11:04 am

    Was it the honorable Rubber T. Stamp? I think my friend has had that judge for every bit of trouble he's ever been in.

  15. darius404  •  May 26, 2012 @11:03 pm

    Frisco- How exactly is that a bad thing?

    Well it's not, of course. Dan just wants to know how much of a bad-ass arms trafficker this guy really is. You know, for kudos purposes.

  16. darius404  •  May 26, 2012 @11:04 pm

    Oh, html code, again you switch my love-hate relationship with you back to hate.

  17. Bill Poser  •  May 27, 2012 @2:41 pm

    I don't suppose that a complaint to whoever supervises judges in that jurisdiction would have any chance? That judge is not competent.

  18. Patrick  •  May 27, 2012 @3:39 pm

    Odds of judge sitting on future cases for Ken's clients unless removed or recused? 100%. Odds of judge losing his seat or being recused from all of Ken's future cases? Zero.

  19. NI  •  May 27, 2012 @4:32 pm

    One would think that even if a judge doesn't care about the rights of the defendants, he would still care about being lied to. There is no other way to put it, this police officer lied to the judge. That would certainly piss me off if I were the judge.

  20. David Schwartz  •  May 29, 2012 @12:00 am

    NI: Unless the judge doesn't mind if people have to lie to him so long as they "get" the "bad" guys.

2 Trackbacks