Justice for All
Arizona is in a state of mass incarceration. The laws, governed, enforced and prosecuted to the fullest extent permissible by courtroom attorneys representing the state, criminals are facing their fate in the hands of public defenders that are novice and inexperienced compared to those skilled and aggressive prosecutors with ambitious goals and lofty salaries to be asked to join a respectful law firm or run for political office and become one of the main prosecuting attorneys representing the state. Tragedies occurred in almost every criminal trial held in this state as attorneys present their cases to the judge and jury to pleas of innocent or guilty depending on the circumstances involved. It is likely that some cases can be predicted to end rather quickly and with pre-determined guilty findings as trial attorneys skilled in the presentation before the judge and jury assassinate the character of the person on trial and reveal all evidence relevant and not relevant to the case in public. Some attorneys thrive in this competitive arena while others falter and rarely say a sensible word to defend their clients.
:
Rarely discussed in public proceedings are the behind the scenes of scheming and bargain hunting that occurs among the attorneys before the trial proceedings begin. Young public defenders, creative and idealistic about the law are often victimized before they realized what happened to them by the more skilled and wiser prosecutors who revel at the thoughts of tearing down a new public defender in front of an audience and the media. Every now and then they will encounter a brilliant activist who is a little bit more savvy and skilled than many others as they balked at the high numbers of plea bargains designed to expedite the court ‘s time and save their resources. This practice of plea bargaining has dominated the trade as it becomes a method of exhibiting mediation and negotiations skills for the trial begins. A good lawyer will realize whether or not they have a good case and not submit to the prosecuting team however, even those who are brilliant can’t fight the extreme pressures that can be applied by government resources when it comes down to the verdict desired for a particular offender.
The case of escapee John “Charlie” McCluskey comes into my mind as his defense was weak and predictable as the mood of the media indicated a swift and easy trial for the county attorneys that served this case to the court. At the very beginning of the trial, security was increased and a stun belt was used to manage the inmate’s behavior inside the courtroom. In addition, Fox News reported that “A Mohave County judge says television cameras will not be allowed in the trial of an Arizona inmate facing escape and other charges Judge Steven Conn says the likelihood of harm from televising the proceedings outweighs any benefit to the public.”
Interesting enough, McCluskey was guilty as hell and although likely overcharged to make political points with the press, there was no doubt that the public defender assigned could not keep up with the others to make a case of the contrary. As one witness stated so eloquently “The defendants, most guilty as hell, though likely often vastly overcharged, would view him as the person delegated to sell them down the river.” The Washington Post wrote John McCluskey who pled not guilty in these charges “stemming from the alleged escape and hijacking of two truck drivers. The 46-year-old faces separate charges in New Mexico, where he and two others are accused of killing an Oklahoma couple. McCluskey’s co-defendants resolved their Arizona charges without trials.”
Routinely a public defender is realistically burdened with an average caseload of 40 to 50 case files in the start of the day expecting to represent them all with the wide eyes open justice approach of such a feat. Impossible to track and to maintain, he or she takes on a most impossible task and situation with a self-fulfilling prophesy already written on the walls that they will fail to keep up trying to do a good job. Given the terrible working conditions to defend those of crimes committed, there are no elements of justice present under these circumstances that are unequal in the scales of justice that doesn’t even include the terrible intimidation of the state’s assets against their feeble resources given.
Going back to the McCluskey case, you get the impression that the Mohave County public defenders are on the same track as many others as they were ill prepared to do this case on the very first day with their opening statement that was flawed to say the least. The arguments didn’t hold water as the trial proceeded to a record breaking goal to finish the trial and announce the verdict within five working days with anticipated guilty pleas on all counts.. After all, the most important thing about this case was the closure of the escape and kidnapping charges and then hand this man over to the federal officials in New Mexico where he would face charges of double homicide in the Haas family murder while on the run from the law. The Mohave Daily News reported that “McCluskey, Welch and Province are also charged in New Mexico with the Aug. 2, 2010, murder of an Oklahoma couple Gary and Linda Haas, both 61, who were found in their burnt camper. The suspects possibly face the death penalty if convicted of federal charges of murder and carjacking. Gary Haas’ sister, Linda Rook, and his mother, Vivian Haas, both of Joplin, Mo, attended the four-day trial in Mohave County Superior Court.
Many observers, thinking they could have done a better job than the public defender assigned were not shocked or surprised that the trial went so well and making its deadline on time. Wondering whether the incompetence was deliberate [or unprofessional] or unintentional, it is reflective of the kind of assistance arrested and indicted offenders receive nationwide in their efforts to defend themselves. The motive to keep the trial on a pre-choreographed track for the state’s own interest was obvious as there were people present inside the courtroom that will no doubt be engaged in the 40 million dollar lawsuit filed against the state by the attorneys for the victims at the hands of John McCluskey, the Haas family, and document all facts related to the negligence involved in this escape.
Some would say that McCluskey “would have been better off doing this case pro se for all the help he got” was one quotation of an interested party as the conspiracy theory developed that many of these facts indicating the mismanagement of the escape “were swept under the rug.” This was no doubt one of the most publicized criminal trials for the year, yet the courtroom proceeding, although short and sweet to the tune of harmonious agreements between judge and the state kept the process in check and revealed nothing more or less that would incriminate the state in its future defense of the Haas family lawsuit not yet scheduled to be heard at this time.
Sources:
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/justice/judge-says-no-to-cameras-in-escaped-inmates-trial-apx-06062011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/escape-kidnapping-trial-begins-for-arizona-inmate-who-escaped-from-state-prison-last-year/2011/06/14/AGWiv6UH_story.html
http://www.mohavedailynews.com/articles/2011/06/19/news/local/doc4dfdb560f1819200852868.txt
No comments:
Post a Comment