“…Michael Schmidlin successfully contended police used excessive force when they arrested him March 29, 1997, on suspicion of public drunkenness. Unless the city appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court, it could pay $24,000 plus interest to Schmidlin and at least $300,000 in legal fees to his lawyer, Mark Martel. That figure might swell to more than $500,000, said Martel, who will spend the next month or so calculating the exact cost.” Martel says it’s the California city’s own fault for putting up too long a fight in the 11-year legal battle. (Jason Green, “Palo Alto loses longstanding legal fight in excessive force case”, San Jose Mercury News, Mar. 13)(via ABA Journal).
Posts Tagged ‘crime and punishment’
Little guys and “structuring” law
To read Alan Dershowitz on the Spitzer affair, you might think the criminal laws against “money laundering, structuring and related financial crimes” mostly go unenforced when sums are in the “thousands, not millions, of dollars” and do not arise from “organized crime, drug dealing, terrorism and large-scale financial manipulation”. Alas, plenty of targets of these laws could tell you otherwise, as Forbes found when it went collecting examples from proprietors of cash businesses like restaurants and motels and even a couple who says their legal troubles arose after they divided up for deposit $40,000 they’d received in gifts at their big wedding. (Janet Novack, “My Big Fat IRS case”, Forbes, Apr. 7; earlier; similar from Dershowitz on CNN transcript).
Fled home, rode bus to end of the line
The Hampton Roads Transit bus driver told the 13-year-old girl, who was “upset about a family situation” and had gone out after curfew, that she had to get off the bus at the end of the line. A man approached, befriended and later allegedly assaulted her. Her mother has now filed a $10 million suit against the transit system. Plaintiff’s lawyer Jason Roper says “someone” should have “call[ed] someone… You can’t tell me that no one could foresee this happening.” (Duane Bourne, “HRT, driver sued over sexual assault on teen”, Virginian-Pilot, Mar. 2)
Fourth graders told: don’t “spill” to the cops
Kwitcher snitchin’, and your confessin’ too: The Southwest Juvenile Defender Center runs a visit-the-schools program called “Why a Lawyer” which is “one of several such programs taught in schools and detention facilities throughout the country by groups worried that children don’t know their basic rights — including the right to remain silent.” At the private Shlenker School in Houston, fourth graders were asked to answer questions from a “police officer” (played by a University of Houston law student) about a prank call to a neighbor’s house. The student who said least was then singled out for praise for not “spill[ing] her guts”. When questioned by cops who are responding to reports of mischief, it seems, the recommended approach for preteens is “Give your name, your age and then ask for an attorney and ask for your parent.” Malikah Marrus, a researcher for the U-of-H-based Defender Center, complains that it’s an uphill battle getting kids to clam up when questioned by the authorities: “Their impulsive behavior gets them to spill their guts right away.” (Sarah Viren, “Programs teach legal rights to elementary school pupils”, Houston Chronicle, Feb. 14).
Mississippi’s other legal scandal
Prosecutors’ bite-marks forensics. (Radley Balko, Slate, Feb. 20).
Privacy law and criminal investigations, cont’d
Following up on our discussion of HIPAA and the New York therapist murder, police have reported a break in the case, arresting a mentally disturbed man who has told investigators of having been committed to a mental institution 17 years ago by Dr. Kent Shimbach, the doctor who was injured in the rampage (and who shared offices with the therapist who was killed, Kathryn Faughey). Dr. Shinbach apparently has told investigators that he did not recognize the assailant and has no memory of any contact with him in the past.
Helen Smith (“Dr. Helen”) at Pajamas Media recalls the case of Vallejo, California psychologist Ira Polonsky, Ph.D., “who was shot and killed by what family members believe was a former patient. Unfortunately his death is still a mystery. Why? Blame the confidentiality laws in California:”
…police have been stymied in pursuing that line of investigation because of confidentiality laws protecting Polonsky’s patient records and appointment books.
Vallejo police detectives are in touch with a court-appointed attorney – a “special master” – who is working with the county court to see if there can be at least a limited review of protected records, but neither police nor court officials will comment on progress in that area.
And Hans Bader takes note of a recent Volokh thread discussing cases in which it seems Massachusetts privacy law was construed to prohibit the taping of ransom discussions with kidnappers (Commonwealth v. Jackson, 1976, mentioned in passing here) and a Florida court considered (but rejected!) the argument that a murderer’s privacy was infringed by his victim’s having tape recorded the murder.
Lerach sentenced to two years
Over decades, the class-action titan paid secret kickbacks to pliant “representative” plaintiffs, then systematically falsified the nature of his relations to those plaintiffs the better to deceive judges, opponents, competing class action lawyers, and class members. He and his defenders are now portraying his offenses — even the systematic lying to courts — as minor and victimless. For some indications of why our legal system takes a very different view, see my WSJ op-ed of a year and a half back. Per Peter Lattman’s story/interview in today’s WSJ, “Mr. Lerach has requested, and the judge will recommend, that he be sent to Lompoc, a low-security federal penitentiary in Southern California often called a ‘country-club prison’ or ‘Club Fed.'”
Yesterday’s L.A. Times piece by Molly Selvin takes note of Lerach’s “trademark vitriol — he famously threatened to “destroy” companies that balked at settling”. Selvin also quotes NYU legal ethicist Stephen Gillers expressing concern that the spate of Milberg Weiss prosecutions “has to worry [lawyers] even if they’re doing nothing wrong because the Justice Department has shown its willingness to look into how they do business”. Gillers offers no examples of any Milberg lawyers who have been prosecuted despite “doing nothing wrong”, nor does he explore the question of how lawyers might exploit the impunity they would enjoy if the Justice Department permanently refused to “look into how they do business”. Indeed, if Lerach is right when he says kickbacks to named plaintiffs were industry practice in the class-action biz, it would seem that DoJ should have started “looking into how they do business” long before it did.
With fine understatement, Andrew Perlman at Legal Ethics Forum observes that it would “send the wrong message to students” for Lerach to be permitted to set up teaching legal ethics to law students at the University of Pittsburgh as part of his sentence. And taking a contrarian view, Larry Ribstein (via Bainbridge) says an appropriate comparison for Lerach would be to Michael Milken (Drexel Burnham) or Jeff Skilling (Enron) — but in the good sense.
More: This morning’s New York Times, a paper in whose columns Milberg Weiss long enjoyed cordial if not deferent coverage, buries the Lerach sentencing on an inside page of the business section. The paper’s “Dealbook” blog covers the story here. And The Economist recalls a “shouting match” in 2006 between Lerach and a leading British corporate governance advocate over whether litigation was the best way to address shareholder/manager conflicts. Plus: Charles Cooper, CNet.
“Twelve Angry Men”
Our roundup link to a discussion of the classic jury-deliberation movie stirred up a considerable discussion among David Bernstein, Ilya Somin, Orin Kerr and commenters at the Volokh Conspiracy.
Update: Peter “P’Ta Mon” John
David Lat reports (Jan. 22) that the criminal defense attorney covered in this space a few months back has a new ad in the Baton Rouge phone book that omits his former slogan, “The Thugs’ Lawyer”. It does, however, offer a new “Expungement Special Only $500 * Plus Filing Fees”.
Police more likely to sleep with than arrest prostitutes
The Venkatesh-Levitt paper on the economics of prostitution in Chicago shows that prostitutes are arrested about one out of every 450 tricks—but are forced to give “freebies” to police for about 3% of their tricks to avoid arrest.
On the one hand, I’m appalled at the utter corruption exhibited by law enforcement here, and wonder to what extent this illegal “perk” acts as a public-choice rationale for law enforcement to oppose legalization and regulation of brothels.
On the other hand, that 3% of labor extorted by the police is a heck of a better rate than the 30% or so tax rate various governments make me pay…
See also: Howley @ Reason; Balko @ Reason.