713-224-1747
Recent Blog Posts
Defense Experts in State v. Green
Here is a list of the expert and other opinion witnesses the defense intends to present in the hearing, beginning Monday, on the constitutionality under the Eighth Amendment of Texas's death penalty procedure:State v. Green Hearing Expert Testimony
Gerry Goldstein (who says that the criminal defense lawyer in a death penalty case has to be like a cockroach-"all over the government's shit") and Barry Scheck will be presenting Wednesday's and Thursday's testimony (respectively? I don't know).
Here are précis of the witnesses' qualifications, as well as their billing rates and amounts of time they've spent on the case:State v. Green Death Penalty Procedure Constitutionality Hearing Expert Bios
(I wonder if I can get the State Bar to approve CLE credit.)
Bullies, Betas, and Unquestioning Compliance
The government wants the job of dealing with bullies; it doesn't want our kids to learn to stand up for themselves or others because it wants a monopoly on lawful force. But society needs people who stand up for others, even-no, especially-when the government is the bully.
Government wants people to depend on the state for their safety. Even if it succeeds and trains the rest of us to be unquestioningly compliant, there will always be sociopaths who don't acknowledge the rules by which the rest of us agree to abide. Such people are able to identify potential victims who are more socially submissive. Of course they're looking for that sort of victim-when seconds count, the police are just minutes away. Fortunately for the sociopaths, in the government's ideal beta-populated world, there will be many more victims because social submissiveness will be the norm.
How I'll Be Spending My Days
This (via Brian Rogers, Chron.com) is what I'll be watching when I'm not otherwise occupied in the next couple of weeks: the hearing in the 177th District Court on whether Texas's death penalty procedure violates the Eight Amendment because it creates a significant risk that an innocent person will be executed.
Signed by capital defense veteran Dick Burr, the motion filed by the defense provides a thorough and erudite summary of the reasons that innocent people have most likely been executed in Texas. First, five problems inherent to the seeking of death:
Crime clearance rates and pressure on the police;
Publicity;
Death qualification of prospective jurors;
Fear of the death penalty in defendants and their defense team; and
The tendency of capital juries to consider punishment before determining guilt.
Then, seven problems that exist at the trial level in Texas death-penalty cases (but that could be avoided):
Robert's Rule #_
Dear "Whatever it Takes" folks,
I have often said that a word for people like you who expect the government to keep them safe is "victims." Here is a good functional explanation of why:
It's one of Robert's Rules: When seconds count, the police are just minutes away. (I didn't make that one up, but it's one of the Rules nonetheless.)So I'm always stumped by the credulous, even irrational, faith of folks whose plan to defend themselves, their family, their home or their business is a call to 911. They have to know the Rule intuitively, if not from experience, don't they? Yet they live like it isn't so. It's hard to imagine them being similarly ignorant of the acceleration of gravity, so that they decide to take the window instead of the elevator to get from the top floor to the lobby.
More at Suburban Sheepdog.
Love,Mark
If He Offers to Show You His Wand, Refuse.
Dear submissive "Whatever it Takes" subjects:
TSA is grooming your children. (Via Ted Frank's TSA Abuse blog, which I keep handy in case my blood pressure drops precipitously.)
Love,Mark.
p.s. TSA would never hire a pedophile, would they?
Why “Whatever it Takes” is Relevant
So I've written a bit about TSA, about scope-and-grope, about the minute risk of air travel, and about the popular "whatever it takes" response to complaints about the TSA's invasion of our liberty and our privacy.
So what does any of this have to do with the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering?As a member of society, I am pissed off by "whatever it takes." How dare these submissive scared quislings surrender my children's freedom so that they can feel safer?
As a criminal-defense lawyer, I am worred by "whatever it takes."
"Whatever it takes" is a strong authoritarian statement. Not only does the speaker want the government to solve the problem, and not only does he want the government to do what is necessary, but he also trusts the government to decide what it takes and disregard the cost. It's an invitation, in response to fear, to governmental overreaching. "Whatever it takes" is a demonstration of the effectiveness of make people afraid.
My Perspective on AIr Travel
A common refrain among those who are happy trading a quick grope or some nude pictures for permission to travel about this once-free land is, "if you don't like it, don't fly." To them, we are "thin-skinned" because we don't want our children leered at by TSA agents of dubious provenance. Those of us who refuse to allow the government to have its way with us are described as "enabling Al Qaeda." Yes, these folks are generally anonymous-sound reproductive strategy-but the legacy media jump in with both feet as well. If I thought flying was worth being scoped and groped (I can imagine scenarios in which it would be, but none of them involve vacation travel), I would say so, but I could still honor the feelings of those who felt strongly otherwise, just as I respect the feelings of those who simply don't find scope-or-grope objectionable. Where, in all of the statist apologetics, is the respect for the feelings of others? The level of discourse is low; it's saddening, really.
Not Worth It
Assume that those who would plan terror attacks have at least as much information as we have. They know that "it remains unclear whether the AIT would have detected the weapon used in the December 2009 incident"; that "only 2 percent of all passengers would have been picked at random to go through" these questionably-effectual scanners; and that "random" means people who look like they will readily comply or people who might look good naked. Also assume that the planners are more familiar with probability, statistics, risk and cost-benefit analyses than most Americans. A terror attack doesn't cost a lot of money; with lots of Saudi cash supporting Al Qaeda, the limiting resource is probably people willing to blow themselves up. Because terrorism's weapon is terror, a failed attack is not a failure. The schmoe with the shoe bomb might frighten people and change their behavior almost as much if he can't get the fuse lit as if he can.
Blawg 100
A hearty "thank you" to the Defending People reader who nominated this blog to the ABA Journal's Blawg 100 popularity contest.
Now go vote for someone in the Criminal Justice category-Gideon, Seddiq, Pryor, Greenfield, Berman, or Sylvester; hell, vote for Scheidegger if you're into that sort of thing. Anyone but me.
Oh, yeah, and the IMHO category too. Tannebaum, Randazza, Charon...
More “Whatever it Takes” Quislings
Leslie Malkoff was headed to Dallas with her husband Kurt. Malkoff said she thinks people are missing the whole point of the scanners."You know what, everybody is so afraid, more afraid of being felt up than blown up. You know what, whatever it takes, I say, not to have someone take a bomb in their underwear. Whatever. So you're fine with either one? I'm fine with either one. Oh, yeah. What do you think, honey? I totally agree," Malkoff said.
Barbara Carnes of Spokane was heading to Seattle for the holiday. She had no concerns about the heightened security measures or the body scanner. "Whatever it takes to be safe," she said. "I don't care."
When all of you opt out and create long delays and missed flights how many will be the first to complain. How soon we forget what happened on 9/11. The thought of even 1 person getting through with something will be regretted. There is a need for more high tech security because the terrorist are trying more high tech ways to hurt us. I am for whatever it takes to protect us. Posted By bob on November 18, 2010, 10:26 AM
Contact Us if You're
Ready for a Better Future
Schedule a consultation today by filling out the form below or calling our office at 713-224-1747. We look forward to representing you.
The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.
I have read and understand the Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.
From our office in Houston, we represent clients throughout Harris County and across the state of Texas. We assist with criminal cases in Conroe, The Woodlands, Kingwood, Bellaire, Friendswood, Highland Village, West University Place, Cypress, Willis, Austin, Dallas, For Worth, Arlington, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, Beaumont, Tyler, Plano, Spring, New Caney, Porter, Humble, Atascocita, Aldine, Cloverleaf, Pasadena, South Houston, Pearland, Fresno, Missouri City, Sugar Land, Pecan Grove, Richmond, and Katy.
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
917 Franklin Street, Fourth Floor, Houston, TX 77002
713-224-1747
