America’s great lie

The idea that we should furnish the poor with a public defender has been an effort to save our nation from shame – for sending the poor to prison without adequate representation. But today the nation’s public defender system has become a mockery of justice.

To provide an accused with a public defender who has three hundred other cases to defend is simply to laugh in the face of both justice and the accused himself. It takes me months to prepare the average criminal case for trial. The trial itself can take weeks, even months.

While O.J. Simpson was being tried in Los Angeles for murder, a case that cost millions to defend and months to conclude, another black man was being tried in the same courthouse for a similar murder. It took only three days for a jury to find him guilty. He had a public defender with scores of other cases to defend. Many prosecutors boast that they have over a 90 percent conviction rate. Little wonder. Under the present public defender system the prosecutors should enjoy one hundred percent convictions, and many in fact approach perfect conviction rates.

The public defenders in seven states have finally refused to take on any new cases. It’s about time. If I walked into court to defend my client and had never talked him, never previously opened his file, never discovered the witnesses against him, much less interviewed them, never reviewed the evidence in the hands of the prosecution, never demanded my clients rights to discovery, never read the cases relevant to the case at hand, never prepared the cross examination of the witnesses against my client, never …and on and on, I would be guilty of legal malpractice.

Every public defender who purports to represent an accused under circumstances in which he or she has neither the time nor the resources to fully defend the client is guilty of malpractice. These public defenders cannot be saved from malpractice because they are crushed under a ridiculous case load – some with even as many as five hundred cases or more. No one who was accused with such an attorney has received a fair trial and every such accused is entitled to an appeal on that basis alone. The judge must not sentence the accused under these circumstances because the judge would be taking part in a fraud on the system. Yet hundreds of thousands of indigent persons go to prison each year under circumstances no better than those outlined above.

When I was coming up as a young prosecutor, the defendants were represented pro bono by the lawyers in the local bar. It was part of the duty of members of the bar to take part in the justice system. Today that idea is unheard of. The practice of law is first and foremost a money-making profession. I see nothing wrong with that notion, but what about giving back?

Every trial lawyer should be required to take on a couple of pro bono cases every year. At our office we have a separate pro bono law firm and have for over ten years. It often brings us more satisfaction than our big money wins. The job of a lawyer is to represent the people – the lost, the forgotten, the damned, the hated, the voiceless and the poor. Indeed, God forbid, we may one day become one of those who are entitled to representation but cannot afford it.

Every time an accused goes to prison without having received a fair trial we are one step closer to the loss of our own freedoms. Our rights are, in fact, being fought for by public defenders who can never fulfill their duty to their clients because of their pathetic, impossible, caseloads. When they fail, we are in danger. Our system becomes a hypocritical charade. And we prove, once and for all, that the promised justice for all in America is an evil lie that is imposed on the poor.

If only those with money can receive justice, then how can we permit our children to recite a horrible falsehood in school when they chant, “with liberty and justice for all.” That can no longer be the truth in America.


34 responses to “America’s great lie

  1. In regards to the Myth of American Justice:

    There is no way that we can have anything but injustice if the office of the prosecutor is given 10 times the budget of the office of public defender. Defendants are subjected to the situation of the defenders of the Alamo – the odds are overwhelmingly against them.

    We can solve this problem in several ways:

    1-Parity in terms of budget for both prosecutors and public defenders;
    2-Mandate that all attorneys must provide a specified amount of pro bono services – they won’t do it without a mandate as in the federal court system;
    3-Raise the level of required training for the police so that they stop abusing laws such as trespass laws, disorderly conduct laws, and resisting arrest laws – now often used for harassment and to retaliate against whistle blowers and activists;
    4-Revise grand jury rules so that the jurors are told that they can call witnesses and so that it is more likely that defense witnesses will be called to prove there is no probable cause;
    5-Increase penalties for prosecutors who commit fraud upon the grand jury by mistating the law and withholding exculpatory evidence including witnesses;
    6-Revise our criminal statutes so that non-violent crimes may be dealt with more by mediators and not all “crimes” are automatically forced to trial so that judges are freed up to deal with more significant crimes;
    7-Increase funding for mental health services including drug addiction treatment and offer more diversion for first time offenders and non-violent drug offenders to remove their cases from the trial schedules.

    Most importantly we need to have civilian oversight over judges and prosecutors. There will have to be creative thinking as how to accomplish this task. The fox cannot guard the hen house!

    I am sure that there are a lot more who through creative thinking can come up with the solutions that I am too ignorant to figure out.

  2. An important topic Mr. Spence:

    The job of a lawyer is to represent the people – the lost, the forgotten, the damned, the hated, the voiceless and the poor.

    More important, are the souls who need representation, but, because of their situation deals with “National Security” they cannot buy or even obtain any legal representation for lawyer’s know to do so would be career sucide 😦

    What are TIs to do while their lives are being destroyed by the hidden hand for our government?

    Love “Light” and Energy


  3. In the notorious Scott Peterson case, a recent report claimed that the police expended 20,000 hours investigating the crime (it appears most of this time was spent ensuring that Peterson had no possible avenue of escape, no matter what it took).

    It was further claimed that the state spent $11 million to obtain their ‘win’ and that the prosecutors spent another 20,000 hours in their preparations for trial. One wonders how many other cases receive this much effort, noting that the state never could find any actual evidence of Peterson’s guilt. I also wonder how much of a defense a poor man could put up against such an effort by the state, with or without a public defender.

  4. You state: Every public defender who purports to represent an accused under circumstances in which he or she has neither the time nor the resources to fully defend the client is guilty of malpractice.

    Well in Illinois we actually had a vindicated criminal defendant sue his public defender for malpractice. And the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed his right to do so. Johnson v. Halloran, 194 Ill.2d 493 (2000).

    For a brief and naive moment I actually thought that we were going to see drastic changes take place in the machinery of the public defender’s office. Rather than defend embarrassing lawsuits that would result in the entry of substantial judgments while simultaneously exposing the shortcomings of the public defender’s office, surely we would see increased funding to that office along with the hiring of more defense attorneys and a reduction of caseloads. But instead the General Assembly found a more economical solution – it passed the Public and Appellate Defender Immunity Act, 745 ILCS 19/1 et seq. Is anyone surprised?

  5. Gerry-

    Although I agree with your statement that the PD with an astronomical caseload must be malpracticing by the nature of that caseload which does not allow him/her to even remotely prepare each client’s case, I am troubled by the damning tone of your conclusion.

    The individual PDs are in no remote way to blame. Do you ask that they simply quit their jobs in protest? Most of them are in those jobs because they care, often deeply, about their clients. They are certainly not there to make their fortunes. Au contraire. They are doing hallowed work, as far as I am concerned.

    You are correct that there is no way those valiant warriors can do a remotely adequate job under the pressure of crushing caseloads – but the blame falls squarely and completely on the “system”. It’s a factory. It’s a railroad. We play lip service to the right to counsel in a functionally obscene way.

    I was a public defender in the late 70’s and early 80’s. I left because I could not stand the feeling of inadequacy trying to represent clients each individually with an untenable caseload. My caseload back then seems like nothing when I watch a NY Times story about a valiant young PD who is carrying 155 felony cases. This is so far beyond the pale as to be unimaginable.

    I am truly in awe of those who continue to battle in the public defender realm. We are in a terrible quandry given the right wing supreme court appointments, which must make us wary of the appellate avenue for protection of such basic rights.

    It’s a scary time. Just please don’t cast aspersions on those who struggle on the front lines against the horrible power of the State.

    With much love,

  6. Jo-Hanna

    I agree. I do not disparage public defenders. They are the true, unsung American heroes who work for little or nothing in cases that are often hopeless. They work toward making the myth of justice for all a reality when they know they can’t.

    My outrage is against a system that pretends to give justice for all by burdening public defenders with impossible caseloads. It’s like a person trying to feed the masses with one small sack of groceries. Public defenders are not given the power of Christ who is said to have fed the crowd from a fish or two.

    The system is at fault. Not the public defenders. And the system knows it. If the system will not correct this horror, then the public defenders themselves must. And they are in seven states by refusing to take on more cases.


  7. Thanks, Linda. Yes, we must correct the justice system. Your ideas are an important approach that should be given consideration.


  8. Gerry,
    I assume you are not suggesting that lawyers take on Criminal defense cases Pro bono. The State has an obligation to fund these cases and the lawyers have an obligation to be sure that they make the state do so. I do believe that good lawyers have a moral obligation to take “low-bono” cases but if they are not prepared to fight for investigators, Docs, ballistics and DNA experts, crime scene and the like then stand aside. The Government brings the charge, they should foot the bill when an indigent person cannot. When a lawyer does it “pro bono” it is actually a repudiation of Gideon and moreover isn’t necessary.

    PS. I will never forget the speech you gave the day after Mike Tigar took on the OK Bombing case. It has helped see me through a lot of low bono cases.

  9. Thank you all for talking about this most pressing issue. In Georgia our PD system is in the process of collapsing. Our well intentioned, but poorly run, state wide model has proved to be yet another red-tape filled swamp populated by politicans and bean counters, not attorneys. Most attorneys involved either give up and make do or quit.

    After a very long personal battle with this issue (thanks John Nolte), I finally had to quit as I was very afraid of the moral and professional consequences of continuing as part of the local PD culture. Example, in Fulton County (Atlanta) I was the supervisor of the fast track misdemeanor calendar. This one calendar alone handles (as it still goes on today) between 100 and 300 cases PER WEEK with a staff of 2-5 defense attorneys. Now yes, these people mostly have prior records and their bonds are low, they just cannot get out of jail. The crimes are often very serious (drugs, family violence, stalking) and have major implications regarding the rest of our client’s lives. But they are still PEOPLE with RIGHTS. If these people are not protected then the slippery slope leads straight to class warfare and social unrest. As a society we simply cannot stand by and watch those with no voice face a well trained and funded opposition. The “pump and dump” calendar is a disgrace and as much as we tried, at the defense bar, and no matter how well intientioned the prosecutors are, as most were actually pretty decent, it is simply a straightforward injustice when a defense attorney is given 1-10 minutes to meet, discuss and most likely plead out a client while an impatient system taps its feet and stares at a clock. Most times the police report is not even read. These humans are not just numbers and statistics, they are dads, moms, sisters and brothers. Your family is there America, in cuffs, in a jumper, with no hope, with no real chance at justice.
    The state is guilty of ignorance. Ignorant of our rights as citizens and we, the citizens themselves, are likewise ignorant of the collapse of our national legal foundation. By just shuttling a significant portion of our population in and out of our local prisons we destabalize the economy, families, education and our entire society. Until we have a better nationwide basic standard for legal care the individual states will look at public defense as the first budget to cut, after all no one lobbies for poor accused criminals. I still fight on, with less financial security, less support, less resources, but no more could I participate in such a broken system.
    G_d speed to my heros in public service. I did four odd years for my country as a public servant and wish all those still in this system the best of luck, I just was not strong enough to continue I guess. In my mind, public defense is the first and best source for experience as a trial lawyer and made me see the way the “hidden half” lives. Concurrently, my relationships with people still “in” the system show me how close to the precipice our country is and how urgently we need to address this massive inequality.
    Joshua Schiffer
    The Schiffer Firm, LLC

  10. Gerry, your comments here remind me of my mantra: “Justice for some is not justice. Equality for some is not equality.” Any argument to the contrary is facially wrong, I think. It’s absurd to suggest that some justice is “justice.” In fact, “justice for all” is redundant–perhaps?

    It suits this discussion. I have also used it in discussions regarding the right to marry and Prop. 8 in California. It has widespread applicability.

    If only some people are getting justice, no one is getting justice. If only some people are equal, we just aren’t equal. And, until we as a society and community recognize this and correct it, we won’t yet be “a more perfect union.”

    I may end up as a public defender or in legal aid for some time in my life. I will always be available for pro bono work and service. The profession of the law ought to be a service like all other professions. Wouldn’t we think less of a doctor who denied medical treatment to an ailing person simply because the patient could not pay–if helping would be little cost to the doctor, and the care would save the life of the patient–wouldn’t we say the doctor MUST (morally) help. Likewise, if helping one or two or three clients a year wouldn’t hurt the lawyer, he or she ought to, from a moral standpoint, help those people–regardless of their ability to pay.

    Or, am I to believe that the defense of liberty and justice is simply not that important, not worth my time, not worth asking for a colleague’s time? No. That cannot be.


  11. Joshua

    Your comments tell the truth. That America can stand by, watch this, and still demonize lawyers leads one to believe that we are either ignorant or vicious.


  12. That lawyer dude:

    Well, Dude, the state should pay. It must. And it must pay on the same basis that it pays prosecutors.

    Absent that, every trial lawyer should have a pro bono case in his file.


  13. Gerry,

    You make a good point about public defenders. Also, I agree that it would be a good idea if every lawyer “gave something back” to the system.

    The problem though is that some lawyers should be giving more back than others. Those who have done particularly well (and I’m not specifically referring to you) should give more back than those lawyers struggling with small practices in the heartland of this country.

    I think what we give back should be somewhat proportional to what we are taking from the system. I know large lawfirms in my immediate area that I think give very little back. On the other hand, some lawyers in my community are really struggling to earn a decent living.

  14. Wonderful post! I’m writing a blog post about this issue today and am referencing your book “The Smoking Gun.” Loved it by the way.

    I wrote a book review about it years ago and was looking for links to your book and website when I found your blog.

  15. Hi Gerry,

    I am not a lawyer, and you may ask why i am here, i love this country and the Freedom that the founders of this land established. and i have seen its corruption (in my opinion) so that i have become quite intriguing to me as i get older , In my short life time i have seen many injustices perpetrated by the “STATE” and i wonder how the “STATE” acquiers such authority to “pump and dump”, “railroad” the average Joe through a “SYSTEM” that is obviously hostile to the working class or even impoverished people of this country, which is growing at an amazing pace i might add .There are statements and comments about the freedom in this land if we are in fact free where are the checks and balances that keep this from happening ? Perhaps we should try to limit the STATES authority in peoples lives at all.
    it is my understanding one breaks the law when he violates anothers personage property or life so therfore if a man chooses to sit at home and do drugs but harms noone the STATE should have no authority there for that is his pursuite of happiness, whether we agree with it or not. now if that man harms another then the law has place. which is to protect the victim not the criminal with all this said has this “SYSTEM” been corrupted and turned into a”STATE” of LEGAL PLUNDER.
    I have read a document written back in 1850 published by a man named Fre’de’ric Bastiat called The LAW so my question would be how does or did the “STATE” acquier such an oppresive authority in the first place ?

    Regards Don

  16. Mark:

    Yes, what we give should be in proportion to what we receive. But there is a sweet irony here. The more we give, the more we receive.


  17. Gerry,

    This slaughter-of-the-native-peoples-day I am thankful for you.

    At the federal public defender we are slightly better off than our county colleagues. But the priorities are clear: this past fiscal year, the U.S. Attorneys Office in L.A. hired 75 new prosecutors. The FPD was allowed to replace 3 defenders who had left. Eric Holder and Obama won’t change that. They got to where they are by learning how to participate in the system.

    For me the issue isn’t really the case load; it’s the judges, the vast majority of whom are former prosecutors or corporate attorneys.

    I often feel like a speed bump, slowing down the bulldozer of the government before it demolishes my client.

    I don’t really think change can come from inside the machine. My job is about resistance until change comes from the people. I wish I could find a way to make the criminal process more visible to the public because I think people would demand change if they could see what actually went on.

    Thanks for keeping me company in the meantime.

    Love, Kim

  18. Kim,

    You are among the true heroes in this country, little known, little lauded, but the brave and the caring.

    Thank you for what you do.


  19. Gerry,
    As an unconscious citizen of the US I believed in “Justice” until I was pulled over by DUI squad because the music in my car was too loud (convertible). No radar and the cop that pulled me over, down the hill, didn’t even write a report. The supervisor was going to show ‘my new guys how to do it’. I had to pay $10,000 lawyer fee for the privilege to cop a speeding plea to ‘get out of the criminal system’ and I was not speeding. I don’t think any of it is about Justice, if it ever was. From the police up through the court and to the legislators, it’s all a personal or political agenda. The supervisor – hot shot Mexican guy going to show his new guys how to stick it to someone driving a BMW. Judge was appointed because of her daddy, she couldn’t get work as as lawyer. The MADD have gone MAD! They are nothing more than a political group dictating to the public.
    God help those who must rely on the ‘system’.

  20. The “give back” sentiment is pure BS. I assume the lawyer has earned his right to practice law and has no debt to be repaid.

    Forcing a lawyer or anyone else to serve pro bono is prohibited by the 13th Amendment.

    The best way to bring legal services to the public is the way Walmart brings world products, including drugs, to the public: free market.

    Any person truly interested in availability of legal or medical services would favor disestablishment of the legal and medical oligopolies and abolition of their certification to steal.

  21. Gerry:
    I am a public defender in the state of Oklahoma. My caseload is not overwhelming, but certainly heavy. As a young public defender back in 1999, you graciously responded to a letter I wrote you regarding my defense of a 58-year-old black man charged with First Degree Murder. His defense was NGRI. After providing me with serveral tips, you closed your letter with this: “Care for him and fight for him. That will win for you.” And I did fight for him and care for him. In the end, I was able to persuade 8 out of 12 jurors that he was NGRI. A hung jury. However, had more investigative resources been available, and had my caseload been lighter to free up more preparation time, I believe all 12 could have been persuaded. (Note: before the retrial, I left to go to another PD office and could no longer represent him; another attorney took over the case and the client was found guilty and sentenced to life without parole).

    As I see it, my task, whether trying a case or plea bargaining, is to obtain mercy with all my strength.
    Now, I am a Christian. Most would think a Christian would align himself with the prosecutorial-minded right. I do not. I will not put myself in a position to be a stone-caster, or one without mercy. I will plead for mercy, even if it may be that justice and the law do not dictate mercy. For blessed are those who show mercy, for they will be shown mercy.
    And didn’t Jesus perform one of the greatest feats of defense lawyering? A woman caught in the act of adultery was brought before him (the pharisees were the forerunners of prosecutorial selection, for her male “partner in crime” was nowhere to be found). Under their law, they could stone her to death right then and there. Indeed, they had the stones in their hands. The law was ironclad, strict culpability, and there was no reasonable doubt as to her guilt. And Jesus’ one and only argument was “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
    He looked beyond the law; he pleaded for, and then found, mercy. If other Christians ask me how I can defend “those guys,” I refer them to this.
    In my job, I hear the death rattles of mercy everyday. Some days I help to revive it, many days I cannot. But I have to try. And certainly, my efforts would be less burdensome if I had a lighter caseload. Thus, public defenders need a show of mercy, which is in fact mercy toward the indigent defendant, from the legislatures of our country and those private defense lawyers who have been financially blessed and are in a position to take on pro bono defense work. Because mercy will rarely come from those modern-day pharisees we call prosecutors and judges.

    Thank you for your work. You promote justice, mercy, and giving. I attended the TLC psychodrama seminar last January in Asilomar and was touched and taught beyond measure by the staff.

    Peter Astor

  22. Peter: Your comment touched me deeply. As a child I was taught the same Christian values of love and forgiveness you follow. I applaud you for it.

    I am no longer a Christian for reasons that are not material here. But that does not mean that forgiveness and mercy and caring and understanding are values owned only by true Christians such as yourself. I trust that true human beings can, should and do follow them as well.

    Thanks, again,


  23. Again, you bring up an interesting subject, Gerry.
    Although I was saddened by your last comment to Peter, to learn you are no longer a Christian, I support your free choice.

    Linda Shelton wrote an interesting suggestive piece in her comment to your article as well as has others.

    There is no question our justice system needs a complete overhaul, as does much of the rest of American way of doing business.

    Are we really the great nation we claim to be, or is it all a big lie? As a nation, it seems we have a bigger ego than we do a true performance level.

    Keep up your great writing, Gerry. You raise eloquent conversation topics.


    • I wish, Cliff, my topics were more than “eloquent conversation topics.” I wish they inspired change, but that is the ambition of the naive. I am grateful for your attention here. Thank you.


  24. I am a disabled citizen and have read your article concerning public defenders being overloaded with cases, not true in Burien Washington, (the same place where infamous Riechert came from), in protection of my mother from harassing neighbors, the neighbors made a story up that I had spit on them, when it was the neighbors who spat upon me. During trial it looked that I was going to win, when my public defender whispered to the judge, (which is recorded on the taped transcipt), that I had admitted to spitting on the neighbors when that was not the truth at all.

    If that wasn’t enough, while the public defender, my mother and I were standing in the hallway, this all ways causing lawsuits arresting officer comes up to me and says, “I should arrest you for eye fucking my witnesses!!” , I told him that should he do that, I would sue him in personal and professional capacity!, the officer then asked where a certain witness was, the same witness for the prosecution that was overhearing our private conversations between my attorney and I, my just pointed between myself and the attorney and said, “He’s over there!, the officer then hit my 71 year old mother in the mouth and brought his hand back to hit her again, I slammed his head into the wall and five officers jumped on me. There were alot of witnesses on my side that were denied to testify at trial and I was told no matter how many times it took, I was to be found guilty my attorney told me.

    Was found guilty on the first charge, did my time, the 18 months later was called back in court by same judge and sentenced again and handcuffed on the very same case. The judge even wanted me to come into his chambers prior to sentencing without a attorney present.

    The second charge of “assault on a officer”, I did a year and they still tried to resentence me on the same violation after I had done my time and probation period.

    anyway, i could on and on about how much injustice I’ve been thru, but I just had to tell you that these public defenders are truly “officers of the court” and for the courts anyway they can get it done for the courts.

    Would like help concerning fighting these cases if you should wish to show a concern.

    Sincerely Yours,
    Richard Dyson

  25. Gerry,
    Happy Birthday! I hope today was very special for you and your family and that you have very very many more!. Hope to see you at some of the regionals this year and at the graduate seminar and party in August.
    Thanks again for all you have done for mankind, and, especially thanks for helping me become a “real person”. Art Lloyd

  26. I very much agree…especially with ” Indeed, God forbid, we may one day become one of those who are entitled to representation but cannot afford it.”

    Just two years ago my husband and I had a very comfortable lifestyle. We were accused of “disturbing the peace”, which was ridiculous, but we were able to find an amazing lawyer…one who actually had defended two judges in a case a few months before…All charges were dismissed after they realized who our lawyer was…the accuser didn’t even want to go to court, as they knew we would win.

    Two years have passed, and we are now living off 401K savings and wondering how we will pay for basic necesities…Astronomical medical bills due to a child with autism…and I now know that if this ever happened again, we could not afford a lawyer…and things would be very different.

    It is a sad day in America when people cannot see this injustice…when people who are not in that situation do not care about those who are…I have heard the comments of well-off friends…”why do you care about them, you can afford a lawyer…why do you care, you have a job, etc…” Little do they know that our rights are being taken away and that when we least expect it, we could be “them…”

  27. Gerry,
    The more I read of the loss of rights and the lack of justice in the United States, the more I realized that my conviction to never step foot across the border again was correct. You guys have lost it.

  28. Dear Gerry,

    I don’t know how I missed this post, and I hope I won’t annoy anyone by covering what some might consider “old ground.” It is indeed a great lie when the state gives lip service to the saying “justice for all” mantra but does everything it can to stack the deck against poor and indigent defendants by assigning public defenders who are so bogged down by crushing caseloads that they often don’t have time to go over the facts of each case.

    From what I have seen, the state isn’t about to do anything to change the way the “criminal justice” system operates by hiring more public defenders. From their POV, their job is to obtain convictions, not seek justice.

    So what can the average citizen do? The way I see it, each person who can should read as much about the criminal justice system and the law as possible. Your books, like WIN YOUR CASE and THE SMOKING GUN, are excellent ones to start with. There’s another book called THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE HANDBOOK, written by two attorneys, that I think every person should have, as it provides valuable information on what to do in case they are accused of a crime. It is certainly not a substitute for legal counsel, and the authors make that very clear. But it will give a person knowledge they need until they can get a lawyer who can give good legal advice. In addition to that, there’s also a very good TV program on the TNT channel called RAISING THE BAR, created by David Feige, who was a public defender in the South Bronx area of New York City.

    Until things change for the better, I believe the only thing that will help the average citizen is knowledge of law and the system, which is available from books, the internet, and other media channels.

  29. After reading Susan’s post, I would like to offer an apology to the people of America for driving drunk so many times I can’t count them.
    But, for the grace of God, I never was in a wreck, nor did i crash, or hurt anybody. I do recall once driving from Oakland to San Francisco, and it was on some very foggy vision.
    I was once very foolish, and once oblivious.
    I am thankful my errant ways did not hurt others.
    I have this one friend, who drinks so much, and he is not affected by booze like normal people.
    He was never pulled over for a DUI, yet, he probably drives around with a blood alcohol level
    over the limit about every day.
    Again, I want to aplogize to the American public as to any who were on any of the same higways I was once on.. I have since stopped drinking in large measure, and since do not dive loaded.
    I think a guardian angle must have been looking over my shoulder, people like me do really stupid things when young, and wild, and etc..We just never really think about what we are doing.
    The S/ L has since long passed on all my stupid activity driving drunk.
    MADD sees tragic situations all the time, where some were not as fortunate, and caused havoc of innocent people on the road, just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time
    Some may have a high tolerance for driving (drinking) drunk, probably like >>>
    Well, I won’t get into the professional details.
    My friend who could drink so much and drive and appeared not to be drunk at all was trial lawyer.
    And, a pretty good one at that. Somehow, his life was filled with drinking, too much.. and for so long.
    Why—I don’t have enough time to go into, nor do you have the time either on that.

  30. I was convicted and jailed by the judge without trial or without any notice whatsoever and he knew and acknowledged I was pro se. Everything was being done behind my back. Now I have a motion to dismiss in place since other actions are taking place as though the case is still on. Weird and bizarre? Its the norm as it goes on with numerous others. Frank Pravda, Town of Saratoga

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s