Such Attorney - Client privileges are FUBAR

CHICAGO - A man who spent 26 years in prison was freed on bond Friday while he awaits a new trial for a murder another inmate confessed to his lawyers.

Alton Logan’s family said they took up a collection in the lobby of the Cook County Criminal Courthouse and quickly came up with the $1,000 needed for his release.

A tearful Logan said he felt great leaving the courthouse surrounded by friends and family.

Two attorneys recently revealed that their former client, Andrew Wilson, admitted to committing the crime that Logan was convicted of but that attorney-client privilege kept them from coming forward.

Logan did not kill a security guard in a McDonald's restaurant in January 1982, the two lawyers said.

For nearly 26 years, they said, they kept a sealed affidavit of their client's confession to the crime in a locked box.

The attorneys came forward in January after Wilson died.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24207440/

TerryRC wrote:If you don't tell your lawyer as much as you can, they can't properly represent you.

Pick a good one and let them do the lawyering. Otherwise, you might as well represent yourself...

...and you know what they say about that.

TerryRC wrote:Nice comeback, Sam.

It had nothing to do with the argument, though.

TerryRC wrote:Do you know the rules for admission of evidence? Do you think you can just bring it into the room, get it entered and run with it on the spot?

TerryRC wrote: You have been watching too much Matlock.

TerryRC wrote: Do a little study and see what percentage of cases are won by people that represent themselves.

Attack arguments, Sam, not people. You may find your credibility increasing.

TerryRC wrote:Some more of your own advice you should seriously consider for your own benefit.

You are the one that calls people "dumbass", "smartass", "fool", "girly-man".

You also never admit error and jump all over anyone that disagrees with you, even on a subject you know nothing about.

I pointed out that not telling your lawyer everything you can about your case is kinda foolish and look how you react.

You are a boor, Sam, and you are boring. You are a bitter old man whose sole pleasures are drinking beer and playing an internet "tough guy".

If you call a witness without them being on the list, your opposition can request a recess. If they don't get it, they now have a basis for appeal. That gives the opposition a chance to counter some of the "off guard" factor

Please, next time you get in trouble, do us a favor and defend yourself...

TerryRC wrote:Do you know the rules for admission of evidence? Do you think you can just bring it into the room, get it entered and run with it on the spot?

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

IV. ARRAIGNMENT AND PREPARATION FOR TRIAL

Rule 16. Discovery and Inspection

(a) Government's Disclosure.

(1) Information Subject to Disclosure.

(A) Defendant's Oral Statement.

Upon a defendant's request, the government must disclose to the defendant the substance of any relevant oral statement made by the defendant, before or after arrest, in response to interrogation by a person the defendant knew was a government agent if the government intends to use the statement at trial.

(B) Defendant's Written or Recorded Statement.

Upon a defendant's request, the government must disclose to the defendant, and make available for inspection, copying, or photographing, all of the following:

(i) any relevant written or recorded statement by the defendant if:

the statement is within the government's possession, custody, or control; and
the attorney for the government knows -- or through due diligence could know -- that the statement exists;
(ii) the portion of any written record containing the substance of any relevant oral statement made before or after arrest if the defendant made the statement in response to interrogation by a person the defendant knew was a government agent; and

(iii) the defendant's recorded testimony before a grand jury relating to the charged offense.

(C) Organizational Defendant.

Upon a defendant's request, if the defendant is an organization, the government must disclose to the defendant any statement described in Rule 16(a)(1)(A) and (B) if the government contends that the person making the statement:

(i) was legally able to bind the defendant regarding the subject of the statement because of that person's position as the defendant's director, officer, employee, or agent; or

(ii) was personally involved in the alleged conduct constituting the offense and was legally able to bind the defendant regarding that conduct because of that person's position as the defendant's director, officer, employee, or agent.

(D) Defendant's Prior Record.

Upon a defendant's request, the government must furnish the defendant with a copy of the defendant's prior criminal record that is within the government's possession, custody, or control if the attorney for the government knows -- or through due diligence could know -- that the record exists.

(E) Documents and Objects.

Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and:

(i) the item is material to preparing the defense;

(ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or

(iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant.

(F) Reports of Examinations and Tests.

Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit a defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph the results or reports of any physical or mental examination and of any scientific test or experiment if:

(i) the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control;

(ii) the attorney for the government knows -- or through due diligence could know -- that the item exists; and

(iii) the item is material to preparing the defense or the government intends to use the item in its case-inchief at trial.

(G) Expert Witnesses.

At the defendant's request, the government must give to the defendant a written summary of any testimony that the government intends to use under Rules 702, 703, or 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence during its case-in-chief at trial. If the government requests discovery under subdivision (b)(1)(C)(ii) and the defendant complies, the government must, at the defendant's request, give to the defendant a written summary of testimony that the government intends to use under Rules 702, 703, or 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence as evidence at trial on the issue of the defendant's mental condition. The summary provided under this subparagraph must describe the witness's opinions, the bases and reasons for those opinions, and the witness's qualifications.

(2) Information Not Subject to Disclosure.

Except as Rule 16(a)(1) provides otherwise, this rule does not authorize the discovery or inspection of reports, memoranda, or other internal government documents made by an attorney for the government or other government agent in connection with investigating or prosecuting the case. Nor does this rule authorize the discovery or inspection of statements made by prospective government witnesses except as provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3500.

(3) Grand Jury Transcripts.

This rule does not apply to the discovery or inspection of a grand jury's recorded proceedings, except as provided in Rules 6, 12(h), 16(a)(1), and 26.2.

(b) Defendant's Disclosure.

(1) Information Subject to Disclosure.

(A) Documents and Objects.

If a defendant requests disclosure under Rule 16(a)(1)(E) and the government complies, then the defendant must permit the government, upon request, to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items if:

(i) the item is within the defendant's possession, custody, or control; and

(ii) the defendant intends to use the item in the defendant's case-in-chief at trial.

(B) Reports of Examinations and Tests.

If a defendant requests disclosure under Rule 16(a)(1)(F) and the government complies, the defendant must permit the government, upon request, to inspect and to copy or photograph the results or reports of any physical or mental examination and of any scientific test or experiment if:

(i) the item is within the defendant's possession, custody, or control; and

(ii) the defendant intends to use the item in the defendant's case-in-chief at trial, or intends to call the witness who prepared the report and the report relates to the witness's testimony.

(C) Expert Witnesses.

The defendant must, at the government's request, give to the government a written summary of any testimony that the defendant intends to use under Rules 702, 703, or 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence as evidence at trial, if --

(i) the defendant requests disclosure under subdivision (a)(1)(G) and the government complies; or

(ii) the defendant has given notice under Rule 12.2(b) of an intent to present expert testimony on the defendant's mental condition.

This summary must describe the witness's opinions, the bases and reasons for those opinions, and the witness's qualifications[.]

(2) Information Not Subject to Disclosure.

Except for scientific or medical reports, Rule 16(b)(1) does not authorize discovery or inspection of:

(A) reports, memoranda, or other documents made by the defendant, or the defendant's attorney or agent, during the case's investigation or defense; or

(B) a statement made to the defendant, or the defendant's attorney or agent, by:

(i) the defendant;

(ii) a government or defense witness; or

(iii) a prospective government or defense witness.

(c) Continuing Duty to Disclose.

A party who discovers additional evidence or material before or during trial must promptly disclose its existence to the other party or the court if:

(1) the evidence or material is subject to discovery or inspection under this rule; and

(2) the other party previously requested, or the court ordered, its production.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/Rule16.htm#Rule16(a)(1)

TerryRC wrote:Sam, I can comprehend you.

Slurs and insults are easy to interpret.

We all know you are so smart that you don't need a lawyer, a doctor, a plumber or a mechanic.

You are so brilliant you could have won the Nobel in any category but are too much a patriot to take an award from foreigners.

Boring.

TerryRC wrote:Sam, I can comprehend you.

Slurs and insults are easy to interpret.

TerryRC wrote:We all know you are so smart that you don't need a lawyer, a doctor, a plumber or a mechanic.

TerryRC wrote:You are so brilliant you could have won the Nobel in any category but are too much a patriot to take an award from foreigners.

TerryRC wrote:When you start attacking arguments rather than people, you will become less boring to those of us that come here to debate, not be bullied.

TerryRC wrote:I can think of things you do deserve, but a Nobel isn't one of them.

So, how about those airlocks in the Nautilus? Or the fact that Clarke didn't invent the comm satellite. Or the fact that most people that represent themselves in court do not fare well.

You don't usually admit fault and you rarely attack people's arguments, just their character.

TerryRC wrote:Sam, I pointed out that Clarke didn't invent the comm satellite. I pointed out that the russian that did invent them also invented airlocks. You then said that perhaps he got the idea from Verne. I then pointed out that there were no airlocks on the Nautilus.

It was about that point you started attacking my character, my education, my employment and everything else.