[njbgroup]

Hello Helpers and Friends:


I have just gone through one or more horrible experiences with the same public defender who acts noticeably worse than the prosecutor does, this matter involves an illegal search and seizure issue and then the subsequent filing of a false police report by a lying police officer.

Someone an eye witness witnessed the whole event that took place and volunteered to come to court on my behalf to testify. Great, I thought a real good Samaritan, but by the time court date arrived he had been contacted at his job or by phone by the police, the public defenders office and the prosecutor. For some reason he got scared and turned-coat, change his change on the stand to I couldn't see that clear, I really don't know and I don't remember this or that. Critical information that made him a strong witness crumbled and this whole incident took p-lace just 6 months ago, I know for a fact that he didn't forget, I've seen him 20 times since then and he was crystal clear until the Suppression of Evidence Hearing" in court and then he turned on me.

He said to me that my Public Defender put him into this position. In other words he said my attorney turned on me tampered with the witness that was to testify on my behalf and got him to change his story in collaboration with the false police report.

Bottom line can my attorney be charged with "Witness Tampering" and obstruction of Justice? I have already written both him and the court a letter firing him for his misconduct and disrespectful behavior, and deliberate withholding of vital information to my case and breaching the "Confidentiality Clause" by giving the prosecutor heads up on certain questions and info.
Should this matter go straight to the Attorney Generals Office?

Please Help,

NJBG

[excon]

Hello nj:

Sure, he can be charged. But you're going to have to get the cops to do it, and I don't think that's going to happen.

Next. I've heard stories of pd's turning on their clients over the years. I spose it happens, but I haven't seen it. Why would your guy help the cops? So no, I don't believe it happened. I think you just don't understand what, in fact, did happen.

However, let's say I'm wrong. Let's say you had a pd who actually screwed you worse than the cops. Nobody is going to care. The Attorney General doesn't investigate these things. The Bar Association does. Write them a letter, if it will make you feel better.

excon

[Fr_Chuck]

Ok, first the fact that you even spoke personally to the witness is a serious thing, you are not suppose to be talking to him. And the DA will talk to him and remind him if he "lies" he could be charged, and of course the DA will dig into who he is, his background and the such.

Most likley he was telling you something to get rid of you and not discuss the case with you.

And I will agree with excon, many public defenders normally don't have time to do much, and don't have any funds to do tests and investigations.
They merely see that all of your civil rights are not voiolated.

And most "witeness" would not know if a search was legal or not from merely seeing it from a distance.

Sorry but if excon does not believe it, no one is going to believe it

[ScottGem]

I'll chime in my 2 cents. It doesn't make any sense for the PD to do this. Remember the witness would have to testify in any hearing that he did so. If he recanted on you once, what would stop him from doing it again.

If you want to pursue this, you would need to file a grievance with the Bar Assn. They have jurisdiction. You could sue the PD in civil court for legal malpractice. But, again, all you have is the statement from an apparently unreliable witness.

I will add that what you should have done, is get a deposition from the witness when he first came forward. This way, you get his testimony into the record. If he changes his testimony later, then you have a written record to impeach the later testimony.

[excon]

Hello again, nj:

Couple more things. Why would your pd file for a suppression of evidence hearing, and then make sure he lost? If he thought the evidence was seized legally, he wouldn't have filed for a suppression hearing in the first place.

If YOUR pd wanted to screw you, he would have talked you into pleading guilty no matter what the evidence suggested. He would never have taken the time to attempt to get the evidence thrown out, if he wasn't trying to help you.

So, what's your status? Have you been found guilty yet? I want to help, and I can if you're still PRE-CONVICTION. But, going after your pd isn't going to help you at all.

excon

[njbgroup]

Hello again, nj:

Couple more things. Why would your pd file for a suppression of evidence hearing, and then make sure he lost? If he thought the evidence was seized legally, he wouldn't have filed for a suppression hearing in the first place.

If YOUR pd wanted to screw you, he would have talked you into pleading guilty no matter what the evidence suggested. He would never have taken the time to attempt to get the evidence thrown out, if he wasn't trying to help you.

So, what's your status? Have you been found guilty yet? I want to help, and I can if you're still PRE-CONVICTION. But, going after your pd isn't going to help you at all.

excon

PLEASE RESOND;

Sir;
With all due respect gentlemen, the towns that I come from that involve the PD office and average person that needs legal help and uses their service means one thing "Plea Bargain" and I as of April this year have been in court at least 3 times pre-trial matters and have seen PD's manipulate inmates into pleading guilty or stay in jail for many more months or longer if they didn't and with the additional threat of receiving more prison time if convicted. The name they have on the streets and in prison is "public pretender" This is a common routine that's been going on for years. So a guy who may or may not be guilty of possession of narcotics as an example is forced into pleading guilty to distribution which is a far more serious offense and often times these were very small amounts that could have been for a person's personal use, though possession is it illegal does not make him a drug dealer. And if he had the money for a private attorney he probably would have had the case dismissed or been given a much better deal. But when you are incarcerated for 23 ½ hours a day with the jail withholding your mail and you have no ability to make bail or get true legal assistance you are then at the mercy the PD and or court. I saw the judge ask the PD so what do you want to do and basically heard him give his recommendation for prison time.

My attorney does know that this was an illegal search and seizure issue and just because he asked for a Suppression of evidence hearing it does not mean he did it in good faith. How about have the hearing merely for show, but then sabotage it hoping that I screw up and say something in that hearing that should I go to trial they can twist it around.
The strong witness that said he would testify on my behalf worked in a downtown store right across the street from the scene he didn't even know me but saw what happened, and volunteered to state what he saw. Which was the simple fact that I was walking down the street was called over to the unmarked undercover cop car, the cop snatched the plastic bag out of my hand [that contained vitamins I just purchased with a receipt], along with some CD's I just bought off the street [they later said these were copies] without my consent, there was a brief conversation in which I told them you can't do that. I never said anything either disrespectful or incriminating, I gave them ID and then they jumped out and cuffed me and then began searching my other shoulder bag. I was never stationary or standing but continuously walking minding my business when stopped. The report has me in a different location, a made up location in broad daylight soliciting customers etc. [false] though they admit they never heard me say a word nor see me make any transactions.
Even if someone did this action it would normally be a misdemeanor offense, you get at most a $250 fine and usually given time to pay it. But with me they lied, hit me with a $5,000 bail and turned it into an indictable offense, I remained incarcerated for 7 days locked for 23 ½ hours a day {for what reason} do even do this to people for traffic tickets up t 3 weeks before putting them in population. I went to the first appearance, the 1st judge saw me and basically said there is something wrong here and released me ASAP on my own recognizance.


Now my Pd has asked me 5 times to take a deal and I refused, so what if I take it to court and win? Will I sue? This is what some think though that is not my agenda. The lawsuit issue came up, even though I later sent him a letter stating that I have no intention of suing anyone should we find a peaceful resolution to this matter, and I'll sign a waiver, my PD failed to relay this message to the other parties. He also has been a loud mouthed rude individual who knowingly withheld information from me about my witness changing his story. I saw him in court posing easy questions to my adversary, and putting words in his mouth that substantiated his lie. I passed him a note saying make sure you ask him this question, he obnoxiously shoved it back, and said I'll give you a chance to expound on that when you take the stand and when I did get on the stand failed to object to certain things nor did he pose the question promised, raised his voice in an angry hostile manner. When I asked him on 2 or 3 different occasions if there is anything that he wanted to go over with me regarding the case or my testimony or preparation he behaved in an evasive, unprofessional, unwilling manner, did not tell me that I would be called to testify until 5 minutes before the proceeding, even though I asked him this question weeks prior, he failed to show me any paper work that pertained to my case including additional false statements made the "1 officer" nor statements by my witness until 2 minutes before the proceeding. This was a deliberate act of keeping me in the blind and ill prepared. The investigator who spoke to my witness did have a written statement that was mentioned during the SE hearing, but just 8 weeks later he does not recall and then changed his direction. He even told me that that the cops and the prosecutor had been to his job saying bad things about me, and stated before I went into court that I can thank my PD for what is about to occur here in court today. This should give you guys a little more insight into the situation, there are some unusual things going on with this case and I need an attorney but really can't afford one, but refuse to have this negative, deceitful traitor continue to crucify me playing the part of the Public Pretender. I'm not so much interested in suing anyone as I am in keep from freedom and going on with my life…They are trying to do me bad and I'm just fight for my life. Now What Do You Suggest?

[njbgroup]

Come on guys you've been around and must know that corruption in the courts is wide spread especially for low income persons. The System is broken, wake-up!

Some people are victimized for other reasons such as being too outspoken! Or perhaps too political and has offended someone in high places, unwittingly.

[ScottGem]

I notice that you keep harping on the illegal search. You seem to figure that will result in throwing out the evidence.

Maybe that's why the PD is being so lackadasical here and why he wants you to plea bargain. Sure the court system could run better and sure its stacked against those who need it most.

Maybe you do have a case of legal malpractice, its hard to tell.

[excon]

Now What Do You Suggest?

Hello nj:

I think you should write to the AG.

excon

[Fr_Chuck]

Sorry no I have yet to see an illegal search, once they believed you had illegal CD's, I will assume they had the right to put you into custody.
At that point a search of the subject and his property would be allowed under laws of arrest ( at least in my state)

Anytime we arrested a person, we would search their pockets, their backback if they had one and so on. ( unless it was in a locked case)

So where is the illegal search ? The bag in your hand is in plain sight and subject to search if they have a reasonable belief that there is something illega there.

At least in GA that holds up from what you just stated as a legal search, you once in custody for the CD,s theyare free to search all they want.
What else did they find when they searched

[ScottGem]

Lets try this scenario on for size.

Patrol1 to Dispatch: We just broke up a group selling bootleg CDs. One of the group got away. Perp was (add description matching you) and carrying a plastic bag.

Dispatch to All Cars: Be on the lookout for a white male, 5'10", 165 lbs, dark brown short hair, wearing khakis pants and a green team jacket. Carrying as plastic bag

Now there you come along in your neatly pressed Khakis with a NY Jets jacket, dark hair, 5'11", etc. So the cops stop and check your bag and find the CDs. Is this illegal search and seizure? Not from most judges!

I'm not saying that things happened this way, but they certainly could have and it throws your illegal search defense out the window. It might also explain the other charges. It might even explain the witness changing his story:

DA: Well what did you see?
Witness: I so the cops flag down this guy, grad his bag and search through it
DA: Are you aware that a major bust of a CD conterfeiting ring took place a couple of blocks away at just that time?
Witness: Uhhh no I wasn't.

So now the witness has his doubts. Nor does anything the witness would say make your case. All he saw was the cops flag you down and search you. He has no knowledge of the reason you were flagged down. So, frankly, this witness doesn't do a thing for you if the police had a reason (as I suggested) to flag you down.

Sorry to punch holes in your case, but even a rookie prosecutor would be able to do it.

[njbgroup]

Well since it didn't happen that way it does not throw out my claim, stick to what I said. What you're saying is all speculation and hypothetical scenario. Probable cause is if the officer actually saw something illegal occurring or actually believed it be occurring, not the filing of a false police report saying fictitiuos things that never even occurred. The witness subsequently saw the police report and the 1st thing he said was you were not standing over there, and you never stopped and this and that, sorry but an eye witness would prove that the cop is a bonafide liar at many levels.

[ScottGem]

What I'm saying is that there are many ways to justify stopping someone and searching them. Little details like where you were standing or how you were walking are not going to matter to a jury. And if it comes to the word of a trained observer and police officer over a casual witness, who do you think is going to win?

Sorry dude, but I just don't think you have a case.

[Fr_Chuck]

Please understand the laws of arrest and the laws of search and seizure are not as fancy in most US courts like you see on TV on CSI shows.

If a officer is trained and experienced in certain crimes, his opinon of your behavior, noticeable object in your pocket.
Or lets say the area is known for having for sale bootleg CDs and he sees someone with some in a sack, that is cause to stop and question.

Next no one has said what was in the back back, was something else found, that caused the arrest?

[njbgroup]

Thanks...