I also appreciate Judge Ott and have the utmost respect for the bench, but my New Years wish for helpful Lawyer (or should I say lawyer who needs help) is that he/she finds a new profession or takes a job as a social worker. What a bunch of unrealistic crapola. "People who plead not guilty are often paying the court the compliment of trusting in the judge's fairness", give me a break. I realize that there might be exceptions to the rule, but most people (not some) who plead not guilty either want to find a way out of the situation or can't admit that they have done something wrong. So, hire helpful lawyers like yourself, pay them big bucks, waste the court's time, and hope the lawyer will get you off. So, if these fine upright ordinary citizens don't get there way, they harbor ill feelings toward the justice system. Well, cry me a river you bleeding heart liberals. You need to face reality dude. I understand why you are so sympathetic to your meal ticket, but what I wish for Stephen Ott is that when people walk out of his courtroom they'll always say, fair judge but he's no fool. When your wrong, he throws down on your **#.

Your comments unfortunately, are not uncommon. But the points you argue as being examples of people trying to "get by" with something, is also something we are told is part of our Rights under the U.S. Constitution. True, many people hold out and plead not guilty in hopes of beating the system, but having worked from both sides of the aisle, I can only say from my experiences, that our justice system is the very worst system ever created, except of course, for all of the others. So although, "ordinary" and "upright" citizens, might never find themselves in front of a judge, our Constitution still protects us from the power of our Government to take away our life and liberty. If the system should fail, I hope it fails on the side of liberty.

Out of curiosity, have you read anything about the Justice that these Duke University Lacrosse players are getting at the hands of an elected District Attorney in North Carolina. I guess these boys' shyster lawyers are merely grandstanding from their "bleeding liberal hearts" and can't "face the reality" of the justice that the D.A. wants to give them.

Again, please, please speak up the next time you are on a Jury Panel. Although I do not practice criminal law any longer, I would want to know what your feelings are regarding Justice. I've represented many, many guilty people, and many, many innocent as well. Merely because a Judge or DA thinks something is justice, doesn't make it so. I've helped the guilty go free, and I've seen the innocent sent up the river. Its unfortunate, but true.

I'd like to say every judge I've been in front of has been fair and impartial. But to be honest, I can't. Unfortunately, the exception is when the judge truely disassociates his true feelings from the case and instead allows the evidence and the rules of law to dictate justice. Our system is flawed, it is flawed because human beings are flawed. It is still the best system ever created, but it is by no means perfect.

(Oh, and since your identity is hidden behind a moniker, I can be a bit more arrogant. . . so I'd ask you, if everytime you notice that you are speeding on Hwy 74 or 54 or whereever, even though no police officer is around, do you immediately pull off the side of the road and call the police in order that justice can be meted out? What difference does it make if you are caught or not. Obviously you are not the type of person to try and "get by" with making the State prove your guilt.. . . unless of course you are disengenuious, which can't be true.)

I was representing this man in a drug charge in Fayette County many years ago. The ADA was spitting fire and talking about all the time he was going to give my client. I, of course, attempted to represent his interests by soliciting a plea which was more favorable. Unfortunately, my gift for gab was waining on his ears...(go figure.)

Then, I noticed a cigar on his desk. It was a big one and I thought it odd, so I asked about it. He was proud to say that he was looking forward to enjoying it later that evening with his other ADA's. I don't particularly care for cigar smoke, but I do know a few of the names and I asked what type it was.

To my surprise, he offered up that it was one of the very best. It was a true Cuban Cigar. I sat back and waited and wondered if he knew that they were illegal in the U.S.. Of course, I couldn't, so I causally brought up the fact that if my client had been found in possession of Cuban Cigars, would he be giving him the same plea offer-since Cubans were illegal.

He immediately noted his own hypocracy. Slowly and discretely, he opened the drawer, while looking at me and placed the cigar into the drawer and with some subdued tone in his voice, said that maybe we could work out something different for my client.

My point is, that Justice is not "one size fits all". Your opinion of justice may very well agree with mine, but then again, it might be far from fair. So we need a peice of paper, called the Constitution to protect the ordinary and average citizen from being held in contempt by a Judge or DA whose opinion of justice might not be truely fair or impartial.

Thats my opinion, I welcome yours.

You knowingly heard and saw another Officer of the Court admit to being in possession of an illegal substance and you did what?

Ah yes, lets use this as a bargaining chip for my client.

Not a very strict interpretation of the law.

Tell us, if it were a bag of coke of a joint would you have still "looked the other way".

Didn't you have to take some kind of oath or something that says something about holding up the law of this country.

Yes indeed, it is strange how the law works or doesn't in your case.

I guess it's a good thing that you weren't the cop that saw the city manager drinking and driving.

It just goes to prove that "every thing's legal until you get caught".

Good questions..... Richard, care to opine?

I love how others interpret ethics. I can only say that in my criminal days, barring some illegal act, I had to place the interests of my client over all others. I kissed so many rear-ends, especially prosecutors and judges, that my lips were swollen.

As an officer of the Court I have a duty first and foremost to my client. As a private citizen, well thats another matter. Again, I don't report my neighbors for speeding, nor rolling through a stop sign. And to be honest, if I were to go about "policing" the population of PTC or Fayette County, it wouldn't be for the possession of drugs. I'd be busting them for a whole lot of other things that really make a difference. (Yeah, I'm leaning very strongly to the decriminalization of drugs.)

And as to the Golf Cart DUI deal, what I would have done is unimportant, but, if I were able, I'd change the law to consider the vehicle and circumstances surrounding any DUI. If one were driving a Tracker Trailer, the legal limits for booze is much lower, presumably, because a Tractor could do a whole lot of damage if driven while drunk. But the limits are the same for a car and a Golf Cart. I think the punishment was too severe for the crime. He will always have the stigma of having a Dui on his record, and there is no difference in the books as to what kind of vehicle he was in. I knew of someone prosecuted for being DUI on a Riding lawn mower. So, yes, I'd change things if I had the power.

And if you know of any attorney that would sell out the interests of his client, so as to be able to stand proud and say he busted a ADA, then you need to find another attorney.

Ok, let us guess the punishment for DUI and a HUMMER: five years?
DUI and a cement truck: four years? DUI and a truck hauling a double-wide: three years? DUI and a new Cadillac: Zero. DUI and a 23 year old pick-up with fenders blowing in the wind: Ten years? DUI and one of those three-wheeled doodle-bugs: one day? DUI and one of the largest Mercedes made leaving the Wyndom Hotel with a police escort: Zero. It goes on.

You are begining to sound like the kind of lawyer I like. If everyone does their part, justice is served. When I hire an attorney I only ask for one thing ... "Just win baby"!

Between 50 and 60 thousand (60,000) people are killed in auto accidents each and every year. The majority of those are caused by DUI. I didn't want to get into this here in PTC due to the quantity of real drinkers that live here but it is necessary.
Lawyers will contend in court anything that you tell them is true, and even defend you if you tell them you are guilty, they check it out--you are guilty, but they will defend you anyway to keep you from being found guilty of anything. Ok you say? Ok. No!
Sorting DUI by how much damage MIGHT have been done is stupid. 50,000 get killed every year. What might the guy do when he gets home, get into his car and go gets pizza? You don't know.
What is wrong with having a drinking record if you drink too much? Drunk in public is illegal.
Cops usually take town officials, judges, lawyers, etc., home in a squad or unmarked car when they are caught drunk, driving or not, but not for our town manager, I guess. Drinking to excess is accepted in most cases except driving, and that is the problem!
It is the same as taking too many relaxation pills---exactly the same.

Dui's do alot of damage to the lives of Americans everyday. Although of the 50-65,000 people killed on our highways, alcohol contributes to about a third of that number, not the majority. Although, that is a small consolation to the 20,000 that were killed.

But again, DUI's are a strange breed of thier own. A whole set of laws have been structured around that area of the law, which is why during my practice, I'd prefer to represent a murderer than a DUI defendant. Because in Fayette, I fear DUI drivers more than I do violent offenders.

I also never represented any DUI defendant in a trial. I specifically would refuse to do so. I offered to work out the best plea possible, but I told them up front, if they want a trial, then they can take it to one of the other lawyers who practice in that area.

As to special people getting by with DUI, that may be true, but I recall a State Court Judge in Spalding being convicted and ultimately losing his job over it. A Court of Appeals judge got one a few years ago and was able to keep his job the next election cycle.

So although, special people often get special treatment, aka Ted Kennedy and his nephew Patrick Kennedy might get away with murder and multiple DUI's, most of my experiences have shown that as a rule, our police and DA's do have convictions that require them to mete out the punishment evenly and fairly. Again, I find that they can on occaision be swayed by a friend or dignitary, but overall, I have faith in the System. Otherwise, I don't know what I would do.

My momma told me a long time ago, that the person that told me life was fair, lied to me. We can try to be fair, but life just isn't always what we hope it to be. We have to have the resolve to be ethically and morally honest in our own lives and hope that others will return that honesty in kind. Regardless, if they do or don't, we still have to keep the faith, and stand ready to defend our Constitution and those that are unjustly denied its protection, whether we agree with what they did or not.

I can honestly and proudly say, that I never defended a single criminal in all my days. What I did, with I hope as much integrity as I could manage, was to defend our Constitution from any abuses that our State might attempt to play upon it. I have one client who is in jail for the remainder of his life, and justice was served. I have another who is serving 25 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. But I sleep well at night knowing I did what was required of me in making sure the Constitutional protections were respected.

The latest info I found indicated that DUI deaths had decreased since the 80s due to MADD and stricter laws, but they still acount for 41% of the driving deaths (recorded). Of course, that assumes that the police always charge all drivers who deserve to be with DUI. I know this not to be true. I suspect it is well over 50%.
About as bad a statistic is the over 300,000 people injured in car wrecks per year. Do you do personal injury?
The sympathy we have for drunk drivers, due to alcoholism being rampant, is sad. We don't show such compasion for mentally challenged or ignorant people.

"Cops usually take town officials, judges, lawyers, etc., home in a squad or unmarked car when they are caught drunk, driving or not"

I remember years ago the wife of the base commander of Andrews AFB was arrested for DUI while leaving the OC. The MP's took her to the brig and she was processed just like anyone else.

There isn't a more tight-knit group of people than that, on the planet, and no special treatment was given.

When I used to go to Virginia beach during the summer there was a standing order from that base commander that if any, and I mean any, service man or woman got caught DUI they were to be shown no special treatment. Most often the offenders were given over to the MP's. The civil authorities couldn't come close to the punishments the military could hand out.

When I was in Albuquerque I had a run-in with a drunk serviceman who answered his door with a .38 in his hand. I had knocked on his door to ask him to please turn down his TV. I returned to my apartment and called the local police as well as the night watch commander of Kirtland AFB. About 5 minuets later both the Albuquerque police and the MP's were there. As it turned out the MP's got to cart him away. When I asked the cop what the deal was with that, he replied that they, the local police, couldn’t have nearly as much fun with him as the MP's could.

Granted my stories involve the military, but the local cops and sheriffs officers I know won't play that game with the spouse or child of a fellow officer. There's just no way to keep something like that quiet.

You must be referring to members of congress.

You are either naive or wishing! It happens all of the time.
You will never find a DUI record in the base commander's wife's record. They are settled quietly and you know it.
Mostly though they don't arrest such people in the first place. Ever see a cop arresting such people or flagging them down as they leave a watering hole? They know where the parties are to be left alone.

You answered the question as I thought you might.

You answered honestly.

Good enough for me.

As for myself, I hire lawyer's to do "my" bidding. Their job is to represent me/my company, I really don't care how they win, just as long as they win.

I've often wondered what would happen to a lawyer if they told Bill Gates, "I can't do that, that's illegal".

I guess starting your own practice isn't such a bad thing.

P.S. I guess the lesson learned here is "a well connected lawyer" is just as good if not better than a "good" lawyer.