Welcome (Again) To CourtWatch

By: Andrew Cohen
Topics: Welcome

Hello and welcome to the third (or maybe the fourth) incarnation of CourtWatch, an online column at cbsnews.com that began in the good old days, a decade ago, right after Al Gore invented the Internet, when Arlen Specter was a Republican, Al Franken was a comedian, and Susan Boyle was just a nice Scottish lady.

Today, CourtWatch moves from being a regular feature in the Opinion section of the website to being a stand-alone blog that will be updated daily (the Good Lord willing) with analysis and commentary on breaking legal news and events. We'll try to find you good links to the best law pieces around—we'll trawl through the papers and blogs to do so-- and hopefully we'll generate interesting conversations and debates about topics you care about. And if there is something you'd like to see covered by CourtWatch by all means let us know.

-Andrew Cohen

More From Andrew Cohen:

CourtWatch Columns Before Today

Andrew Cohen's Posts In Hotsheet

4 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by Gititdun November 5, 2009 8:41 AM EST: Mr. Cohen;
As you said in your Vanity Fair article:
"That we don't hear much about the vast majority of these sad cases?and certainly not before it's too late and the sentence is imposed?owes more to human nature and poor journalism than it does to the alarming level of injustice foisted upon the wrongfully convicted."

This is where I just do not get it. THE largest newspaper in the state located in the state capitol just 90 miles away and all the stores in town sell their newspapers here, yet this "court and legal reporter" claims that we are out of their coverage area and this is merely an "interesting issue".

"An interesting issue"

A judge suppressing a not guilt verdict and a prosecutor committing a felony by altering evidence is merely an interesting issue by a courts and legal reporter for the largest newspaper in the state located in the capitol.

What am I missing? The US Constitution and the written laws of the land being disregarded and violated by the courts and it is simply an "interesting issue"? His response follows.
-------------------------------------------

Thank you for the email. That is an interesting issue. Because it is in North Vernon, it is outside our coverage area. But I will keep an eye open for the results of your appeal.

================================================
Jon Murray | Courts and legal reporter | The Indianapolis Star
ph. (317) 444-2752 | f. (317) 444-8609 | jon.murray@indystar.com | www.indystar.com
------------------------

Although he will be looking for the appeal, again as you and many others have "talked" about in the media, only when it's too late.

A case that involves ALL that can be wrong as you said in your article;

"Sometimes their court-appointed lawyers are a sham."
"Sometimes their prosecutors cheat."
"Sometimes the judge in their case is just plain bad."

Court appointed attorneys who allow the state to present a baseless case with "altered" evidence and the only judge in American history to perjure himself so to suppress a not guilty verdict is merely an "interesting issue."

Charles Wilson, of the Associated Press / Indianapolis has been contacted. cdwilson@ap.org as has every television station in Indiana, Cincinnati, Louisville, as have all major networks, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN and just too many to list.

"The thousands of innocent people in our prisons are there in part because they couldn't, by dint of race or lack of sophistication or poverty, gin up any sort of public clamor about the manner in which they got there."

This basically means money and lots of it, to where one must be capable of hiring a high profile attorney with public relations ties the "average American" has not access to. Proving there is a two tiered justice system in America.

What sort "of public clamor" must one provide to expose such a blatant violation of others legal and Constitutional rights?
http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php?topic=1846.0

http://www.helpfindthemissing.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5797

http://blogs.myspace.com/persecutionofstevegilmore

What more can the "average American" do?
These sort of case persist, only, because these rogue courts know they will not be reported, until it's too late.; Reply to this comment


by Gititdun October 20, 2009 11:48 AM EDT: Mr. Cohen,
Here is the second paragraph to your Vanity Fair article. What sort of sophistication does it take to get the media to cover a case where the prosecutor ALTERED evidence and the only judge in American history is suppressing a not guilty verdict?

Besides contacting every media outlet in America over and over and over for four years what must one do to bring attention to a case where the prosecutor committed a felony, court appointed counsel does nothing and a judge violated the Constitution?

"That we don't hear much about the vast majority of these sad cases?and certainly not before it's too late and the sentence is imposed?owes more to human nature and poor journalism than it does to the alarming level of injustice foisted upon the wrongfully convicted. The thousands of innocent people in our prisons are there in part because they couldn't, by dint of race or lack of sophistication or poverty, gin up any sort of public clamor about the manner in which they got there."; Reply to this comment


by Gititdun October 18, 2009 8:22 AM EDT: Why is our national media so quick to respond to stories that involve Americans violating other countries laws or crossing borders they shouldn't, yet so slow or negate completely to report about egregious civil and Constituitonal violations of our own courts upon our citizens, unless the case is about the rich, affluient or a politician?

If the Duke case was so news worthy and Mike Nifong was disbarred for falsely accusing three young men of rape and withholding evidence, then what should happen to prosecutors to ALTERS evidence in a murder case and the judge has perjured himself so to become the only judge in American history to suppress a not guilty verdict? Can a judge be guilty of "obstruction of justice" a felony?

Also, the court appointed counsel has allowed every bit of it to happen and refuses to challange any of it.

So here is a case that encompasses every aspect of the problems you described in your V/F article.

It is also proof positive how there is justice for those who can "afford" it and the rest be damned.

http://blogs.myspace.com/persecutionofstevegilmore

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property

In part; "No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary"

pg 929 transcript / Final Instructions from judge Webster

"The question of the existence of an apparent danger and the amount of force necessary to resist force can only be determined from the stand point of the Defendant at the time and under the then existing circumstances."

pg 930
"Actual danger is not necessary to justify self defense. The question of the existence of such danger, the necessity or apparent necessity to act as well as the amount of force necessary to employ to resist the attack can only be determined from the standpoint of the accused at the time and under all the then existing circumstances. There has been evidence introduced in this case that the accused was exercising his right of self-defense."
----------------------------------------------
The judge points out in final instructions:

"There has been evidence introduced in this case that the accused was exercising his right of self-defense."

So what nullifies THE LAW?

?No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.?....

The judges own instructions disallows for any legal jeopardy of any kind what so ever, so how did this proceed to trial and WHY is he suppressing a NOT GUILTY VERDICT?; Reply to this comment


by Gititdun October 17, 2009 9:54 AM EDT: Mr Cohen,
Are you serious about;
"Judges and juries convict innocent people all the time in this country. Usually, the defendants are people of color or are disadvantaged because they are poor, ignorant, or just downright unlucky. Sometimes their court-appointed lawyers are a sham. Sometimes their prosecutors cheat. Sometimes the media helps tighten the noose. Sometimes the judge in their case is just plain bad. And sometimes jurors are prejudiced."?
Then look into this please.
http://blogs.myspace.com/persecutionofstevegilmore; Reply to this comment