Adam Gotsis arrested

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,782
I blame you for making me see the post to which you replied.

As I read the thread, I at first thought you were replying to me.

On the bright side, it confirmed a decision I made a while back. (y)
i like the way he describes flynn and his "ilk ".

i feel that way about Duke coach.

i hope skep does not mind, but i will start referring to Duke as" the dreaded ilk". Great post!
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,148
No. It doesn't. Most plea out because it's a guaranteed lesser sentence. It's not that they are inept, it's that they are overwhelmed. There are simply not enough of them to be able to devote ample time to anything more than a basic defense unless it's extremely high profile. I've got good friend who is a public defender, and he spends very little time at home, because his case load is through the roof.
This is both true and false. PDs are overloaded, but most prosecutors are too. That's why the plea system came into being and why it remains in place. And, yes, usually the defendants taking a plea are doing it to avoid a stiffer sentence. But they are offered the plea because, in most cases, the state is ready to go to trial and there's enough evidence to convict. (I was part of a jury that was 5 minutes from being sworn in when the defendant plead out.) The system works better then it is usually portrayed; the cases that go to trial (except capital offenses) are usually ones where the evidence is equivocal. Very few of those.

To get a great view of how this works, goto:

https://kaltura.uga.edu/media/t/1_6qmhqbkc/33785631

This is the first part of Real Justice, the great Frontline on the Boston court system. Mind, this is how things work in a well-funded system. In Georgia everything is harder for both sides.
 

YJMD

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,628
My experiences with PDs has to do with mental health cases (I'm a psychiatrist). It really spans the gamut. Some were really ill-prepared, basically showing up and reviewing the chart and talking to their client minutes before the hearing but at least knowing what their role is. One guy for some reason was a huge *** to me and asked me questions about the illness a patient had (not specific to the patient) which I naively answered trying to get ammo to use against me, used his examination of me to basically offer testimony instead of ask questions, made references to my age instead of qualifications, etc. The worst example, though, was when I was a resident and just observing. It was clear that the PD didn't even review the statute relevant to the case he was representing. It was so bad that the judge did things like, "are you sure you don't want to ask the doctor about XYZ", and the PD would say "no".
 
Top