Public defense, I wish I had never quit you.
]]>Am I completely insane for considering this?
]]>I have been thinking about this post for about a month and a half now and I’m still not sure exactly how to say it. Basically - I sold out. Sort of. I left the public defender’s office for private practice. BUT it is still criminal defense and my heart is still in the same place. I was not looking to leave the public defender’s office at all. But a judge, of his own accord, passed my name onto a well-known private attorney in solo practice who was looking for an associate. He offered me a job and my world was thrown into turmoil for a few weeks while I wrestled with whether I should leave my beloved job as a PD for an opportunity to do the same kind of work for a different kind of paycheck and a different kind of client. Ultimately, I decided that it was an opportunity that I should not pass up, for many reasons.
I went back yesterday and read the interview I did on Monday Musings last year. I said that I had found the job I was supposed to do, that I couldn’t shake the part of me that gravitates towards the poor. And my heart still aches to think about that. I wanted to use my skill and my soul and my position as someone lucky enough to have a phenomenal education to serve those that were not as privileged as I was. But in the last month, I have worked on cases that I was not getting the opportunity to tackle when I was a public defender, after being passed over for a position to handle superior court cases. I have already written and filed a brief with the Supreme Judicial Court. I’m getting to delve into the law more than I was before, when so much of my time was occupied with triage as a result of too many cases. I’m working longer hours, but my commute has shortened considerably and my paycheck has grown comfortably.
I do mourn the loss of the public defender camaraderie. It is not the same to be a private criminal defense attorney and I know this. There is something special about people who choose to pursue the life of a PD and I thought that I was going to be a part of that for as long as I could. But it’s been a period of a lot of changes and a lot of transitions in my life and I am embracing this particular one. I still feel like I am fighting the good fight.
I still have the urge in me to write, so stay tuned for the future of the blog. I don’t know where it is headed, but I like it being here.
]]>I thought it had all blown over and that everyone had come to their senses and focused on things that actually matter…until I read about the unbelievable obscenity trial starting in LA. The DOJ started out by threatening to bring the wrath on pin-up girls in collars and ended up with a single case involving fetish pictures so extreme as to make potential jurors nauseous.
I have a confession to make - I admittedly was not schooled thoroughly on the First Amendment and I did not even realize that the standard of “it’s not obscene if it has literary, artistic, political, or scientific value” was still in effect. I have heard tales of Supreme Court justices gathered with their clerks in a viewing room to screen porn in order to determine if it was obscene, but that was decades ago. In this age of the internet, mainstream porn stars, and pervasive sexuality, the concept of legal obscenity seems…quaint.
I actually laughed when I read about this trial, not only because it is actually happening, but because the defense is “performance art.” This brought to my mind images of shady men ducking into dark back rooms in order to ogle interpretive dance. I realize that “it’s art” has to be the defense with the legal standard being what it is, but no one is fooled by Ira Isaacs posturing himself as an artist on par with Marcel Duchamp. The guy was selling 1000 videos per month at $30 a pop - he’s a businessman who found a niche in the market and filled it quite handily. But it’s also ridiculous to counter that with the argument that child porn is a lucrative niche, but still indefensible as “art” - in the case of legit child porn, there is a victim, there is an actual person harmed by its production. No one here is arguing (as far as I am aware) that the people in these outlandish movies were participating against their will or that any actual, unconsented-to acts were committed. It’s porn. PORN. No one is sending it direct mail to schools or featuring it on the Yahoo homepage. It exists, but it’s easy to ignore. For all those reasons, I am laughing out of disgust that this is ACTUALLY an issue. There is actually a trial going on. There is actually a trial going on with its own scandal because the judge had some sexual images up on the internet.
Legal experts who had called on Kozinski to recuse himself from the Isaacs case said it wasn’t necessarily a problem that the judge had collected sexually explicit material but that he was reckless in allowing it to be discovered.
This may be my favorite part - it wasn’t that the judge was utilizing his freedom of speech or that he had questionable taste in humor (”One such item is a photo of two women seated in what appears to be a cafe with their skirts hiked up to reveal their pubic hair. Behind them is a sign reading ‘Bush for President.’” - Really?), it’s that he was too technologically-challenged to hide it. Somehow, I think it has more to do with the fact that Judge Kozinski has been a supporter of free speech issues:
]]>“When he learned that there were filters banning pornography and other materials from computers in the appeals court’s Pasadena offices, he led a successful effort to have the filters removed.
“I did some rabble-rousing about it,” Kozinski said in a brief interview last week. He said he was made aware of the issue when a law clerk researching a case was banned from accessing a gay bookstore’s website.
“I didn’t think the bureaucrats in Washington should decide what the federal judiciary should have access to,” the judge said. “I thought that was incredibly arrogant for them to decide on their own.”
Here’s a summary of what is going on in my public defender life lately -
- I have a big, big case on for trial a week from today. The stakes are high, as is my confidence (tentatively). That is perhaps what worries me most.
- I have, by far, the biggest caseload in my office. I’m the first one in, the last one to leave, and the one here alone on the weekends. It’s always been my nature to work (overly) hard and I get anxious when I have too much free time. But it may be getting to me and it may be time to reassess the situation at hand.
- With that all said, I have to get back to work. But I’m thinking of you, blog.
]]>Once I get set up over there again, I will let you know.
]]>I get paid less than $40,000 per year by the state of Massachusetts to defend the indigent full-time. There is something seriously, seriously wrong here.
]]>