Thursday, June 8, 2017

Criminal charges against Carol were not dropped yesterday, but Public Defender Patty Poe might be smart and honest enough to provide solid counsel

Carol Tovich Shuler
The bad news from Carol's court session yesterday was that the charges against her were not dismissed. The good news is that dismissal was not considered. The best news is that public defender Patty Poe made a positive impression on both Carol and me.

Carol spent maybe five minutes, at most, before the judge. Poe had filed a motion to dismiss the trespass charge against Carol, and that was the primary issue presented to Judge Margaret Holden Palmietto. Nicholas Jain, the assistant prosecuting attorney on the case, was not there -- and the young woman pinch-hitting for him said she'd not had a chance to review the motion, so Holden set a hearing on that motion for one week away, at 9 a.m. on June 14.

Here was perhaps the most interesting news of the day: Poe met with us for about 10 minutes before the hearing and said Jain had contacted her a few days ago to offer an SIS (Suspended Imposition of Sentence) in Carol's case. Poe said such offers are common in misdemeanor cases. As we understood it, an SIS means Carol would enter a guilty plea, be given a term of probation (probably a year), and if all went well during that period, the whole thing would be dropped from her record.

This is just my view -- I can't speak for Carol in a legal sense -- but hell will freeze over before Carol enters a guilty plea to the "assault on a law enforcement" charge. Poe said she had reviewed documents we had filed in the case, and she seemed to sense how we would feel on that subject.

"An SIS offer is common, and it can be a good thing for some defendants, but I wouldn't recommend it for you."

My impression was that Poe understood the Probable Cause (PC) Statement and Misdemeanor Information (MI), which contain the "evidence" against Carol, are filled with what might charitably be called "cow feces."

Poe looked at Carol and said, "You don't look like the kind of person who would 'barrel headfirst' into somebody." Poe seemed to understand that deputies had no lawful grounds to evict us or even be on our rented property that day and thought that would be an important issue to pursue.

Here is an oddity from yesterday: In Carol's previous appearance, Judge Palmietto seemed to have ants in her shorts, anxious to move things along in a hurry. But yesterday, when Carol had an attorney on board, Palmietto was the picture of calmness and seemed in no hurry for the case to reach a resolution. Our impression is that this could drag on a while -- even though Poe has made a strong case that the trespass charge should be dismissed, and we have filed documents showing that the "assault" charge is not based on probable cause and should be kicked. We'd like to get it over soon -- the prosecution simply has no case -- but it doesn't look like that's going to happen.

As for Poe, she impressed us as being cordial, professional, intelligent, honest, and (I think) trustworthy. If she also proves to be tough, enough to stand up to likely pressure from the legal tribe to get Carol to accept some form of bad settlement offer, she could be exactly what we need in a lawyer.

After 17 years of fighting corrupt lawyers, judges, and prosecutors, wouldn't it be ironic if we finally found a solid attorney in, of all places, a Missouri Public Defender's Office.


Anonymous said...

Glad to hear about some encouraging signs. The system does, indeed, move slow -- like a glacier.

Anonymous said...

Interesting news about an SIS offer. I had never heard of such a thing.

legalschnauzer said...

@7:45 --

It was a new term to me, too. I imagine tons of misdemeanor cases are resolved with SISs. Sounds like the terms can vary, but they probably are a good deal for someone who actually has committed the offense as charged. It certainly isn't a good deal for Carol.

Anonymous said...

One reason the judge wanted Carol to have a lawyer is so the prosecutor could make offers like the SIS without having to deal with Carol directly. Thankfully, it sounds like you have a PD who isn't falling for such BS, or at least isn't encouraging you to fall for such BS.

legalschnauzer said...

@8:14 --

Thanks for making a good point. I'm guessing prosecutors don't much like making offers directly to the people they are trying to screw over.

Anonymous said...

The whole purpose of Carol's arrest was to entice her into a bad "plea agreement" that would damage or ruin your civil claims. Sounds like you are onto this scam, and I hope your PD is, too. Good luck.

Anonymous said...

"You don't look like the kind of person who would 'barrel headfirst' into somebody."

I'd say Ms. Poe was right on target with that.

Anonymous said...

Sheriff Arnott and PA Dan Patterson probably don't care about this, but quite a few taxpayer dollars are being wasted on a case like this. Quite a bit was wasted on an eviction that could not take place by law. Greene County voters should remember this at election time.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:22 --

It is ironic that GOPers like Arnott and Patterson always claim they are against government waste -- except when they are involved in government waste.

Anonymous said...

Greene County can't house its prisoners, it (and Missouri) can't pay for a decent Public Defender System, and Springfield has homeless camps all over the city. But we need to conduct a bogus eviction on the Shulers, and when we break Carol's arm (whoops!), we need to arrest HER and throw away more money on a crooked prosecution.

This is GOP leadership, in action.

Anonymous said...

I hope it works out well for her and don't blame her at all for not wanting to take a deal. If she takes that deal she is agreeing that she did something wrong. If they did jump the gun on the eviction then they had no legal standing to order her to do a damn thing. They may have some liability here. Sounds like you lucked out with your court appointed attorney. If you trust her she should know what you might could do as far as filing a claim against the police for false arrest then beating the hell out of her arm to the point of breaking it. Could it have been the police themselves that called in saying they were you and then making threats? They do that so to cover their actions of beating the hell out of law abiding senior citizens everyday across this once great land .

Anonymous said...

I am glad you like your Public Defender. I hope all these charges, which just sound absurd to me end up being dropped.

legalschnauzer said...

@1:31 --

Anything's possible re: the 911 call. I just know I didn't make it, and that was their original story all along, which my brother/lawyer conveyed to me via Deputy Scott Harrison.

Anonymous said...

There are a few of us out there. The lawyers that hate other lawyers. The ones who became lawyers because of the injustice of it all. The ones who have followed your blog for years!

Anonymous said...

You are being played for a fool, which you are. How easily you're manipulated. Carol will go to jail before this is done, and you'll be to blame.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:14 --

Thanks for the comment. Would like to visit with you and/or someone like you someday. Would be refreshing, I think, after all we've been through. Might be refreshing for you, too, to share thoughts with someone who sees the system for what it really is.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:03 --

I doubt you have the brainpower to handle any questions, but I will throw a 2-3 your way, anyway:

(1) How am I being manipulated, and by whom?

(2) What makes you think Carol will wind up in jail? You think she actually committed the offenses as charged? What makes you think that?

(3) If she does, how is it my fault? What have I done to cause her to wind up in jail?

legalschnauzer said...

Memo to @12:06 --

I've never had anyone show the guts or intelligence to make such an accusation under his or her own name. You want to be the first? Contact me via phone or email, give your ID and contact information, and I will be glad to discuss with you. Otherwise, I don't address accusations from people who don't have the courage to ID themselves. If you are that big a puss, I don't care what you think.

legalschnauzer said...

Memo to @11:15 --

I see you still are too big a puss to ID yourself. No surprise there. That is your history. I haven't seen a shred of "proof" from anyone. Why don't you take your "proof" and jam it up your ass, where it belongs. You're a fraud and coward, and that's never going to change.

legalschnauzer said...

Memo to "Rick" @6:25 --

When have you identified yourself? Send your real name, contact information, address, place of employment, and photo, etc., and I will be glad to take a look at it. I don't see any such information in my records. Feel free to re-send the earlier information if you care to.

e.a.f. said...

the problem is, in my opinion, is that during that year the police can make a lot of trouble for you and you could wind up in jail, The American injustice system seems to do a lot of this plead guilty and we'll let you off, but later things like that can come to bite you in the butt. It gives you a criminal record. it is amazing that the system will spend so much money on such a small thing. I mean really even if some one had done what Carol is accused of, they are making a very big deal of it all. There is definitely an agenda here, as far as I'm concerned.

It is almost unbelievable that they use police officers to evict people. Don't they have real police work to do, like catch drug dealers, B & E. artists, etc.

What a waste of money this all is. I wish Carol all the best in her fight for justice.

legalschnauzer said...

e.a.f. --

Under the law in Missouri, and I assume other states, the landlord (or his representatives) are supposed to handle the eviction. The sheriff (usually one deputy) is to be on hand only as a presence to keep things peaceful. Nothing about our situation, however, was done according to law.