Wednesday, January 3, 2018

Lies my Missouri public defender told me: With Carol's freedom at stake in bogus "assault" case, Patty Poe cooked up some double whoppers, with cheese (Part 1)


Patty Poe
What's it like to have your own lawyer lie to you? Carol and I have a lot of experience with this question, and "infuriating" is one answer that comes to mind -- especially when you consider that your freedom or your money probably are on the line whenever you communicate with a lawyer. But here is perhaps the more important question: How can you tell your own lawyer is lying to you? According to the punch line of a classic lawyer joke, "His lips are moving" is the usual answer. While that answer can provide a satisfying belly laugh, it is short on specifics.

Being able to detect your lawyer's lies can only help you -- and your case -- if you are able to determine the specific nature of his lies and the honest version of what he is saying. In other words, it's not all that helpful just to know your lawyer is lying; you need to know how he's lying (why he's lying is another key factor) and what is the accurate information that helps you move forward.

Having just come from an experience where Missouri public defender Patty Poe lied to us repeatedly about Carol's "assault of a law enforcement officer" case, this seems like a good time to help others learn from our experiences. With that in mind, this is the first of a multi-part series about a sad truth in the American justice system: Yes, the other guy's lawyer is likely to lie -- most of us kind of expect that -- but your own lawyer is the one who really can inflict pain by lying to you.

If this sounds like an exercise in cynicism, that's because -- after 18 years of fighting injustice and being cheated by lawyers of almost every color, variety, and political stripe -- we are cynical. That's not to say we have totally given up on the notion of finding an honest lawyer. Many of the people I've stood up for here at Legal Schnauzer -- Don Siegelman, Paul Minor, Jill Simpson, Paul Benton Weeks, and others -- are people I consider honorable lawyers, attacked by the reptiles in their own profession.

While we have not been represented by an honest lawyer -- actually, I take that back; Springfield, MO, lawyer Dan Menzie did a solid job of representing us in the case where my brothers sought to have Carol and me declared wards of the state -- we hold out hope that one will enter our orbit someday. Until that happens, let's take a look at our interactions with Patty Poe in the weeks and months before she sought to withdraw from Carol's case.

We will examine a series of five emails Carol sent to Poe, along with Poe's responses to them. (Carol's five emails, and Poe's responses are embedded at the end of this post.)


(To be continued)




18 comments:

Anonymous said...

How long has Poe been a practicing lawyer?

legalschnauzer said...

@7:22 --

I think she's been at it about a year. I'd say she needs more "practice."

Anonymous said...

Are you going to bash this young woman until the end of time?

legalschnauzer said...

I'm reporting accurately on Poe's fumbling and bumbling of Carol's case, while her client was facing a possible year in jail. Since when is that "bashing"? Maybe you'll get a chance someday to see how it feels to have your "defender" lie to your face while your freedom is on the line. It isn't fun, and this abuse of taxpayer dollars needs to be exposed.

I will report on it until I feel the story is properly told -- or until the end of time, whichever comes first.

Anonymous said...

How long has this ridiculous case been hanging over Carol's head?

legalschnauzer said...

@7:43 --

It will be one year at the end of this month -- and the "victim" admits Carol did not cause physical contact, which is the central element in the statute, which has been repealed. If my memory is on target, Carol's arrest was Jan. 30, 2017. And the "victim" admits she committed no crime. All the "justice" establishment has done is "kick the can down the road" for a year.

Anonymous said...

If I'm Patty Poe, I'm getting just a bit tired of your attacks.

legalschnauzer said...

If I'm Patty Poe, and I'm honest with myself -- which she probably isn't -- I look in the mirror and say, "You know, I lied to these people over and over, I failed miserably at representing Carol, so I'm getting the public ass-kicking that I deserve. I vow never to treat another client that way again.

"If I had a hair on my fanny, I would call Carol and apologize. But being honest and human with her probably would cost me my job, so I won't go there. Still, I feel bad at how I mistreated a woman I know was abused by cops.

"I'm a sorry excuse for a human being, but I've entered a profession that pretty much forces me to be that way."

Anonymous said...

Aboard the Eliza Battle Ms Chapelle made her way to the Captain's quarters to learn the identity of the stowaway. Upon arrival the Captain informed her that the stowaway was in sickbay. Ms Chapelle asked the Captain for some background information on the Alabama Power -Canary feud. The Captain replied that a public official that RSA would reward for his assistance, had promised a road easement through his property and would receive 50 acres west of his property from the tax increment district. Alabama Power would build a transmission line on this road easement from the Martin Dam transmission line North of Auburn to a substation in southwest Auburn. Alabama Power had built the southwest substation and was building the North substation and needed the road right of way for the connecting transmission line. With the Tax Increment scheme abandoned, the public official wanted the road right of way moved to the property west of him. To appease the public official, One of the rare birds hired by RSA attempted to influence Alabama Power to obtain the ROW for the road and power line through the property west of the public official. In June 2016 the Lee County Commission voted to remove a short segment of a county road from the State Graded Inventory to prevent Alabama Power from using a alternate route. The Captain continued that Roger's Dec 5, 2017 post has a comment where the author states that he went to Trump Tower in Nov 2016 and met with Rudy to discuss documents qualifying for investigation into the Hobbs Act. Ms Chapelle inquired if Rudy was a candidate for the US Attorney General at this time. The Captain replied yes, but with Mike's friend standing beside Trump, the plan was to pick Sessions and use him to go after Clinton. Ms Chapelle asked the Captain about the letter that he had received from the IRS informing him that he had not paid his taxes. The Captain replied that the tax audit by RDS/ala tax was a Reverse Eggshell Audit. The Captain continued that the preparations of his taxes was not a concern but the chain of custody of the tax return from CPA to the actual electronic filing of the return was suspect. The Captain added that he is confident that the CPA's will discover the error and notify the IRS.

Anonymous said...

The sheriff and prosecutor cooked up these charges because they thought it would create "issue preclusion" on Carol's civil claims. No doubt about that.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:28 --

You are right on target. In fact, I'm planning a post on that very subject, and it will show that they are wrong about preclusion law. But you are absolutely right; this is all about the "P Word." And the idiots don't even know that it doesn't apply.

legalschnauzer said...

Eliza Battle:

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for keeping us posted on events aboard the good ship EB. May your travels be smooth and your journey be safe.

Anonymous said...

even if Carol were guilty as sin of trespass or pushing the officer when she was trying to get out of his grasp, it wouldn't prevent a suit for unnecessary use of force. The difficulty will,be proving her injuries were the result of unnecessary force, even proving only by a preponderance of the evidence.

Juries a very sympathetic to dangerous use of force when it is uncalled for or overdone, but also sympathetic to officers trying to stop a threat. You'll have to prove they were lying about Carol's actions and their own thoughts. You'll have to prove that there was no good reason to knock her down ( the event that probably injured her arms when she braced the fall) and that rough handcuffing was used when she was perfectly willing to be handcuffed and gave no resistance, and also that the handcuffing directly cause the break.

You have to prove the was no cause to bring her to ground and handcuff her. You've got no case about delay of care or improper treatment, they took her to the hospital in a reasonable period of time. I think any theory that she injured herself in the car is silly, but you nonetheless will have to deal with officers noting that she was thrashing around the back of the vehicle. You will also have to deal with some reports about her having an altered mental status.

Anonymous said...

Hey, the "victim", even if he's lying, alleges she pushed him. That's causing contact under the statute. even if he's in the middle of trying to handcuff her.

legalschnauzer said...

@3:23 --

You need to read the "victim's" statement more closely. He didn't say Carol pushed him; he said she did just the opposite -- she pulled away from him. He wasn't trying to handcuff her because she hadn't done anything to be handcuffed for.

legalschnauzer said...

@3:16 --

If unnecessary force didn't cause the comminuted fracture in Carol's arm, what did? You have some alternative explanation?

If the cops' stories are so strong, why aren't they turning over discovery. They haven't turned over any yet, zilch.

Anonymous said...

I agree 100 percent with 12:28, and I've written lyrics for the occasion. They don't exactly match the music, but I think you'll get the idea:

Preclusion is the word that you heard
It's got groove, it's got meaning
Preclusion is the time, is the place, is the motion
Preclusion is the way we are feeling


Thanks to Barry, Robin, and Maurice Gibb for their assistance.

Thomas S. Bean said...

I filed six South Dakota State Bar Complaints naming the usual cabal: defense lawyers colluding with prosecutors and the Judge.

None of my complaints made it to the board that reviews such complaints.

The SD State Bar Officer who vets complaints was named Thomas C. Barnett, Jr. He claimed that my complaints were from a frivolous source: me, the guy who got screwed. I appealed this arbitrary obstruction by Barnett to the SD Sup Ct (who were supposed to hear my appeal "en banc" as a group. That didn't happen. The presiding Judge Gilbertson (GOP stooge appointed by Bill Janklow who got bounced out of The US House after running down a motorcyclist because this Republican tough guy didn't like stopping at stop signs).

Of course, this obstruction didn't sit well with me...so I used the alternative media to alert the corrupt GOP corporate media at their website using a discussion forum. I posted the complaints at The Rapid City Journal online forum where Editor Peggy Sagon got interested and then ran into "The Buzzsaw" of censorship. Prior Restraint is alive and well in dakotaland...but it's practiced secretly so that the totality of my complaints were lost to any potential future jury pool: only the cops and feds and Republicans are allowed access to the media to pollute the minds of those who might want to know how their money is spent and how their "social contract" with the Gov is routinely rescinded.

News and gossip spreads fast in back stabbing, little fly over states like South Dakota...and...everyone who had a fiduciary duty to police the lawyers refused to do so. SD is considered by some, as one of the most secretive corrupt states in the country. That did surprise me initially, but...experience served as a better education than law school at USD School of Law.

I researched the canons of ethics, and usually in any act of collusion (which is explicitly prohibited) by an officer of the court, there are at least three other violations of the canons of ethics. You can go down that route if you wish....and it will be good fodder for your blog....but don't get your hopes up.