If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Russia Today)   News: A Kansas City man was released from prison three decades after a wrongful rape conviction. Fark: The Clerk who helped the inmate exonerate himself with DNA evidence was fired   (rt.com) divider line 42
    More: Asinine, DNA, Kansas City, DNA evidence, inmate exonerate, Innocence Project, legal representation, rape kits, Kansas City Police Department  
•       •       •

9927 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Aug 2013 at 1:15 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-01 01:22:10 PM
10 votes:
FTFA:  both the prosecutor and attorney"had a problem" with her intervention in the case

Yes, people usually have a problem with their incompetence being exposed.
2013-08-01 01:25:23 PM
8 votes:

angrycrank: I don't see how providing a copy of a successful application that is already public can in any way be considered "providing legal advice".


The legal system isn't about justice, it's about punishment. We let an innocent man go and that sort of thing is frowned upon.
2013-08-01 01:32:49 PM
7 votes:

netweavr: It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'


No it isn't.  Its analogous to a knowing someone needs information that they're legally entitled to see, and giving them a copy of that information because you know they don't have the knowledge to help themselves or the money to hire someone to do it.

She saw someone struggling against a system that was WRONG but ultimately convinced it should fark him anyway because he didn't have the education or money to fight back "properly."  It isn't like the freaking facts of his case changed, he just copied a motion filed by a lawyer this time and it immediately worked and got him out of jail.  Now because his exoneration pissed off whoever decided, "fark that guy, I put SOMEONE in jail for the crime.  it may not necessarily be the correct person, but I nailed his ass so he's staying in prison," this woman gets fired?  farking ridiculous.
2013-08-01 01:24:26 PM
7 votes:
FTFA: Buffey's case is similar to Nelson's in that the obstacles to obtain potentially exonerating DNA evidence are high. In addition to needing the requisite legal knowledge to file a proper motion with the court, a 2009 US Supreme Court ruling stated that a defendant willing to pay for a DNA test at his own expense was not entitled to do so. Chief Justice John G. Roberts said that such an allowance risked "unnecessarily overthrowing the established system of criminal justice."

So in short, justice and truth be damned if you can't invoke the proper magical incantations to appease the brokers of life and death.

Pure perversion.
2013-08-01 01:24:53 PM
6 votes:
I'm trying to understand this. The Clerk points them to a document that is a matter of public record to help them get what they need. Why is that grounds for a terminatin'?

I'd say it's more analagous to a check-in nurse saying, 'You might want to get a second opinion. Read this.'
2013-08-01 01:23:53 PM
6 votes:

netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'




It nothing like that.

It's more like a bartender seeing someone choke to death on a meatball sand which and performing the Hymlick maneuver.

This was simply a case of Lawyers defending their turf.
2013-08-01 01:27:10 PM
5 votes:

Smelly Pirate Hooker: FTFA:  both the prosecutor and attorney"had a problem" with her intervention in the case

Yes, people usually have a problem with their incompetence being exposed.


With a special emphasis on attorney/judge types. Did she do the right thing? ABSOLUTELY.
2013-08-01 01:25:46 PM
5 votes:
In other words.

1) we don't want to pay your pension

2) damnit, now we have to find out who did it again.
2013-08-01 01:22:03 PM
4 votes:
I don't see how providing a copy of a successful application that is already public can in any way be considered "providing legal advice".
2013-08-01 01:27:06 PM
3 votes:

netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'

-=-
You would not feel that way if YOU were in jail for something you did not do, you would have been thankful someone had the decency to help you... So Fark You Corporate dick suckers.
2013-08-01 01:26:08 PM
3 votes:
F*cking clerk... helping the public and all.
2013-08-01 02:30:01 PM
2 votes:

lohphat: FTFA: Buffey's case is similar to Nelson's in that the obstacles to obtain potentially exonerating DNA evidence are high. In addition to needing the requisite legal knowledge to file a proper motion with the court, a 2009 US Supreme Court ruling stated that a defendant willing to pay for a DNA test at his own expense was not entitled to do so. Chief Justice John G. Roberts said that such an allowance risked "unnecessarily overthrowing the established system of criminal justice."

So in short, justice and truth be damned if you can't invoke the proper magical incantations to appease the brokers of life and death.

Pure perversion.


As attorney and someone who has worked on appellate work for folks on death row, I award you a THIS that can be seen from space
2013-08-01 01:48:05 PM
2 votes:

netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'


I completely disagree, and I walked this particular line 100 times myself before I was a lawyer.  The clerk was asked for a public record, she was pro-active in assisting a member of the public in locating that record.  She did not tell her what to file or what to say in her own motion.  She was providing technical procedural advice not legal advice under the meaning of the law.

I ran the Pro-se information Project for a Family court just outside of DC and I was often faced with the exact same dilemma.   I was a only a paralegal (with a judge's signature stamp in my desk) so I could technically only tell people HOW to file things  not WHAT to file, so I danced this dance all  the time.  FOr example I got a series of simple standard form approved for a lot of common domestic filings and motions approved; but I was only allowed to give them out if they checked off a form requesting the documents, not if they verbally asked for them.  A chief motivator for going to law school was the fact that I would often have an attorney or two in my office and I would walk them through exactly what they needed to file and what the motion needed to say to get some sort of action from the court, but if five minutes later, a person who WASN'T an attorney came into my office, I was legally prohibited, under penalty of criminal law, from repeating those exact same words to them.

This often lead to the farce of me sending the person to the office of the volunteer attorney (when one was around-usually a freshly minted lawyer trolling for cases by doing a stint at the free advice desk) and then having that attorney call back to my office so I could tell them exactly what to say to the person I just sent there.
2013-08-01 01:34:05 PM
2 votes:
alloveralbany.com
2013-08-01 01:28:48 PM
2 votes:
she should have been allowed to finish her final 9 months ans get her pension this is a case of butthurt lawyers taking it out on a clerk.
2013-08-01 01:24:52 PM
2 votes:
Yea, if there's one thing we can't have, its innocent people being let out of prison.  Wait...what?
2013-08-01 01:22:29 PM
2 votes:

released from prison three decades after a wrongful rape conviction


I would be the bitterest bastard who ever bittered. 30 years, down the tubes.

And they should have been the good years: the guy was in prison from age 19 to age 49.
2013-08-01 01:19:57 PM
2 votes:

netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'


I bet he can sleep at night, though. Not to mention he doesn't have to avoid rooms with mirrors.
2013-08-01 03:17:58 PM
1 votes:
If I was the clerk I wouldn't care about being fired, I'd sleep soundly for the rest of my days. If I was the man falsely imprisoned I'd strongly consider going Count of Monte Cristo on the prosecutor and anyone else involved.
2013-08-01 02:53:15 PM
1 votes:

flondrix: netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'

It sounds more like the check-in nurse giving you the correct form that you didn't know you needed to fill out.


If you want to play the metaphor game, then it's the check-in nurse calling your sister and saying you needed to fill out a different form to get that Rx you wanted. Then providing a copy of the form and telling her how to modify it so the doctor will change the Rx.
2013-08-01 02:27:28 PM
1 votes:

Theaetetus: From another article on this:
Byrn fired her June 27, telling her she had violated several court rules by providing assistance to Nelson and talking about aspects of the case, even while under seal, to attorneys not involved in the matter.

The judge's dismissal letter cites numerous recorded phone conversations between Dunnell and Nelson in which they discussed Snyder's efforts, including the document she provided that Nelson used in his successful DNA motion.

That sounds like a lot more than your giving someone a standard form, Magorn.



Admittedly so, but in both cases the problem was the same: someone being denied substantial justice because they were unable to put the prayer for relief in a proper format.   We supposedly did away with that shiat way back in the bad old days of English common law when we added Courts of Equity to the Chancery Courts, and motions were no longer denied because they were bound in the wrong color of ribbon (Where the term "red tape" actually comes from).  To my mind, sustantive legal advice would have been telling her "you should file a motion to have the DNA tested"  or  "don;t take the plea bargain that was offered", not "here's an example of a motion that does what improrerly formatted motion is trying to do" . One really is offering legal advice she is unqualfied to give that may cause harm to the recipient.   the Second is merely turf-guarding by lawyers who were shown up.   This was post-conviction relief so no statutory deadline applied, so the worst that would have happened to the recipient of the advice was that their motion would be denied, again.
2013-08-01 02:21:26 PM
1 votes:
30 years? The guy should be allowed to rape whoever he wants now.
2013-08-01 02:20:27 PM
1 votes:

Englebert Slaptyback: netweavr

She kept her full pension...


Where did you see that? TFA just said she was "fired about nine months prior to her retirement after 34 years as a court employee".

I hope she does keep her pension, but whether she will is not clear.


Five days after Nelson was released, Court Administrator Jeffrey Eisenbeis took Snyder into Byrn's office near closing time and told her the prosecutor and defense attorney "had a problem" with her involvement in the case. She was suspended without pay, ordered to stay out of the courthouse unless she had permission to be there and scheduled to meet with a human resources investigator June 20.

"At first I didn't know if my pension was going to be intact, and all I could do was curl up in a fetal position and cry," said Snyder, who had been planning to retire in March. She later found out her pension would be just fine
. - better article
2013-08-01 02:15:56 PM
1 votes:
Russia Today: All the news that glorious comrade Putin has deemed fit to print.
2013-08-01 02:10:58 PM
1 votes:
From another article on this:
Byrn fired her June 27, telling her she had violated several court rules by providing assistance to Nelson and talking about aspects of the case, even while under seal, to attorneys not involved in the matter.

The judge's dismissal letter cites numerous recorded phone conversations between Dunnell and Nelson in which they discussed Snyder's efforts, including the document she provided that Nelson used in his successful DNA motion.


That sounds like a lot more than your giving someone a standard form, Magorn.
2013-08-01 02:03:16 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: I think cops and prosecutors forget their real purpose...which is to find the truth...NOT to put people in prison.  Putting the right people in prison as a result of the truth is the goal.


I'm wondering how nitpicky they got with the other motions filed.  Were they really bad, or did they chuckle and go "haha, he didn't dot that "i", let's reject his motion and see what happens!!!".  At some point, somebody files a motion asking for DNA evidence that they think clears them (because if they were guilty, they wouldn't be asking for DNA evidence that would rubber stamp their guilt), you get the guy a pro-bono lawyer and help him out.

Firing the clerk is beyond evil.  I think they were just looking for a reason to not pay retirement benefits, whatever she had.   Regardless, it is an example in this country how suit-wearing people in power seem content with ruining the lives of ordinary Americans without batting an eye.  So incredibly sad.
2013-08-01 01:52:10 PM
1 votes:

Smelly Pirate Hooker: FTFA:  both the prosecutor and attorney"had a problem" with her intervention in the case

Yes, people usually have a problem with their incompetence being exposed.


How were they incompetent? DA presented the case based on the victim identifying the suspect by picture and voice. Jury convicted him. Yes we know now he was innocent (of that particular crime) but at the time DNA testing was not available, victim id'ed the suspect and the jury weighed the evidence and convicted him. It seems the incompetence was with his own attorney who said he would present evidence that the accused was with family members at the time of the crime. However, he never presented anything at the trial.

This suspect was easy to locate. He was already in jail for 2 robberies and another rape charge.

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/pages/casedetail.aspx?c as eid=4201
2013-08-01 01:50:04 PM
1 votes:
I think cops and prosecutors forget their real purpose...which is to find the truth...NOT to put people in prison.  Putting the right people in prison as a result of the truth is the goal.
2013-08-01 01:49:33 PM
1 votes:

netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'


Yeah, that is stupid.

Changing the Rx would be like changing the sentence.
She is a public servant.  The records were public record. Someone should never be punished for doing a little extra in their job to help out.
2013-08-01 01:48:49 PM
1 votes:
The people responsible for sacking the woman who has just been sacked should be sacked.
2013-08-01 01:44:54 PM
1 votes:

RembrandtQEinstein: And the best part is the guy can't sue the prosecutor or the arresting officer because of immunity laws. So he only has one option left to truly get justice.

If I were the prosecutor and arresting officer and possibly the judge I would be spending a lot of time looking over my shoulder.

After all he already did 30 years what does it matter if he does the rest of his life after wrecking the shiat of the people who wrongfully put him there. If I were on the jury for that case


Or: just follow them around until they turned to you, shoot them dead, then explain to the cops that since you knew from direct experience what they were willing to do to you for no reason at all, you were standing your ground.
2013-08-01 01:42:25 PM
1 votes:
And the best part is the guy can't sue the prosecutor or the arresting officer because of immunity laws. So he only has one option left to truly get justice.

If I were the prosecutor and arresting officer and possibly the judge I would be spending a lot of time looking over my shoulder.

After all he already did 30 years what does it matter if he does the rest of his life after wrecking the shiat of the people who wrongfully put him there. If I were on the jury for that case
2013-08-01 01:42:24 PM
1 votes:

Wile_E_Canuck: I'd say it's more analagous to a check-in nurse saying, 'You might want to get a second opinion. Read this.'


She wasn't changing what he was trying to do, just show him how to do it correctly.  Our check-in nurse gave him a hospital map after he couldn't find the doctor's office by himself
2013-08-01 01:41:31 PM
1 votes:
Knew the man was seeking a motion for DNA testing. Knew the man was denied the motion twice. Knew this was due to his lack of ability to prepare a case. Knew of other motions for DNA testing which had been successful. Frankly, if you had this type of knowledge and did nothing, I would say this would have been a subversion of justice. This is not an opinion on his motion itself but the barest legal aid with no presumption of success.
2013-08-01 01:38:23 PM
1 votes:

Weaver95: angrycrank: I don't see how providing a copy of a successful application that is already public can in any way be considered "providing legal advice".

The legal system isn't about justice, it's about punishment. We let an innocent man go and that sort of thing is frowned upon.


Scalia has stated that as long as no intentional maleficence was committed, it is completely proper for a prisoner to be executed, even if we know 100% that he is innocent. So not just "don't let an innocent man go free", but actively seek to kill him, knowing he is innocent.
2013-08-01 01:37:57 PM
1 votes:
Dare thee not to contravene the judgement and will of your "betters".

Day by day our civilization is becoming this:

l3.yimg.com
2013-08-01 01:35:50 PM
1 votes:

Englebert Slaptyback: released from prison three decades after a wrongful rape conviction


I would be the bitterest bastard who ever bittered. 30 years, down the tubes.

And they should have been the good years: the guy was in prison from age 19 to age 49.


If he had earned an average of $50k per year during those years that comes up to $1.5 million. I should think the state owes him that as a minimum for his lost earning potential.  Then there would be the compensation he should receive for lost liberty (I would think that should be a much higher number).  Then there should be compensation for pain and suffering (again a large number). Finally, the state should face punitive damages (also a high number).

I think the state would be fortunate to get off with only a $10 Million payout.

The court clerk should also get a handsome improper temmination settlement.
2013-08-01 01:31:15 PM
1 votes:

netweavr: It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'


No, it is analogous to a nurse explaining to a patient where the button on the intercom was - and then the doctor and head nurse (judge and DA) firing the nurse because they were getting their jollies off from the screams.
2013-08-01 01:28:24 PM
1 votes:
Once convicted you have no right to evidence that can clearly show your innocence. Link
2013-08-01 01:27:43 PM
1 votes:

Englebert Slaptyback: released from prison three decades after a wrongful rape conviction


I would be the bitterest bastard who ever bittered. 30 years, down the tubes.

And they should have been the good years: the guy was in prison from age 19 to age 49.


Hopefully he get's compensation for the time lost, hopefully he'll get enough to retire to a beach-front home somewhere

/Nah, who am I kidding? Kansas will fight tooth-and-nail to not pay him a cent for their blundering
2013-08-01 01:27:34 PM
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: netweavr: The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'

Why?



Because The Process is more important than any other consideration (be it a life wasted in prison, or a life ended due to a medication error).

Better for to waste any number of innocent lives than to violate The Process.
2013-08-01 01:18:39 PM
1 votes:
The Clerk should be fired.

The inmates attorney should probably be disbarred as well, but the Clerk cannot take that kind of proactive action...

It's analogous to a check-in nurse changing your Rx. Sure, he/she may be 100% correct, but it's still cause for a terminatin'
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report