Billy Jones, the Blogging Poet, has a post that exposes for all to see how inept, lackadaisical and apathetic our local criminal justice system is.
Crime victims... be prepared to have the ball dropped, and weep.
Two of the culprits mentioned are the Simkins District Attorney's office and the magistrate's office. It seems the system is rigged to help defendants get off the hook.
Not so stunning, actually.
Joe, as you know, I learned the hard way earlier this year. I was totally thrown under the bus in the cyber-stalking case. Key aspects of the case were not investigated (the deputy involved basically mislead me about what he was doing right up until the day of trial). Motions to dismiss were made (and considered?!?) on the issue of jurisdiction (something that the magistrates and DA had six months to sort out). And key evidence, most specifically confessions online/on TV were not even presented in Court.
Mr. Martin did not win his dismissal on great lawyering - or courage in Court.
http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2010/05/when-fecund-stench-permeates-courtroom.html
Incompetent/crooked DA's are a statewide problem that our Attorney General has done NOTHING to fix - even in the wake of Nifong. I, for one, am tired of the excuses the lawyers (including Sam) make.
Related:
http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2010/07/hello-roch-hello-ed-cone-hello-john.html
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 26, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Thanks, Mary. It all depends on their level of motivation. For these people to go after criminals and seek justice, they have to WANT to do it.
Unfortunately, they DON'T want to do it.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 27, 2010 at 08:26 AM
In the case related to Mary's, I experienced similar lack of interest by those involved in the process. My options were limited to hiring an attorney to represent me in civil proceedings, an option still available, particularly if I choose to expand my complaint to include related incidents.
Let's also recall what happened to Nathan Tabor at the magistrates' office.
Posted by: Bubba | July 27, 2010 at 09:08 AM
Oh, Bubba, it was crystal clear that the Randolph County DA wanted no part of me (nothing new, of course, in terms not NOT WANTING to do their jobs) or the cyber-stalking "test case".
During pre-trial discussions with the two underling ADA's who "handled" the case (and who also led me to believe that the Sheriff's office was doing things that it wasn't), it was clear they'd rather turf it all to the civil side of the Courtroom (where Mr. Martin would not be able to take the Fifth and would have a much harder time defending his online shenanigans) - not to mention, a whole nuther another jurisdiction.
Of course, from Billy's account, changing jurisdictions isn't going to solve any problems.
And yes Bubba, a LIBEL lawsuit is a (very viable) idea that I have not yet discarded - particularly since people like Roch Smith Jr. seem bound and determined for the world to believe that I'm somehow mentally-unbalanced for the horrible/awful sin of wanting someone in a position of medical/legal oversight to do something about justice denied (nevermind the facts they haven't checked) . . . which, of course, isn't damaging AT ALL to the livelihood/reputation of a practicing physician.
I'm sick of the CRAP that's been thrown my way in this blogosphere. If Roch & Martin & company want some hoops, let 'em keep it up. I'll give them some HOOPS.
And I feel Billy's pain in dealing with a system that is clearly broken. Victims-of-crime have ZERO rights in this state.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 27, 2010 at 10:38 AM
Bubba, with respect to the Nathan Tabor situation, I was also told by someone that an option is to hire a private attorney to conduct the prosecution. A private citizen should not have to do that, of course. You are right that Tabor's situation is a bit reminiscent of Billy Jones'. As crime victims, they are not necessarily getting conscientious, competent help from those who are paid by taxpayers to do a certain job.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 27, 2010 at 11:29 AM
No, Joe, a private citizen/victim of crime should NOT have to hire an attorney to conduct a (civil or criminal) prosecution . . . especially after they've been screwed by a crime (in the case of Randolph Hospital executives, perjury) in civil court.
It's kinda been my point all along.
And there should be some kind of checks & balances in place in the system for incompetent/pandering/incoherent DA's . . . especially after the Duke Lacrosse case.
But good ole' Roy Cooper is still snoozing.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 27, 2010 at 12:33 PM
"And yes Bubba, a LIBEL lawsuit is a (very viable) idea that I have not yet discarded - particularly since people like Roch Smith Jr. seem bound and determined for the world to believe that I'm somehow mentally-unbalanced..."
To pursue libel against someone, it would have to be for something they actually wrote. I don't think that writing derogatory things about yourself and pretending that others wrote them qualifies.
Posted by: Roch101 | July 27, 2010 at 01:27 PM
Roch, huff and puff all you like. But if I decide to dance that dance - and invite you to the party, you've supplied plenty of material and lots of quotes. Nobody is going to need to "pretend".
You see, we're actually all very well-grounded in reality - and your tactics.
You've had your fun (and I'm sure it was real hoot for some in this ether). But you're on notice. You've been lax with your "facts". And malice is simply not going to be a problem to prove.
So clean up your act. I, for one (among many, I expect), am done cutting you slack.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 27, 2010 at 01:59 PM
Thanks for the link, Joe. My motivation in writing the post was twofold, 1. as part of my efforts to fight off the PTSD that I've battled since the 1970s and thought I had finally whipped until the attack brought it roaring back to life.
The second reason is to make victims aware that they can't count on the system to do what is needed.
And while I didn't mention it in my piece, I've wondered if my attacker has someone on the inside working to make things go away. But that is purely speculation and/or paranoia on my part.
Thanks -Billy
Posted by: Junkyard Bill | July 30, 2010 at 07:48 PM
With respect to your speculation about "someone on the inside", Billy, I don't think we can rule it out.
Thanks for posting about this, and I hope you are feeling better.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 30, 2010 at 07:59 PM
What did happen to Nathan Tabor?
Thanks
Posted by: Jack Hart | July 30, 2010 at 08:08 PM
If I had to guess, Jack, he's fallen into the deep, dark rabbit hole that is our justice system.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 30, 2010 at 08:45 PM
I think the case is still pending.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 30, 2010 at 09:08 PM
"Billy, I don't think we can rule it out."
Why do you willfully stoke the paranoia of your commenters? This is not the fist time. It is irresponsible, especially for one with your professional education and I question why you do it.
Posted by: Roch101 | July 31, 2010 at 09:01 AM
"It is irresponsible, especially for one with your professional education and I question why you do it."
Pot/kettle analogy was never more appropriate.
Roch is the poster child for "Irresponsible" in our local bloahgosphere.
Posted by: Bubba | July 31, 2010 at 09:14 AM
Roch, there are only two possible explanations for the scenario Billy described: incompetence, or a willful desire not to take action. You can take your pick. And if there is a willful desire not to take action, there must be a reason why. It could be sloth, or it could be corruption-- or it could be some combination of both.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 31, 2010 at 09:29 AM
Roch, we all question why you do/say the things you do here.
Joe is spot-on on his analysis of what happened to Billy.
OBTW, I'm still waiting to hear your own fascinating personal story of how you stood up for a cause and lost skin for it.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | July 31, 2010 at 09:36 AM