Tricking a Defendant Into Making Statements About the Alleged Offense

[cdwjava]

Why do you think your attorney is doing a terrible job? Do you assume that your expensive lawyer should get the charges dropped, and because they have not been that he is falling down on the job? Understand that MOST attorneys cannot get the charges dismissed against their employees and that the best they can generally hope for is a plea deal to minimize the penalties.

And "witness tampering" is when someone induces or coerces a witness to change their testimony, make a false statement, or discourage them from making a statement or testifying as to the truth of a matter (or something similar). It does NOT include baiting a suspect into incriminating himself or making a statement against his own interests. Unless the suspect was threatened or otherwise induced to make a false statement the suspect may well have to live with the ramifications of whatever statement he made.

[Junior1]

Why do you think your attorney is doing a terrible job? Do you assume that your expensive lawyer should get the charges dropped, and because they have not been that he is falling down on the job? Understand that MOST attorneys cannot get the charges dismissed against their employees and that the best they can generally hope for is a plea deal to minimize the penalties.

And "witness tampering" is when someone induces or coerces a witness to change their testimony, make a false statement, or discourage them from making a statement or testifying as to the truth of a matter (or something similar). It does NOT include baiting a suspect into incriminating himself or making a statement against his own interests. Unless the suspect was threatened or otherwise induced to make a false statement the suspect may well have to live with the ramifications of whatever statement he made.

I believe the attorney is doing a terrible job for multiple reasons. Trying to talk me into a deal before the victims deposition for one. Not asking questions to the officer when the officer is a witness and was subpoena for a deposition. For not telling me the true definition of a persistent domestic violence offender, or not addressing it's added to my charge for no reason. I can tell when I'm on the phone with her she knows nothing about my case, or the facts. I'm pending a robbery charge of "forcibly making the victim add my name to the title" and she has yet talked to my cousin, the owner of the dealership where we bought the car from that could testify in knowing we bought the truck together, or at least got a statement from him. Not addressing that the states facts presented show no viable evidence to support the charges when I have never been accused of anything of the sort. This isn't even a fraction.

Here's another annoying instance. My lawyer told me someone else was going to be filling in for her at my next court date several months back. The plan me and my lawyer had for the next court date was that she was going to request the victim come for a deposition. The morning of my court date, I received a call from my lawyers office stating that the fill in lawyer had called and said it was not necessary for me to show up to court that day. The office couldn't tell me why. I showed up to court anyway. The fill in lawyer told me that today we would be waiving the preliminary hearing. I told him I did not like that idea and it was not what me and my real lawyer had discussed in the weeks prior. The fill in lawyer said "I don't really know what you're game plan was" I didn't know how to respond to this other than "What do you mean you don't know what our game plan was....... you're the one here representing me today!!!" Then I told the fill in lawyer I was already upset that I received a phone call from his office stating that he told them I didn't have to show up" The fill in lawyer laughed and said, "Oh, you had to show up today or you would have had a warrant". " I once again flabbergasted said then why in the crap didn't your office call telling me I didn't have to come today, that's not cool at all" The fill in lawyer laughs and says I don't really care if you think it's cool or not and walks away........

[tc498]

A lawyer knows best,a lot of times it's good to have preliminary hearing b.c the defense can size up the evidence the DA has. Your current lawyer may know what they are doing but for your own piece of mind get 2-3 more 2nd options. It would suck if down the line your are 2nd guessing what could of been. The judge and da might be strict and the case maybe stronger then you figured,so a plea could be a good deal.

[adjusterjack]

I suggest you hire yourself another lawyer.

[cdwjava]

If you do not like your lawyer, you have the absolute right to fire him and hire one that will do what you want or will at least do a better job of explaining their actions to you. You'll probably be paying for each and every call and question, but, you have that right.

[cbg]

The problem is that SO MANY defendants, who have not gone to law school, do not know the laws or procedures and are clueless as to how the process actually works, assume that a lawyer is doing a poor job because the lawyer isn't doing what the defendant wants - whereas doing what the defendant wants would screw up or kill his case. Your other thread makes clear that you don't have the first idea what is and is not admissible. Your lawyer does.

[Junior1]

The problem is that SO MANY defendants, who have not gone to law school, do not know the laws or procedures and are clueless as to how the process actually works, assume that a lawyer is doing a poor job because the lawyer isn't doing what the defendant wants - whereas doing what the defendant wants would screw up or kill his case. Your other thread makes clear that you don't have the first idea what is and is not admissible. Your lawyer does.

Well agree to disagree. Although I may not know everything, it's not that hard to see that my lawyer is not doing everything that she could.

[cbg]

And of course, you know exactly what the court has allowed or what is permissible by the laws of evidence...NOT.

[cdwjava]

And of course, you know exactly what the court has allowed or what is permissible by the laws of evidence...NOT.

Then fire him or her.

But, I'd wager to guess that you do NOT know the rules of court, the laws of evidence, how to file a motion, etc. Much of what most defendants (clients) want to do is neither admissible nor advisable. All because you think it might make sense to do so something doesn't mean that it is sensible or even possible. But, if you think your attorney is not serving your interests you do NOT have to keep him.

[free9man]

It may work out to be cheaper to find new counsel now, rather than having to find new counsel to try an appeal based on your belief your current counsel is ineffective.