"And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God"
-- Micah 6:8

"The duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict."
-- American Bar Association Standard 3-1.2(c)

"There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
--Pope Benedict XVI, June 2004

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Lammers Converts

I have to interupt our previously scheduled posting to announce that Ken Lammers of Crim Law fame and a frequent courtroom opponent of mine, is trading in this:

for this---->

Yes, that's right.... Ken is leaving the dark side and joining the forces of goodness, justice, and order. In fact, he's taking a job with another prominent blogger as a Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney.

In all seriousness, Ken will be a great prosecutor, because he is a fine lawyer, and has the prime requisite for being a great prosecutor: a good amount of common sense. I suspect that with his defense experience, he will have an excellent grasp on the worth of a case, and also an understanding for what the defense attorneys he faces deal with, whether it's unreasonable clients, nutty client relatives, etc.

We'll miss him around here; I think I've tried more juries with him than with any other single defense attorney. But our loss is definitely Wise County, Virginia's gain.


Anonymous said...

This should show the lay people that read your blog, that no matter what “hat” lawyers wears, we will still be determining their fate. The question of whether we are a prosecutor, defender, judge, or whatever is a largely a matter of petty personal preference (or perhaps money) and not ideology. It is quite a shame that the lay people equate prosecutors with “good” when, after all, it is just a job. (Of course, there are “good” prosecutors, and “moral” people, but that has little to do with the job they do.)

[As a practical matter, most people go the other way, as an attorney who has made their mistakes working for a DA is more sought after in private practice.]

faithmy said...

Anon--you should really try to get out of your mothers basement and learn to interact with real people occasionally. Tom was being gracious and you come around with your usual crap. Very classy.

Anonymous said...

It isn’t a matter of “grace.” We all wish Ken well. It is a matter of understanding that putting people in jail, or helping them avoid jail are virtually interchangeable roles, and lay people need to understand that, at best, this is just a game to us.

Anonymous said...

Tom, I think Ken is trading a grey hat for, another grey hat. Whether he makes it less grey (that is, white) depends on how he actually manages to conduct himself. It isn’t all his choice. The office might be very black. It might be translucent (that is, transparent). Whatever the case, nobody has a monopoly on morals.

pattypoo said...

Anon--you still cant stop being a twit. Your parents should be ashamed of you. Thank goodness you are too cowardly to sign your name and shame them further.

Anonymous said...

Patty, You did not respond to any of the arguments. Indeed, there are a number of difficult natural law v. positivist issues floating around in the commentary on Mr. Lammer’s defection. You don’t seem to care. Instead, you insult. Granted, you didn’t go to law school, but you need to understand that you fare will be decided by lawyers.

I know that some will state the jury system is a bulwark against lawyer control of an individual’s fate. However, jurors will only know as much as lawyers tell them. Indeed, even if a juror has an innate sense of morals (doubtful in a non-lawyer), they will only be evoked upon a entreaty by a non-lawyer.

Moreover, the viability of the jury system to try people such as yourself is also in question. Some have argued (and I think that Tom agrees, because his boss filed an amicus brief to this point, and he has made similar arguments on here) that if lawyers determine that you are a threat to national security then you can be detained indefinitely without even the formality of arguments made to a jury.

Have a nice day, and look out for ninjas!

faithmy said...

Dont worry Pattypoo--anon thinks everyone who disagrees with him must be a "lay man" (whatever that means)

"but you need to understand that you fare will be decided by lawyers."--and what the foo does this mean? Anon is on more ludes than usual today. Poor, dumb bastard.

Anonymous said...

Ninjas don't exist.

Anonymous said...

Tom and Ken and I disagree, and they are not lay people. There is room for disagreement, but I don’t see how disagreeing with a lay person is a constructive use of anyone’s time. The “ask a ninja” guy say that ninjas are real, but I am not so sure. Whatever the case, all of us, as Americans, should be on alert for ninjas, because, like terrorists, they have no respect for our laws and can not only blend in with Americans, but with trees and bushes, too.