The Chauvin third rail
The Minnesota Supreme Court has denied Derek Chauvin the right to a public defender for his appeal. They say he’s not poor enough, or at least has not successfully proven that he’s poor enough, but he sounds pretty poor to me:
The chief justice wrote in the order, citing state law, that a defendant is considered too poor to provide their own lawyer if they, “through any combination of liquid assets and current income,” are not able to finance their own attorney.
The former police officer claimed in an affidavit that he has no earnings other than nominal prison wages he has received, according to The Associated Press. He contended that his debts are larger than his assets.
Chauvin also said he does not currently have legal representation for his appeal.
Note that last sentence. It could be that no one has volunteered yet, pending this decision. Or it could be that no one wants to touch the Chauvin third rail, and so no one will be volunteering and no organization will be willing to foot the bill.
I can’t think of a defendant recently who’s been more demonized than Chauvin (Weinstein’s probably next in line but not even really close, and he has managed to find counsel and had the money to pay for it). In the past in the US, all defendants have been entitled to a lawyer, and even the left used to say that. No more. Now, as in other banana republics (I contend we have already become one or are well on our way to that or worse), lawyers are targeted and afraid. In fact, in the Chauvin case, even witnesses for the defense were threatened and intimidated.
It seems to me that if Chauvin doesn’t get a lawyer for his appeal, this would be a good case for SCOTUS. They may also be too scared to take it, though – and who would handle the appeal process for getting there, anyway?
No-one should imagine that SCOTUS, clearly fearful of the consequences of adjudicating the numerous irregularities and the obviously fraudulent elements of last November’s election (to many rational observers, neither “free nor fair”), will ever be willing, under any circumstances, to consider the case of the evil white racist cop who murdered the blessed martyr Floyd, a sculpture of whom, recently defaced, adorns NYC’s Union Square, famously friendly, over many decades, to criminals and radicals.
It would have to be an out-of-state lawyer. No local attorney wants the hassle. When you have the state attorney general, the county attorney and the Justice Department lined up, with unlimited resources . . . .
And that doesn’t include “activists” stalking you, your spouse, and your kids.
The cruelty of the Left knows no bounds.
We are not cruel enough to ever defeat them.
At “Power Line,” Scott Johnson has issued two lengthy pleas for a lawyer to represent Chauvin during his appeal. So far, there have been no takers.
In one of these posts, Scott Johnson wrote that he’s retired from the practice of law, implying that he’s not available for Chauvin’s defense.
In addition to all the leftist intimidation issues, there is apparently a real problem with finding a lawyer who specializes in Minnesota appellate court practice. I’ve read that there aren’t many such people. And it looks as if there isn’t one who wants to take a case that would probably end his career, and possibly his life.
Calling this a banana republic is too polite. What’s really happened is that our criminal justice system has been taken over by murderous leftist thugs.
If the Left thinks nobody notices this, they are wrong. If they were smarter, they would see that he got counsel; just not very good counsel; somebody who could tank things through lack of the imagination and passion and persistence needed to make a difference in a very tough case.
If the Left did that, or rather just let it be done, Chauvin would sink without much of a ripple. But this? Turns him into a martyr.
In one of these posts, Scott Johnson wrote that he’s retired from the practice of law, implying that he’s not available for Chauvin’s defense.
I think Johnson and Hinderaker worked for a bank. Not quite up their alley.
there is apparently a real problem with finding a lawyer who specializes in Minnesota appellate court practice
Then how do the appellate courts manage to stay in business? And how often do you encounter a lawyer who just does appeals?
The notion that he does not qualify for a public defender is absurd, like everything else about this case. Viciously absurd.
Art Deco:
I don’t think there’s a lack of appellate attorneys, although it is a specialty. I think there’s a lack of appellate attorneys who are not on the left, and who are willing to take this case.
I seem to recall that Chauvin’s original defense team was funded by some sort of police association, and was a budget deal. I believe his case suffered from that.
Reminds me of the difference between the “socially hostile” and “socially friendly” prisoners in Gulag.
The “socially friendly” prisoners were the criminals, typically Russian mafia types. They were given preferential treatment, put in charge of camp industries or other prisoners, with all the consequences you could predict, including free rein to rob and molest as they saw fit.
The “socially hostile” prisoners were those convicted of ideological crimes (many of them falsely convicted Communists who’d made enemies in some way, possibly by having a nicer apartment than their informer).
Celebrity lawyers on the Left will line up to represent terrorists or traitors or notorious drug dealers for free; these are the “socially friendly”…
How about Paul Mirengoff ? Is he not still practicing (in between jetting to Europe to watch soccer matches) ?
Despite their interesting blog and excellent links – the Powerline guys are a very timid bunch. In the run up to Chauvin’s trial, Johnson clearly subscribed to the notion that Chauvin was not only innocent – but was an honorable, experienced cop. As soon as Johnson took his seat in the court room, he took in the general mood and suddenly decided Chauvin was guilty of a misdemeanor. That became Hinderaker’s view as well. Disgraceful.
Neo:
I don’t understand what you mean by “was a budget deal.”
You mean it was done on the cheap?
F:
I mean they had a limited budget. The prosecution, on the other hand, had huge resources.
How about Paul Mirengoff ? Is he not still practicing (in between jetting to Europe to watch soccer matches) ?
Mirengoff lives in Washington. I doubt he’s ever been admitted in Minnesota.
I think there’s a lack of appellate attorneys who are not on the left, and who are willing to take this case.
That’s just another item in the bill of particulars contra the Minnesota bar.
1. I’m right now writing a Nebraska Supreme Court brief. There are very few lawyers that just work on appeals only. I know just 2 in Omaha. If you are a litigator, you write briefs.
2. Lawyers from other states can be admitted to MN for this case alone.
3. Criminal law is very complex and different from civil law. I’d never touch a criminal case.
4. I contacted a semi-famous appellate lawyer/law professor who does criminal law and has ties to NE. In fact, he got sent to federal prison for robbing banks in NE. I asked him to take the appeal. No response.
Chauvin is a designated victim for the left to punish for the sins of “systemic racism.” When you see cops “going fetal” as Second City Cop calls it, think of Chauvin.
Where are the wealthy, close to retirement, conservative lawyers? Is there not even one who places justice above the mob’s revenge? Who refuses to be intimidated by political power?
If none, we truly have become a banana republic.
“The cruelty of the Left knows no bounds. We are not cruel enough to ever defeat them.” Jeanne
Speak for yourself. They have declared war upon us and, “War is hell. You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it. Those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out.” William Tecumseh Sherman
@GB:
Well said!
GB: I’d like to agree. If I were 10 years younger, I would. Age, and a major surgery coming up don’t allow me the luxury of visiting war on the bastards. Good luck to you, though.
Neo: “It seems to me that if Chauvin doesn’t get a lawyer for his appeal, this would be a good case for SCOTUS. They may also be too scared to take it, though.”
In my mind, his case is a classic case as to why every defendant deserves a legal defense. He was railroaded by the media and those in power. Without a reasonable defense his case’s outcome was predetermined.
If the US supreme court does NOT take it the they are basically saying that this type of “kangaroo” trial is okay. (and, I agree, they may be too scared to take it)
Morality aside, why obey laws if you are going to found guilty or not guilty by whim of public outcry or public sympathy? It truly will be a justice system that supports those who are considered “more favorable” and not support those who are considered “less favorable.” What kind of justice is that? The good guys will lose while those without a moral compass will run over everyone else.
I see in the Star Tribune today that Chauvin will not be allowed to make oral arguments to the state appeals court unless he hires a lawyer. He has already raised 14 issues in a written brief.
According to the Strib, Chauvin has two retirement accounts. But he says if he draws funds from them the state and feds will seize most of it for taxes.
Hmmm…wonder what Orlando Wonder Lawyer Cheney Mason is up to lately? He had no problem jumping into the Casey Anthony case. All in the name of justice and The Law and such, you understand. And IMNSHO he was right to do so but seems this is a much, much greater travesty of Justice. Where the Great Defender of Truth and Justice now? Someone turn on the Bat Signal.
Why is there no modern day William Kunstler for political prisoners like Chauvin and the Jan 6 prisoners?
Why is there no modern day William Kunstler for political prisoners like Chauvin and the Jan 6 prisoners?
They’re never was any such person. Maybe Glenn Greenwald in his younger years. Kuntsler, Leonard Boudin, Vincent and Terrence Hallinan, Emmanual Bloch, Tony Serra, Charles Garry were advocates for the red haze and / or their favorites from among the criminal class. Messrs. Chauvin and Rittenhouse are in neither category.
I seem to recall that ca. 2003 there was quite a corps of young BigLaw associates knocking each other over to provide pro bono services to Gitmo detainees. And yet here is Chauvin without a lawyer and unable to appeal. You wanna share a country with those BigLaw associates? Me neither.
Twenty years ago an ambitious really smart defense attorney would have taken Chauvin’s case. Now, however, there is the very real possibility that a mob will show up at your house with the approval of the local municipality and the cops nowhere in sight. It’s no wonder no attorney is interested in the appeal process.
The only way to stop the madness is to stop voting for Democrats!
We now know of what the Democrats are capable. My long held strategy of voting for the lesser of two evils will stop our slide into chaos.
“Now, however, there is the very real possibility that a mob will show up at your house with the approval of the local municipality and the cops nowhere in sight. It’s no wonder no attorney is interested in the appeal process.”
Because the lawyers approve of that mob as much as the defund cops movement. They’ll deny it but proof is in the lack of actions. As for the conservative…”conservative” lawyers being too old, as I recall Kunstler did that sort of work well into old age. F. Lee Bailey and others as well. Not that I know his politics but where’s that cowboy hat lawyer who defended Weaver about Ruby Ridge? Brave, brave man. He told us so.
Dershowitz?
A Fentanyl-induced progressive condition. A premature exit from the police vehicle. A suspect in a different weight class. A benign position to restrict self-harm and collateral damage. A mob, assembled, that prevents timely access.
A disorderedly conduct. A suspect of the opposite sex in a different weight class. An unarmed woman shot and killed in a prone position. A hero of Democratsy.
A security detail denied. An uprising that never happened. A probable Whitmer-closet. More than three trimesters, and hundreds of citizens in isolation.
Parents, mom and dad, in social justice’s sights.
Hmm, and people hesitate to follow.
All’s fair in lust and abortion, I suppose.
The cruelty of the Left knows no bounds.
We are not cruel enough to ever defeat them.
Oh, some of us very much are. We’re just waiting for people to get sick enough of their shit to give us the go-ahead.
The left are BULLIES. you stomp on them, and show that you are unafraid of their bullshit, they will curl into a whimpering ball in double-short time.
.
.
}}} The only way to stop the madness is to stop voting for Democrats!
The real problem is, we may have, already… There is certainly some evidence to support that.
>:-/
Cornhead: “I contacted a semi-famous appellate lawyer/law professor who does criminal law and has ties to NE. In fact, he got sent to federal prison for robbing banks in NE. I asked him to take the appeal. No response.”
Shon Hopwood, I presume. Did eleven years in federal prison. He has a wife and two kids and a very nice life now, including a professor billet at Georgetown Law. Not surprised you didn’t get a response. He’s got a lot to lose and he knows what losing it means. Not many people up for doing the “our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor” thing anymore.