Thursday, May 24, 2007

Wilk jury deliberating...


The Miami Herald and Sun-Sentinel have stories about the Kenneth Wilk trial going to the jury. Closing arguments were heated... From the Herald:
Wilk's home had been targeted in the past by gay bashers and Wilk had been threatened over the Internet, [Defense lawyer Bill] Matthewman said.
''They're busting into a man's house, his castle, and they know he has hearing loss,'' Matthewman said.
But prosecutors contend Wilk ambushed the officers that morning, saying he was obsessed with police officers and stockpiled guns for just such a day.
Prosecutors have said Wilk repeatedly indicated he wanted to harm police officers for what he saw as unfair child-pornography charges against his partner, Jones.
''No, the defendant didn't know the day they'd come,'' prosecutor Neil Karadbil said during closing arguments. ``No, he didn't know the time, but he was ready when they did.''
Wilk has simply made up excuses for his actions, Karadbil said, criticizing the defense's contention that Wilk suffered from severe hearing loss and AIDS-related dementia.
Wilk suggested Jones use the same defense after Jones' was arrested, Karadbil said.
''He thinks he can explain away everything in the case,'' Karadbil said. ``He thinks he's the smartest man in the room, but what he is, more than anything, is a liar.''
If convicted of the murder charge, Wilk could receive the death penalty.
The panel of eight women and four men began deliberations just after 3:30 p.m. Shortly after, the jurors asked U.S. District Judge James I. Cohn for a transcript of Wilk's testimony. Cohn told jurors there was not a copy of the transcript available for them and to rely on their recollection. The jury will resume deliberations today.
The prosecution got so upset, it made a completely inappropriate remark that will be looked at very carefully by the 11th Circuit if there is a conviction. From the Sun-Sentinel:
One comment the prosecutor made caused the defense to ask for a mistrial.Kastrenakes had ridiculed the defense's experts and remarked about how they were being paid by taxpayers."Where's our tax dollars going -- to pay them?" Kastrenakes asked the jury.The defense objected. Later, when the jury was out of the courtroom, U.S. District Judge James Cohn said jurors could interpret the comment to mean that the defense was wasting jurors' money on Wilk's defense.Kastrenakes said his comment was about the "value we are getting as citizens." The defense noted that taxpayers pay for prosecution witnesses too.The judge said he had to tell jurors to ignore the comment."That is a totally improper argument and you are to disregard it," Cohn told the jury.Wilk has a constitutional right to have the court pay for expert witnesses and the way the money was spent was not an issue in the case, Cohn explained.

Exciting news!


I am excited to announce that we are the new affiliate blog of the Daily Business Review. The look and feel of the blog will remain the same (although they are planning on spiffing it up in the near future). More about this soon...

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

How to catch the bad guys...

Laurie Stein interviews Dan Fridman (here's the video and the print version), who will be returning shortly to this District as an AUSA, about a new training seminar on how to catch internet pornographers:

"Project Safe Childhood", based in South Florida, is the he first conference of its kind. It brought local, state and federal agents together to track and catch online predators.

Another SDFLA connection here -- Stein is married to Mike Tein of Lewis and Tein.

Monday, May 21, 2007

Louis Robles plea deal rejected

Judge Alan Gold refused to accept the deal agreed to by prosecutors and defense lawyers which would have resulted in Louis Robles, the 59 year old asbestos lawyer, serving 10 years in federal prison (previous coverage here). The deal also had the blessing of Tom Tew, the receiver in charge of getting victims paid.

Query -- does a federal judge have the power to reject this sort of deal? Because this is a charge bargain deal, can't the government just dismiss the other counts on its own, leaving only the ten year maximum count? I think the real question is whether the government will have the heart to do this after Judge Gold has said he will not approve the deal. If in our adversarial system of justice the prosecution believes that a deal is fair, should a judge step in? Please give your thoughts in the comments.

This is just another odd turn in this very odd case. Just last week, Judge Gold took Robles into custody because Robles' girlfriend said he was hiring a pilot to flee overseas. The government stated that they did not believe that the girlfriend was being truthful.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Round (week) one goes to...

... the prosecution or the defense?

You would expect that the first week of the Jose Padilla trial would be an overwhelming victory for the prosecution, but there has been a lot of debate about who has taken week one. The Chicago Tribune called the prosecutors "frustrated" with some of the inroads defense lawyers have made with their witnesses, most notably the training camp witness.

The Miami Herald today has two separate articles -- one by Jay Weaver saying: "Like savvy Hollywood directors, federal prosecutors opened the Jose Padilla terrorism trial in Miami with a grabber -- his alleged application to join al Qaeda."

The other by Ana Menedez, concluding: "Now the government must persuade jurors that the man who filled out his al Qaeda application as its No. 1 Slacker was really a dangerous terrorist. What emerged in week one was a slightly different picture: that of a former gang member adrift in the world. 'The Immigrant' admitted he hadn't worked in the military field and couldn't list any combat experience. From the application, he seems not so much a terrorist as the ultimate underachiever, the kind of guy who'd admit to carpentry skills, but would modestly leave blank the question asking him to list his 'intellectual abilities.' Maybe he just didn't want the job."

To get back to my theme for this trial -- This is why we need cameras in federal court. It's impossible to form your own opinion about what's really going on because we can't see it. We have to rely on newspapers which have all sorts of different opinions. Why no cameras?

And just for your enjoyment -- Slate now has this Padilla quiz. Take it.

Friday, May 18, 2007

More compelling testimony in Padilla trial

Today, a member of the "Lackawanna Six'' terrorist group testified in general about al-Qaida training camps and how one could get admitted to such a camp. Prosecutors will argue that Jose Padilla followed those procedures. This witness, however, could not link Padilla to the camps.

From the AP: Prosecutors say Goba's testimony is critical because it describes for the jury what went on at the al-Farooq camp, which the government claims Padilla attended in summer 2000. It also links the defendants to the al-Qaida terrorist group, even if indirectly.``Is it possible to just show up at one of the camps?'' asked prosecutor Brian Frazier.``No,'' Goba replied.``You had someone to help you _ someone known and trusted by al-Qaida,'' Frazier continued.``Yes,'' Goba said.But Goba said under questioning by defense lawyers that his intent was only to prepare to defend Muslims in areas where they were oppressed and persecuted, not to commit murder or other crimes. He said he never became a member of al-Qaida.``Are you now, or have you ever been, a terrorist?'' asked Padilla attorney Michael Caruso.``No,'' Goba replied.

Louis Robles taken into custody

Julie Kay breaks this story:

A federal judge has thrown disbarred Miami attorney Louis Robles back in jail after Robles' girlfriend told the court he was planning to flee the country before finalizing a criminal plea deal on charges that he stole millions from his clients. Last Thursday, U.S. District Judge Alan Gold in Miami issued an arrest warrant and ordered Robles’ $1 million bond revoked, calling him a flight risk. Robles, a nationally known Miami mass torts lawyer, was placed in federal prison May 11, days before Gold was set to decide whether to accept a plea deal for a 10-year sentence that was worked out between Robles and prosecutors.

The big question now is whether Judge Gold will accept the 10 year plea...

"Wilk ends testimony about why he killed Broward deputy"

Kenneth Wilk testified for seven days! The Sun-Sentinel reports: "At times during his testimony, the 14 jurors -- 10 women and four men -- looked intrigued. At other times, they looked bored. They are expected to start deliberating early next week."