In article , Larry Jaques says...

It's a tough call. When Gideon v. Wainright was finally decided,

excuse. And poor folks get free legal representation.

Umm. You're kind of missing something here Larry.

Do you know *why* they get free legal representation?

Hint. It was all about a man named Clarence Earl Gideon who
was arrested, asked for a lawyer, and was denied representation.

He was arrested for stealing about a hundred dollars in quarters
from the Bay Harbor Poolroom in Panama City, FL.

They get free legal representation because Mr. Gideon eventually
went to washington to talk to those 9 guys in the robes.

Those 9 guys decided that maybe it's not so smart to arrest
folks, and then convict them if they don't have a lawyer.
They thought it was even dumber to try them and convict them
without a lawyer, if they couldn't read or write. The 9 guys
said that the prisoners in that catagory had to be released.

The other ones all got new trials.

Which is why in the Miranda (remember him, do you know who
*he* was) warnings they include the line "if you cannot afford
a lawyer, one will be appointed for you."

That wasn't true until Mr. Gideon made it so by petitioning
up to the USSC.

He got a new trial. He asked for a local attorney. He
was found innocent at the second trial.

I pose the same question to you Larry: should our criminal
justice system convict illiterates and incarcerate them, when
they've had no legal representation during the trial?

Would you overturn Gideon v. Wainright?

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================