http://www.exonerate.org/2006/norfolk-four-conviction-thrown-out/ Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:23:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.exonerate.org/2006/norfolk-four-conviction-thrown-out/comment-page-1/#comment-4 Rick Cadmus Sun, 24 Dec 2006 17:43:29 +0000 http://www.exonerate.org/2006/norfolk-four-conviction-thrown-out/#comment-4 I have no idea what the previous fellow just said but will say that it is a breath of fresh air in a smoke filled parlor to hear of this case finally moving forward.  I, myself have been working as an advocate for Jeff Washington who is walking the same 'path' with little resolve so far.  We will continue to plug and present the facts.  Someone will listen eventually.   http://www.freejeffwashington.org I have no idea what the previous fellow just said but will say that it is a breath of fresh air in a smoke filled parlor to hear of this case finally moving forward.  I, myself have been working as an advocate for Jeff Washington who is walking the same ‘path’ with little resolve so far.  We will continue to plug and present the facts.  Someone will listen eventually.   http://www.freejeffwashington.org

]]> http://www.exonerate.org/2006/norfolk-four-conviction-thrown-out/comment-page-1/#comment-3 Doug Wham Mon, 04 Dec 2006 23:33:15 +0000 http://www.exonerate.org/2006/norfolk-four-conviction-thrown-out/#comment-3 The letter opinion by the trial judge is worth looking at.  For such a highly publicized case, and one with such a large record, it is rather compact.  It's unwelcome see to how easily the judge tosses Ballard aside when the issue is the possible ineffectiveness of some very good and  well respected lawyers in a difficult case.  It's also a bit curious that neither defense counsel seems to have known anything about the detective's notes until just recently, even though the notes were filed with the court in some document or other back in the spring of 1999.  It's extraordinary, and rather unusual to my knowledge, for a judge to find deficient performance on a guilt issue where defense counsel were relying on information from the client.  Or, as in this case, the lack of information.  Tice apparently did not recall saying anything to his lawyers about invoking his right to silence.  Well, at least it's the right result, even if the reasons cited by the judge leave a little something to be desired.  And, naturally, innocence played no part in the habeas case. The letter opinion by the trial judge is worth looking at.  For such a highly publicized case, and one with such a large record, it is rather compact.  It’s unwelcome see to how easily the judge tosses Ballard aside when the issue is the possible ineffectiveness of some very good and  well respected lawyers in a difficult case.  It’s also a bit curious that neither defense counsel seems to have known anything about the detective’s notes until just recently, even though the notes were filed with the court in some document or other back in the spring of 1999.  It’s extraordinary, and rather unusual to my knowledge, for a judge to find deficient performance on a guilt issue where defense counsel were relying on information from the client.  Or, as in this case, the lack of information.  Tice apparently did not recall saying anything to his lawyers about invoking his right to silence.  Well, at least it’s the right result, even if the reasons cited by the judge leave a little something to be desired.  And, naturally, innocence played no part in the habeas case.

]]>