Archive for February, 2012

It is unthinkable that a modern democracy would act the way that Australia did in the handling of the Schapelle Corby case. Rather than help provide evidence to the Corby defense team, the government concealed the fact that there were active criminal syndicates smuggling drugs through the baggage of Australian airports.  In an earlier post, I mentioned that there was a new documentary coming out on the subject. That documentary has been released, and is available online. The Expendable Project also released a 619-page dossier outlining the defense of Schapelle. But first lets talk about the documentary. You really can’t watch 5 minutes without getting hooked. The documentary explains that the trial of Schapelle Corby was little more than a “show” trial, and that the judge that convicted her had not acquitted a single person in over 500 cases. Additionally, the documentary explains how the Australian government was complicit by covering up the evidence that drug traffickers use tourists to unwittingly transport drugs within Australia. The documentary includes an interview with an Australian couple that also arrived in Bali with marijuana in their bags that wasn’t theirs. Unbelievably, the couple explained that when they called the Australian Consulate General, they were told to NOT report the matter to the Indonesian authorities under any circumstances, and to just get rid of the drugs as soon as possible. See the video below:

Also, the Expendable Project released a dossier of evidence proving Schapelle Corby’s innocence. The well-researched packet contains valuable facts and helpful infographics to help people understand the case. See for example, the dossier asks why anyone would want to smuggle 10 pounds of marijuana into Indonesia in the first place. The dossier cites a United Nation report showing the relative price of street drugs in different nations. In Australia, marijuana sells for $15 to $31 per gram, while in Indonesia, the same drug costs 20 to 30 cents per gram. The dossier explains that the airport security in Australia was so slack that the Australian authorities were likely scared to even discuss it because they did not want to reveal how vulnerable the nation was to terrorists attacks.

When is it appropriate for nations to try to fight for the rights of its citizens? Unfortunately, politics comes into play. When Corby was convicted, the Australians did not want to offend Indonesia which is the most populated Muslim country in the world. In the Amanda Knox case, we saw the United States slow to speak out against the injustices in the Italian criminal justice system. This was due largely to the fact that Italy is a powerful ally with troops fighting in Afghanistan.

It seems like momentum is building and more people are starting to take a look at this injustice.  What do you think about this case?

What are the dangers of looking for a DUI lawyer on the internet?

I visited the site www.1800duilaws.com, entered confidential about my "case", and the info was later circulated on the internet. I typed in something private to see if the site would keep my "story" confidential or not. (See note at bottom of post)

There are several websites that pretend to be law firms, and take all the information you give them and broadcast it all over the internet.  For example “google” the phrase “dui lawyer” in your town. Most likely you will see the website www.1800duilaws.com or one of its affiliated sites.  What happens to the confidential information that you provide the site?  I did a test to find out.  I googled the phrase “Spokane dui lawyer” and came across the site www.1800duilaws.com, and typed in some very sensitive information about my “case”.  I conducted the experiment from a coffee shop in north Spokane.  About 5 minutes after I entered the details of my “Spokane DUI case”, the comment I had entered into the site 1800duilaws.com came back to me in the form of a spam email to my law firm email account.   (I am not sure how I got on their email list, but I am sure that lawyers all over Washington received the same email.)  Basically, the site 1800duilaws.com invites lawyers to contact the person who needs a DUI lawyer, and they eventually try to sell the referrals to the lawyers.  Below is the email that I received.

The websites view DUI suspects as a commodity, and then “flip” the clients to individuals lawyers for a fee. The problem is that the site doesn’t even alert people that the information will be shared. The lawyers who receive this information aren’t even necessarily DUI lawyers. These emails are broadcast all over the state. I receive about 10 or 12 emails per week from towns and cities all over. Many of the lawyers could be friends, neighbors, or relatives of the DUI suspect, and the lawyers are under no obligation to keep the information confidential. In Washington state, it is not uncommon for a lawyer to defend DUI cases in the county district courts, but to work as a part-time prosecutor in the local city or municipal courts. I have never done this, but the bar association does allow that. It is possible that a DUI suspect could have his or her DUI case information sent directly to the city prosecutor’s email inbox.

When I conducted the experiment in north Spokane, I encountered many fake websites pretending to be DUI law firms.  One other site worth mentioning is the fictitious “Johnson Law Firm”.  This “DUI law firm” is mysteriously located at the “147 S Orange street” all over America. As we can see from the adjacent photograph, the “dui law firm” is located at 147 S Orange St in Republic, WA, Okanogan, WA, and Colville WA. It is also located at 147 S Orange St in Topeka Kansas, and also at 147 S Orange St, in Topeka, Illinois.  (Yeah, I didn’t know there was a Topeka, Illinois either.)  Basically, there are webpages for fake DUI law firms in about 40,000 American cities.  There are about 244 such dui law firms in Washington State, including a law firm at “147 S Orange St” in Addy, Northport, Tonasket, Chewelah, Brewster, Bridgeport, Springdale, Oroville, Kettle Falls, Twisp, Winthrop, Marcus, Valley, Loon Lake, Omak, Peteros, etc. All of the websites have the same street address, the same photo of “Mr. Johnson”, and the same testimonial about what a great DUI defense lawyer the guy is.

So naturally I was curious about this “law firm”, and so I called the 1-800 number. My plan was to tell them that I was on my way over to see Mr. Johnson, and I was lost, and was trying to find this 147 S Orange street address in Colville, Washington. When I called the number, the phone rang to some overseas call center, and the man who answered the phone didn’t speak the greatest English. He did seem earnest enough, so rather than give him a hard time with lots of questions, I just let him take down my contact information. I left the number for one of my tracfones. The next day I got a couple calls and emails from a bunch of lawyers, some of whom I knew.  I then revealed my real name, and told them I was just screwing around, and that they shouldn’t pay the referral fee.  The lawyers had signed up for the referrals but didn’t seem to know where exactly the referrals were coming from.  They didn’t know who Mr. Johnson was.

DUI work can be complicated, and there is a lot a person needs to know to do a DUI jury trial, or to try to suppress the breath test, or to fight to keep a person’s driver’s license.   The work is very technical, and using these sites, a person might find a skilled lawyer or they might not. The danger of these websites is that they simply refer the cases to any lawyer who is willing to pay the referral fees.

Writers Note 2/21/12:  I received a comment criticizing this post for its insensitivity to people with HIV.  I was trying to reveal how much sensitive date could be revealed here, not to make light of the situation or exploit the shock value of this health condition.  I apologize for not handling this in a more sensitive manner.  Also, I should note that the company no longer includes case “comments” in their email blast to all the lawyers.  However, the company still sends out everyone’s name and the city they are from.

Do you think you have the right to refuse a DUI breath test?  More and more, the police are obtaining search warrants for blood sample, and literally pinning people down to obtain their evidence. Every DUI lawyer is accustomed to getting the 2 a.m. call.  A client is arrested and at the jail, and wants to know whether to take the breath test. This is the standard advice that lawyers give: Take the breath test, but don’t answer any questions the officer asks.  However, in the last two years, the decision has become more complicated. Across the country, police have greater powers to take a blood sample by force.

In Washington State, the case that approves of blood tests by force was Seattle v. St. John.  In that case the Washington State Supreme Court explained that just because a suspect is told (in the Implied Consent Warnings) that he can refuse a test, doesn’t mean that the police cannot request a search warrant to compel a test of the suspects blood.  Prior to this court decision, it was thought by some that a DUI suspect could refuse a breath or blood test and the only consequence would be the suspension of the driver’s license.

Although we haven’t seen it in Washington so much, across the nation, police departments are promoting “no refusal” weekends, where everyone who refuses a blood test will simply be subjected to a blood test by search warrant.   For example, my friend Clifford Swayze, who is an Austin Texas DUI lawyer, informed me about the Texas no refusal weekends” where the police will have a judge on call, all weekend, ready to issue search warrants for blood sample at all hours of the night.  Likewise in Atlanta, Georgia, two local police agencies have developed a policy whereby all suspects who refuse a test will face a request for a search warrant.  Other states, such as Montana, have changed their DUI statutes to make it clear that judges can sign warrants for blood draws.

How does a search warrant for a blood sample work?  Well the paperwork looks much like any other search warrant.  There is an affidavit that is filled out by the police that spells out the probable cause the police have to think that a person is intoxicated.  The judge then issues the warrant.  Sometimes this paperwork is presented to the judge in person.  Other times it is done telephonically.  The officer than takes the suspect to a hospital or clinic where a phlebotomist or blood tech takes the sample.  A person can be pinned down, and the sample can be taken by force if need be.  The possibility of a blood search warrant is something that every DUI lawyer should discuss with each suspect when they call for advice.