In Session: Sidebar
April 30, 2009
Posted: 04:56 PM ET

NEW YORK - One hundred days ago, when Barack Obama took office, the country was full of high expectations. Change was afoot in America. Comparisons were made to Kennedy and FDR and, most often, to our greatest president, Lincoln. Even those who had supported his opponent were hopeful that this new young leader would get our country back on track.

President Barack Obama addresses a prime time press conference on his 100th day in office in the East Room of the White House

One hundred days sure goes by quickly doesn't it?

Here we are 100 days later and already we're asking: What has he done for me lately?

Even the president has had to admit that change in Washington comes very slowly: “I can’t just press a button and make the bankers do what it want them to do,” the new President lamented last night at a prime time press conference to mark the occasion, “I can’t just flip a switch and have Congress fall in line.”

Would that he could, but he can’t.

And just think of all he's had to face since taking office: A major recession; two wars overseas; a justice department delegitimized by its previous occupants; a health care system that has left forty-five million Americans uninsured; not to mention, getting a whole new administration up and running; and now, there's a flu pandemic.

“The typical President had two or three big problems. We’ve got seven or eight big problems,” the President pointed out.

So, while the one hundred day marker is a useful media tool - it gives us something to talk about - it is unreasonable to expect much change, in a democracy, in so short a period of time.

So, let's stop counting the days and let the man do the job he was elected to do. As President Obama himself has often said, if we don't like his performance as President, we can all go to the polls again in four years and elect someone else. Four years. That's the election cycle. Not 100 days.

Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Barack Obama • Jami Floyd • Last Word


Share this on:
Posted: 03:50 PM ET

NEW YORK - A Georgia man has been found guilty of misdemeanor stalking one day after supermodel-turned-TV host Tyra Banks delivered dramatic testimony about fearing for her safety. Despite a conviction, the judge indicated he would spare Brady Green any time behind bars. He'll be formally sentenced on June 18.

Tyra Banks

Green was arrested in March, telling police he "had a thing together" with Banks. Prosecutors said he appeared twice at the Manhattan studio where her show is filmed and sent more than a dozen roses with a note that said, "When I see you, I love you. Brady Green." One of Banks' employees claimed Green threatened to slit his throat.

Green, who took the stand during the trial, said there was nothing romantic about his feelings for Banks. His defense attorney claimed Green was just an overzealous fan and answered Banks' Web site invitation for fans to reach out to her.

While the most publicized cases of stalking involve celebrities, statistics show most victims are ex-wives and girlfriends. In a recent Justice Department study, 3.4 million people were subjected to stalking - mostly women. The report also states that 11 percent, about 374,000 people, had been stalked for five or more years. And many victims do not tell the police about being stalked because they felt it was a personal matter.

Most states have passed laws after the stalking and murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer in 1989. In Session, then Court TV, covered the trial. A first offense is usually deemed a misdemeanor and in 34 states, stalking is a felony, but only after a second offense.

Some groups believe more needs to be done. The National Center for Victims of Crime has recommended "improved and greater responses to victims, stronger legislation and greater public awareness about the crime."

-Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

Filed under: Bob Regan


Share this on:
Posted: 10:52 AM ET

NEW YORK–Larry Birkhead recently received a minor victory in his lawsuit against his former attorney, Debra Opri. Birkhead hired Opri in 2006 to represent him in a paternity suit against Anna Nicole Smith. After Smith’s death, DNA tests proved that Birkhead is the biological father of their daughter, Dannielynn, born in the Bahamas in September 2006. Opri represented Birkhead from late September 2006 until mid-March 2007.

Anna Nicole Smith's former boyfriend Larry Birkhead with former attorney Deborah Opri

In a complaint filed in June 2007 against Opri, Birkhead alleges, among other things, that Opri induced him to hire her upon false promises and representations that she had handled hundreds of family law cases. He also alleges that she “placed her own career desires and needs…over the needs, interests and desires of her own client.” Opri has filed a cross-complaint against Birkhead, alleging defamation.

During the five and a half months she represented him, Opri negotiated a contract with a NBC Universal to compensate Birkhead over $1 million in exchange for his participation in some Bravo network specials. According to Birkhead’s complaint, at least $865,000 was paid initially by NBC and deposited, without his permission, into Opri’s attorney-client trust account.

When Birkhead demanded the money, Opri paid him $200,000 and retained at least $665,000. Birkhead is suing Opri for release of the $665,000, which he says she was never entitled to possess or retain.

Soon after Opri refused Birkhead’s demand to release the $665,000, he says he fired her. This was mid-March 2007, fewer than two weeks after Smith’s Bahamian funeral. Opri promptly sent Birkhead a 40-page bill for legal services, with 82 pages of supporting documents, totaling a fee of $620,492.84. It’s easy to see how Birkhead could believe she was trying to come up with expenses and services that would total close to the $665,000 she was holding in the trust account.

The services he was asked to pay for included more than $130,000 for time spent on her cell phone, but little information was revealed about those calls. The bill Birkhead received included a monthly total number of calls at 15 minutes per call. This means Birkhead was asked to pay $475 for every four calls, since Opri’s hourly rate was $475. The bill gave no other identifying information such as the names of the persons to whom she spoke.

Other costly services on the hefty bill included time spent at Smith’s funeral on March 2, 2007, despite Birkhead’s explicit request that she not attend. Opri billed Birkhead for 10 hours of service on each of March 1 (travel from LA to the Bahamas), March 2 (attending the funeral), and March 3 (returning to LA). The invoice also reportedly included lavish dinners, car services and her husband’s laundry bill.

Opri sought to arbitrate this dispute, thereby keeping it out of the courts and, more importantly, out of the public domain. That’s the battle she recently lost. Earlier this month, a California appellate court upheld a lower court ruling stating that a September 30, 2006 agreement between her and Birkhead has no arbitration clause.

Meanwhile, the judge protected the cash in dispute by issuing a restraining order that the money in Opri’s attorney-client trust fund cannot be disposed of. The case is currently pending in Superior Court in downtown Los Angeles and will proceed to discovery in the months to come, including Opri’s sworn deposition and, perhaps, to trial.

Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

Filed under: Beth Karas • Case Updates


Share this on:
April 29, 2009
Posted: 01:48 PM ET

NEW YORK–The more things change, the more they stay the same. The Voting Rights Act became law 44 years ago; but it has been repeatedly challenged and repeatedly upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. Supreme Court

Today, it's back before the justices with a case focused on the usual suspects: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi, states with a long and ugly history of discrimination at the voting booth. But Section 5, the section of the law specifically at issue, also covers Alaska and parts of California and New York. In fact, there are a total of 16 states that are required to get approval from the Justice Department before they can change any of their statutory voting procedures.

Some of these states are actually asking the justices to uphold the law as a model of civil rights integrity and enforcement.

But, God love ‘em, Georgia and Alabama, states with the most notorious of histories, are fighting the case tooth and nail. They argue that there is no need for a law rooted in the past, a law passed 25 years ago; and they're pointing to Barack Obama as proof.

But with all due respect to the president, his election is not proof that racial discrimination is a thing of the past, at the polls or anywhere else. In Alabama, for example, voting is still polarized along racial lines; fewer than 11 percent of white voters there supported Obama. Beyond that, there are hundreds of examples - across the country - of elaborate schemes to suppress the black vote, schemes undone by the requirements of the VRA.

All of this will play out once again in the Supreme Court. But this time the arguments will be held before a new, more conservative Court, including a chief who has long expressed his opposition to the VRA.

Let's hope the majority can help the Court see its way to justice.

–Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Jami Floyd • Last Word


Share this on:
Posted: 11:35 AM ET

CAPE MAY COURTHOUSE, New Jersey–Jury selection in our next live trial, State of New Jersey v Robert Higbee, is slow but steady.

Robert Higbee

This case involves New Jersey State Trooper Robert Higbee, who was on patrol the evening of September 27, 2006 in the Cape May area of the Jersey shore. As defendant Higbee went through an intersection in pursuit of a speeder at about 10:00 p.m., two sisters were entering the intersection after buying milk for their grandmother. The result was a disastrous collision that killed 17-year-old Jacqueline Becker and 19-year-old Christina Becker.

As attorneys individually question juror after juror, most, if not all, are familiar with what happened in September 2006. All jurors have been asked to fill out a questionnaire with 34 questions. The collision is referred to as an “incident,” and jurors are asked everything from whether they are familiar with the intersection where it all happened to whether they know anyone involved in the case.

Potential jurors who have made it through to the next round include: a retired auto insurance investigator, a nurse, a man whose wife’s mother was killed in a car accident and a former auto investigator for New Jersey’s Department of Motor Vehicles.

Robert Higbee is facing 20 years in prison. He currently is suspended without pay from the New Jersey State Police pending the outcome of this case.

Opening statements in this trial are expected next week.

–Jean Casarez, In Session correspondent

Filed under: Jean Casarez • Trooper charged in deadly car crash


Share this on:
April 28, 2009
Posted: 02:06 PM ET

NEW YORK – For more than a decade, innocent people behind bars have been fighting for DNA testing.  And at every turn, it seems, prosecutors were there to stop them - denying access to the DNA material, denying the very possibility of a wrongful conviction. 

Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins is reviewing DNA cases

But we know now, hundreds of exonerations later, that mistakes are made; and slowly the tide is changing.  Prosecutors, across the country, are beginning to question the strength of their convictions. They should.  As the pace of DNA exonerations has increased in recent years, we have been faced with the disturbing truth: Our criminal justice system is broken; and it needs to be fixed.

Enter Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins.  Since 2007, his Conviction Integrity Unit has conducted a post-conviction review of more than 400 DNA cases. The unit also investigates and prosecutes old cases where evidence identifies different or additional perpetrators. That means the innocent go free and the guilty are punished.  That means justice is served.  Not as a matter of politics but as a matter of law and fact.

This special division in Dallas is the first of its kind in the United States.  Let's hope it is not the last.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Jami Floyd • Last Word


Share this on:
April 24, 2009
Posted: 02:49 PM ET

NEW YORK – Yesterday, we broadcast the verdict in the Allen Ray Andrade murder trial out of Colorado: Guilty, of a bias-motivated murder – a hate crime.

Allen Andrade

Mr. Andrade is, in no doubt, filled with hate. He admitted he killed this poor kid with his bare hands; but he said he just snapped, when he found out his new girlfriend was in fact a boyfriend.

The language in these kinds of cases is difficult. Do we use the victim’s legal name, Justin? Or the name the victim preferred: Angie? Do we say "he" because the victim was born with a penis (and still had one at the time of death); or do we say "she," as this victim self-identified? All of this complicated matters in court and distracted us from the only real issue in the case: the defendant’s state of mind.

This defendant was, and is homophobic. That much was proved in court. What was not proved was premeditation: No lying in wait. No careful procurement of the murder weapon. No effort to hide the crime or get rid of the body. This was a brutal beat down, inspired by hate and in the heat of passion.

Angie Zapata

Of course, it is never okay to hurt someone because of who they are; but, there are different degrees of murder. This was not a first degree murder case, however much we might want it to be so.

Perhaps the law should change; perhaps there is no longer room for a "heat of passion" in a civilized society. As it stands, however, the Andrade jury may have gotten it right politically; but the verdict is wrong as a matter of law.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Jami Floyd • Last Word • Transgender murder trial


Share this on:
April 23, 2009
Posted: 02:03 PM ET

NEW YORK – Happy Birthday Bill! As in Bill Shakespeare. The bard's actual date of birth isn't known for certain, but most scholars put it on April 23, 1564.

A painting of William Shakespeare which is believed to be the only authentic image of Shakespeare made during his life

So if you are among those who consider the bard the greatest writer ever, today is the day to unleash thy inner bard. Mayor Daley in Chicago has decreed it: "Talk Like Shakespeare Day" so, "screw your courage to the sticking place" and celebrate Shakespeare's birthday—with his words.

Shakespeare contributed more than 1,700 words and phrases to the English language. So all day long, you can pepper your conversation with phrases like "prithee" and "fie". Or, if you're at lunch, "pass yonder salt and pepper." If you're the boss: “come hither sirrah." Need to yell at that driver who just cut you off? "a pox on both your houses. Why settle for ‘idiot’, when you can say "thou rank fly bitten canker-blossom"? So much more satisfying.

All you lawyers out there can add weight to your arguments, start them with "methinks," "mayhaps," "in sooth" or "wherefore." And speaking of lawyers, Shakespeare didn't really want us to “kill all the lawyers”. His point was precisely the opposite: eliminate the lawyers and social unrest results. “Sweets to the sweet” has come to mean an amorous gesture. But Hamlet's mother was talking about funeral flowers. Most of the time we get it right, which is saying something four-hundred and forty-four years after the fact. It says something about the power of words: then and now.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Jami Floyd • Last Word


Share this on:
Posted: 09:17 AM ET

GREELEY, Colorado–Guilty times four. Allen Andrade stood to hear the judge read the jury’s verdict. He showed no emotion, though there were a few audible sobs in the packed gallery. After fewer than two hours, the jury of eight men and four women found him guilty of first-degree murder, bias-motivated crime, car theft and identity theft related to the brutal bludgeoning death of transgender teen Angie Zapata last July.

Allen Andrade sentenced to life in prison without parole

An hour later, Andrade was back in the courtroom, wearing bright orange jail attire, to hear the judge pronounce his sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Two days ago, jurors heard a recorded jailhouse call from last August. In it, Andrade told a former girlfriend that he could do “10, maybe 15 [years]” but that he hoped he wouldn’t get a sentence of “forever.” But that, of course, is just what he got. He will be sentenced on the remaining charges after a hearing on May 8. At that time, prosecutors will seek to add 60 years to the life sentence based on Andrade’s criminal history.

This trial was closely watched across the country, particularly by transgender advocacy groups, because it is one of the first cases to charge a bias-motivated crime of a transgender victim. The majority of states that have hate crime protections do not include transgender people within the definition of sexual orientation.

The grave of Angie Zapata

Angie Zapata, born Justin, had been living as a female for about three years before her death. Mara Keisling, Executive Director of the National Center for Transgender Equality in Washington, D.C., applauded the work of the police, prosecutors and jurors in Greeley, Colorado. “It was heartening to see that the society in Greeley got this. They understood that [Angie] was a human being. Remarkably and sadly, this was a step forward.”

The jury rejected Andrade’s defense of provocation which could have resulted in a second-degree murder conviction or less, as well as a lighter sentence. Andrade said he became enraged when he learned that the woman he met online, and then spent a few days with, was biologically male.

At the sentencing, Zapata’s mother, struggling to stay composed, told the judge: “Mr. Andrade took my baby away…But he could never take away the love and the memories.” Andrade’s sister, Christina Cruz, also spoke: “Nobody wanted to be in this position. I am very sorry.”

Family and friends visit Zapata's gravesite

Of her brother, she said there are many who love him. “He’s human too.” As Judge Kopcow pronounced sentence, he told Andrade that he hopes “he thinks every day about the violence and brutality he inflicted on a fellow human being.”

At the end of the day, Zapata’s family and friends visited her gravesite. They gathered in a large circle where they prayed, cried, laughed, told stories and promised her that she will never be forgotten. Standing at the headstone, Zapata’s mother reflected: “Right now, I cannot forgive [Andrade]. Maybe someday, in 20 or 30 years, I can forgive, but not right now.”

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

Filed under: Beth Karas • Transgender murder trial


Share this on:
April 22, 2009
Posted: 09:24 PM ET

NEW YORK–It’s Earth Day and everyone is talking green. But what are we really doing? Yes, heating costs are down, but wait until you flip on that summer AC and watch your electric bill rise.

President Barack Obama used Earth Day to announce plans to expand renewable energy resources such as wind and water power

And it's so much worse for folks without jobs. 13.2 million Americans are unemployed right now and millions more are worried about every utility bill, and their jobs, or losing them.

As it turns out, the solution for lowering our energy bills is also the way to create more jobs. It’s something called the Green Collar Economy: a plan to revitalize our neighborhoods, reduce utility bills, create jobs, stop global warming, and strengthen the economy–all at the same time.

The bottom line: we can leverage private investment to protect the environment and create jobs, with programs like energy retro-fitting for hundreds of thousands of homes. That would create real, living-wage jobs to get the work done.

But for this to happen, more Americans need to stand up and speak out. Recycling is good—but it’s not enough. So, on this Earth Day, let's all join the movement toward a Green Collar Economy, one that will put money in our pockets. It's good for us. And it's good for our planet.

–Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

Filed under: Jami Floyd • Last Word


Share this on:

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Sidebar takes you behind the scenes of the day's legal headlines with breaking news and in-depth analysis from In Session's anchors and correspondents.

Contact us
Contributors
Ashleigh Banfield
Anchor of the daily trial program Ashleigh Banfield:Open Court
Ashleigh Banfield
Jack Ford
A former prosecutor and anchor of the daily trial program Jack Ford: Courtside
Jack Ford
Jami Floyd
Former defense attorney and anchor of her own daily program Jami Floyd: Best Defense
Jami Floyd
Fred Graham
Senior Editor Fred Graham covers legal news in Washington, D.C.
Fred Graham
Jean Casarez
Attorney Jean Casarez covers trials around the country
Jean Casarez
Beth Karas
Former prosecutor Beth Karas covers trials around the country
Beth Karas
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP