Appeals Court rules that defendant DOES NOT have a right to a court appointed attorney Posted: 3 months ago by tigertony
Of course, the fact that he beat up the first attorney that was appointed 'may' have had some bearing on the decision.
Comments: 6 Score: [-] 281 [+].
< 1 >
Posted: 3 months ago by coldbladed:
He does have a right to a court appointed attorney. To say otherwise is rediculous. Just make sure he's strapped down Hannibal style from now on.
Score: [-] 57 [+].
Posted: 3 months ago by Maven:
He had one...I don't think there's any requirement that he get more than one because he freakedd out and beat the first one up.
Score: [-] 67 [+].
Posted: 3 months ago by coldbladed:
Its too bad actually. With a better temperament he looks like he'd make a great Santa.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 3 months ago by PulsisX:
« coldbladed : Its too bad actually. With a better temperament he looks like he'd make a great Santa. Actually it seems he has returned to the natural feral state of Santa. (link NSFW)
Score: [-] 21 [+].
Posted: 3 months ago by ol1inch:
I love the line "a defendant gives up his right to a court-appointed lawyer when he beats up the one he has".
I wonder where it is their legal system that says that.
LOL
Score: [-] 57 [+].
Posted: 3 months ago by digitalgimpling:
pfft, he botched his own defense when he beat up his attorney in front of the jury for his ASSAULT TRIAL...
Score: [-] 21 [+].
< 1 >