Febone 1960.net Blog

To Know There Is To Go There

You are currently browsing the archives for the day Sunday, November 20th, 2011.

Cedric The Entertainer Talks About The Soul Train Awards and Heavy D

PlayPlay

Cedric The Entertainer flew into Tampa, Florida to help reopen the Mahaffey Theatre in St. Petersburg, Florida. Cedric flew in from Atlanta after hosting the 2011 Soul Train Awards. Cedric sat down at the lunch counter on Febone1960.net to talk about the awards show and all the things he’s accomplished in 2011. Cedric also talks about his future plans.

Take a listen as Cedric talks about the Soul Trains Awards and the tribute to Heavy D.

What’s Your Take On The Matter? Register and/or sign in and sound off!

You can also twitter the febone_blog

    follow me on Twitter

    Posted 2 years, 5 months ago at 4:22 pm. Add a comment

    Unconventional: Criminal Defendants Trying Their Cases In the Media

    It appears that more and more attorneys are permitting their clients to talk to the media and the authorities before the case is tried in court. Is that wise? Remember the Miranda warning tells you that any thing you or say will be held against you in a court of law.

    The Miranda warning derives from an Arizona rape case. On March 2, 1963, an 18-year-old Phoenix woman told police that she had been abducted, driven to the desert and raped. Detectives gave her a polygraph test. The results were inconclusive. However, tracking a license plate number of a car that resembled that of her attacker’s brought police to Ernesto Miranda. Mr. Miranda had a prior record as a peeping tom. Although the victim did not identify Miranda in a line-up, he was brought into police custody and interrogated. What happened next is disputed, but the interrogating officers left the interrogation with a confession that Miranda later recanted. Miranda was unaware that he didn’t have to say anything at all.

    At trial, when prosecutors offered Miranda’s written confession as evidence, his court-appointed lawyer, Alvin Moore, objected arguing strongly that the confession was not truly voluntary and should be excluded. Moore’s objection was overruled and based on this confession and other evidence, Miranda was convicted of rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 20 to 30 years imprisonment on each charge, with sentences to run concurrently. Moore filed Miranda’s appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court claiming that Miranda’s confession was not fully voluntary and should not have been admitted into the court proceedings. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision to admit the confession in State v. Miranda, 401 P.2d 721 (Ariz. 1965). In affirming, the Arizona Supreme Court emphasized heavily the fact that Miranda did not specifically request an attorney.

    In a 5-4 landmark decision the Supreme Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them. This decision had a significant impact on law enforcement in the United States, by making what is now known as the Miranda rights part of routine police procedure to ensure that suspects are informed of their rights. The Supreme Court decided Miranda with three other consolidated cases: Westover v. United States, Vignera v. New York, and California v. Stewart.overturned his conviction, but Miranda was retried and convicted in October 1966 anyway, despite the relative lack of evidence against him.

    Chief Justice Earl Warren, a former prosecutor, delivered the opinion of the Court, ruling that due to the coercive nature of the custodial interrogation by police (Warren cited several police training manuals which had not been provided in the arguments), no confession could be admissible under the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination clause and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney unless a suspect had been made aware of his/her rights and the suspect had then waived them.

    You might say that this anomalous legal strategy was given birth during the famous Bronco episode on the Los Angeles Expressway at the beginning of the O. J Simpson trial. That melodramtic scene where O.J. Simpson is holding a gun to his head threatening to kill himself, helped Simpson avoid being jailed in the main population during his trial.

    Simpson of course was eventually acquitted and Johnny Cochran became a house name. Is this tactic really helpful to the client who often cannot pay for their defense, or is it merely a publicity heaven for the unpaid Attorney(s)? Further is it a substitute for skill?

    In the Conrad Murray case, his Attorneys were present when he gave a recorded statement to the police. The statement was used to charge and convict him of the involuntary manslaughter of Pop icon Michael Jackson.

    Conrad Murray’s unpaid Attorneys butted heads during the trial over a defense strategy they continued to search for throughout the trial. The strategy presented by the unprepared defense team at opening statement was abandoned in the middle of the prosecution’s case leaving the jury with no reasonable doubt.

    The defense is not the only ones using this tactic. The strategy was used as a substitute by the prosecution for solid evidence in the Casey Anthony trial. Charged with the burden of proof, the prosecution failed miserably leaving a country angry at the lack of justice for baby Calee.

    It appears that this doomed strategy is also being used by Attorney(s) representing Jerry Sandusky. Sandusky is the focus of the child sexual abuse scandal that is looming large at Penn State and its’ football program. Sandusky recently gave a recorded interview to sportscaster Bob Costas which has aired repeatedly on television. This statement may sink Sandusky and his Attorney(s) at trial.

    Criminal defense attorney Penny Marshall sat at the Lunch Counter at Febone1960.net to discuss the pros and cons of this unconventional strategy. We also discuss the paternity allegations made by a 20 year old woman against an under aged Justin Bieber. You can hear that conversation above by clicking the play button.

    Sitting At the Lunch Counter on Febone1960.net is our new Blogtalk radio show which airs daily at 6:30 PM. You can also hear the show on demand by going to http://febone1960.net/Sitting At The Lunch Counter At Febone1960.net.html

    The shows will also be posted on this Blog as well. Join us at the lunch counter for some serious conversations on some serious subjects with every person on the Totem Pole. Here at Febpne1960.net everybody’s thoughts and opinions counts including yours, so register and sound off.

    What’s Your Take On The Matter? Register and/or sign in and sound off!

    You can also twitter the febone_blog

      follow me on Twitter

      Posted 2 years, 5 months ago at 1:47 pm. Add a comment