It is, I think it just gets by because I know a few lawyers to quote “got tired of doing evil shit for corporate America” so they switched to public defenders.
Nah, it still is underfunded, it's just unequally underfunded. Police are over funded when it comes to street level crime patrol, but are laughably underfunded when it comes to training to deal with anything other than violent crime with more violence. Meanwhile, regulation is terribly underfunded. And enforcement of white collar crime is underfunded as well.
Which explains why so many regulators prefer to go after private organizations that can pay multi-million-dollar fines if caught dodging regulations. Gotta recoup the expense of regulatory enforcement somehow.
And that doesn’t even begin to cover courts and corrections, the other 2 parts of our CJS. Corecivic and other private groups make money while the BOP are having to use cooks and clerical staff as reserve guards.
Guess u/Indocede hasn’t seen “The Wire.” The policemen on that show are mostly detectives, and they constantly have to deal with funding shortfalls regarding their day-to-day operations.
Which is funny, because US law enforcement is underfunded and under staffed compared to Western European counterparts.
They buy military surplus because it's cheaper than buying things on the civilian market for the same purpose.
Six months?? Lol, In Germany its 2-3 years, in France its 1,5 years, in Spain its, depending on the education and what qualificaitons you have, anywhere between 8 months and 3 years...
On average, Police training in Europe is around 2 years.
On top of the period of police academy, Spain requires a full year as a trainee officer in which you can't sign any kind of document without supervision from a senior officer and in which any offense against the code of conduct (except these qualified as minor offenses) gets you instantly fired and banned from reapplying to any public service, for life.
Holy shit, now I'm wondering *why in the crippling fuck* American police only have to go through only a month of training?! (Is it really just one month?!?)
This is the scene playing out in my head:
*"Oh yeah, you want to be a cop? Ok well you're only required to train for a month! And afterward, you can carry a gun and use lethal force 'when you feel it's justified'! But you only get one month to learn what that means, so fuck it, just know we will protect you if you accidentally (or purposefully, wink wink) kill someone you don't like the look of. I mean, who are they going to call? THE COPS?"*
I'm horrified.
Can't speak for the whole country, but the west coast is about 5-6 months for the academy, and I know where I live they have 3 more months both before and after the academy followed by 4 months riding with and being evaluated by an experienced officer...
So 9-12 months before they are in the public working and another 4 months grading before they're alone.
The problem is US cops are trained by Israeli forces in the “It’s a War Out There” mentality, with predictable results. Prepare for battle with your own people, and you WILL have a war.
A vehicle that can be used as cover by SWAT teams when apprehending suspects of violent crimes who are armed with guns. Can't just bring a normal car because bullets go right through normal cars.
Definitely why every podunk town should spend a couple hundred thousand a year on them.
What do you think law enforcement did before the DoD started 'giving' them away?
edit: ie- is that a _requirement_ that the PD/county had? or a justification for dick swinging?
When things like [this](https://apnews.com/article/officers-killed-charlotte-north-carolina-warrant-64a4a9c849b721631cd2f8872945e08d) happen to police who serve warrants without these vehicles, it's pretty easy for them to justify why they'd need something like an armored car to prevent it from happening. This is especially true as police tactics shift away from the door-kicking version of warrant services to the surround-and-call version, where they wait people out rather than rush in in the interests of de-escalation.
Gotta have somewhere safe to stand if you're going to give someone the home field advantage every time. And I don't think this is nor should be something every agency has, but more of a regional asset for those more rural areas. Major cities should absolutely have them so there's no excuse to need to rush into things.
So they should take MRAPs out for every warrant?
Also - those were federal agents, they had everything reasonable at their disposal. APCs/MRAPs weren't reasonable given what they knew, and if they thought they'd need one to serve a warrant in a neighborhood, they should probably rethink the details on how to serve it.
If you're arguing they need to have something as a response- sure, and there are lot of options that are more reasonable than every town getting their own MRAP.
What's as cheap as secondhand military stuff and able to withstand gunfire? And yes, they should take an armored car out for every warrant service where they believe the suspect has access to guns, such as with the link I posted where he was literally wanted for being a felon with a gun...
How would you arrest an armed violent criminal if not containing him to one specific location and using negotiators to get him to surrender? I do not understand what you want cops to do to keep themselves from being shot by murderers when every first world nation's police uses vehicles like what you're complaining about.
This isn't an American police issue, the whole world uses them because there are sociopaths who believe they don't have to follow the rules and can hurt anyone they want, including the people we as a society demand hold said sociopaths accountable.
That's a number pulled out of nowhere. Since mechanics are employed by agencies anyway, you are claiming they have to replace hundreds of thousands of dollars in parts each year?
This is what happens when you sell military-grade weapons on the open market. Our society is doomed because we are in an arms race death spiral and the weapons manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.
Man acting like cops are paid so generously or something.
Ain’t not public servant making any significant amount of money unless they hold public office.
Except police *are* underfunded. Specifically their training budget.
They "buy" surplus military stuff at a fraction of cost, and havent actually done that since the late 90s and early 00s, most PDs buy law enforcement specific stuff, it just happens to be visually similar to military equipment.
Police are understaffed, underpaid, under trained, and way too much is expected of them.
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For bonus points, a system that conflate wealth with morality pretty much rewards immoral actions (especially if it leads to opportunity or immoral actions towards further wealth).
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it’s more so because judicial system funding is not a sexy campaign issue. Nobody cares. Nobody wants to raise taxes so that accused individuals (who are really guilty 98% of the time) can mount a slightly better (but still doomed) defense.
My wife did something fuckingly stupid that landed her in criminal court. Instead of relying on a PD, I shelled out a couple thousand for a local attorney that not only knew the local landscape, he used to be the fucking MAYOR. He knew the landscape.
Not only did my wife end up with no more than probation, he got all the appearances AND fees waived for her.
And for anyone wondering, don't ask me why I didn't call a divorce lawyer instead of a defense one. I'm not having that fuck-ass conversation again.
I would estimate most first-time misdemeanor or lowest-level felony offenders only get probation, so I’m not sure how your comment is saying that was a success impossible for a public defender to achieve… Without more details, it’s hard to say that a paid attorney made any difference.
I feel like a lot of lawyers tell clients that so that they "feel lucky" and are much more likely to hire them (or any lawyer) in the future, if needed.
Hell, I would, if I were a lawyer.
A close family friend ran into that recently. She had a great and highly recommended public defender VOLUNTEER to help her son but the judge refuses and instead assigns someone with zero experience in the case specialty. The whole system has been jerking her around and just simply being cruel, and the only lawyer she can afford it blatantly doing bare minimum so can milk her often "forgetting" to submit stuff or inform her of dates. Many judges are untouchable petty kings in their domain, it a revenge system not a justice system if don't have money.
This woman despite being burnt out working, trying to help her son, and get a crooked contractor that literaly destroyed her house to pay for repairs she still finds time to help manage a soup kitchen. Just wish she could get ONE break instead of always digging out of a hole dug by someone else. Givers always seem to attract Takers like a swarm of mosquitos.
The Federal Judiciary in general is badly underfunded, and the employees are bound to not make any public statements, so it’s difficult for anyone to advocate for more. This includes not only the Federal Public Defenders and the courts themselves, but also Probation and Pretrial offices. Large annual cuts supposedly won’t have an impact on anything “because of the increased use of technology.”
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Once you’re in the system, you’re in. The point is to feed people into this pipeline, create a permanent caste of second-class citizens, and provide cheap labor to corporations.
> According to their most recent budget, $3 million of their $53.6 million budget can only be used for a relocation this year. The service recently moved offices, and at this point, News4 has learned, the PDS doesn’t need that money to move anymore. They need it for salaries -- but since the cash came from Congress, the problem won’t be fixed without a literal act of Congress.
This isn’t a lack of funding, it’s them accounting an extra 3 million jobs to their budget that was exclusively earmarked for a move and making decisions based on that.
Last time I got in trouble I got the same plea deal as some guy who arguably did worse things than me. I graduated everything early and was prepared with questions for my court ordered classes. I wonder what happened to that guy, who also cut in front of me in the probation office line. I didn't say nothing but oh my goodness that guy was a jerk.
I surprisingly have meet some REALLY GOOD. As far as good people and professional and legally competent public defenders. These are the unsung heroes of our country…
I have always thought that anyone who has an active law license should be obligated to complete a certain number of Pub Defender hours per year. A lot of professions have obligated continuing education hours,this could just be considered a mandated test of defense quality.
BUTTTTT
I'm sure it would be a pain in the butt to implement and I'm sure every lawyer would lobby against it in congress, and I'm sure if it ever did pass every other lawyer would come up with loop holes or exceptions.
But I feel it would overall be an improvement over the current system and it may in fact improve public perception of lawyers, and the wins could be credited to their law firms and help with publicity in some cases.
That doesn't make any sense at all. The vast majority of lawyers are not criminal lawyers. The vast majority of lawyers are not even litigators. Criminal defence isn't something you can just dabble in. Nobody is well served by forcing wills and estate lawyers, or patent lawyers, or in-house counsel to do work they are not qualified to do - which, at least in my jurisdiction, would violate the rules of professional conduct.
And this will always be the case when you try to pretend that the labor service of another human being can be a 'right'.
"right to counsel" is a point where 'legitimate public need', 'slavery is prohibited', and 'economic reality' come together to teach a harsh practical lesson.
Remember the Public Defender system the next time someone feels froggy about a 'right' to healthcare or a 'right' to housing.
'Rights' to goods and services are silly because, as it currently stands, scarcity exists.
Which is to say, human labor is required to produce these goods and services. Humans cannot be forced to work, nor forced to work for an employer they do not desire.
Therefore, access to these goods and services are limited by the amount of labor willing to produce them for the group with the 'right'. The example used here, the public defender system, is in shambles because most lawyers would rather work in just about any other capacity. This is because working as a public defender sucks.
You would see a similar effect if you tried to implement something like the right to counsel in healthcare or housing. You might have those entitlements on paper, but good luck getting anything of substance or quality in the real world.
>'. The example used here, the public defender system, is in shambles because most lawyers would rather work in just about any other capacity. This is because working as a public defender sucks.
Tell me you have no idea what you're talking about without telling me you have no idea what you're talking about.
When the base salary for a ~~new~~ attorney is [just $80,000 in Washington DC](https://www.indeed.com/career/public-defender/salaries), this furlough becomes just another penalization against public defense attorneys for choosing a pathway of public service
And there are lots of jobs that pay better with less stress here.
This will only make it worse. Esp those that need a decent lawyer that can focus on their case.
That number says average base salary, not for new attorneys specifically. Must include the people who stay with the job for 7+ years. Even NYC legal aid, one of the largest PD offices in the country serving our most populous city, starts somewhere around $73,000. When I started at a PD office (not too many years ago) they had us at $55,000, which is a great deal less than the median income for the area. And given the student loan payments and outrageous rental prices, I’m pretty sure that we’d have all qualified for Legal Aid ourselves.
Not to mention that poor funding meant we were perpetually understaffed and overworked while dealing with a workplace of mouse infestations, ceiling leaks, broken floors, busted computers, and a public parking lot that was generally safe, except for all the incidents of vandalism, theft, and the times they found bodies. All for a job where even the court staff and half the population treats you with derision. The health plan was decent though.
One time I was doing intake for a guy and had to tell him that he likely wouldn’t qualify, to which he responded “Do you know what it’s like to try living around here on 60k a year?” and I said “No but I’ve been hoping for a raise.”
For DC a good lawyer can make much more. That and 80k a year means you will probably never be able to afford a house. Maybe a condo further out or the east side of DC.
You think that's bad? Here in the UK, new lawyers start off around £45k (~55k USD).
https://www.reed.co.uk/average-salary/average-lawyer-salary
So the average salary for a junior lawyer in the US is literally 3x that of a junior lawyer in the UK
https://uk.indeed.com/career/junior-lawyer/salaries/England
https://www.indeed.com/career/junior-lawyer/salaries?from=top_sb
That's not unique to lawyers. Median pay in the UK is $20k lower than the US.
And the differences get even worse as you move up percentiles. At the 75th-90th percentile, UK (and most of Europe) pay is laughable in comparison.
The difference is 1 more year in the US (6 years in the UK vs 7 years in the US) and the average debt difference is only 10k (£96k/$120k USD in the UK vs 130k USD in the US)
> Elsewhere, research by money.co.uk recently found the average law student will accumulate £96,444 of debt upon graduation.
> The average law student graduates with $130,000 in student loan debt, according to the American Bar Association (ABA).
Not nearly enough to justify a 3x lower starting salary
It's not a terrible big difference, only about 25% more -
>The U.S. has about a quarter more suits per capita than does the U.K
http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/papers/pdf/Ramseyer_681.pdf
Thank god we’ve got a 14 year old 44 page paper from Harvard to barely disprove a joke, we wouldn’t want someone citing my Reddit comment in a dissertation.
I also think maybe the US is an outlier when it comes to some wages, the UK may be low but I have a feeling it won't be as low compared to other countries.
I would guess DC is a moderate to high CoL area. And then factor in any health insurance higher than barebones and that 80k isn't as much anymore.
US employers aren't giving anyone free money. They're paying the same minimums as anywhere else to attract competent enough workers.
Did you even click on my link? It has nothing to do with DC. I was comparing the NATIONWIDE average pay of junior lawyers in the UK (£45k) and the nationwide average pay of junior lawyers in the US ($120k USD). The junior public defenders in DC are paid well below the average.
Also, anyone who's working as a lawyer will have highly robust health insurance, it's not like they'll will have many medical expenses out of pocket. Plus the lower taxes in the US. IMO the main thing is that Americans are just used to significantly higher salaries (especially as shown in fields like tech, finance, and law) and companies need to pay that to keep their American employees.
While personally I agree that law schools seemingly churns out more attorneys than we as a society "need," I think it's still appropriate to be dismayed whenever public servants are furloughed due to incompetence or nefarious dealings by our elected leaders. We should not have gotten to this point, and those offices absolutely deserve more funding (and more consistent)
The individual who chooses to rack up hundreds of thousands in debt to focus on a career in defending those who are unable to defend themselves should be lauded
I think this exactly. It’s super disrupting to the Courts which will put a spotlight on the issue. Plus, any trials longer than a day or two well have extra start/stop dates. For defendants, that can mean an extra day or two of freedom.
I can’t speak for the DC courts but a lot of counties I know have separate courtrooms for PD cases with Judge assignments rotating in and out, at least for misdemeanor cases. Felonies are generally less numerous thus easier to be scheduled around. Keeping the furlough all on the same day is very likely to make things simpler and more streamlined for the courts and the PD office, the court-appointed attorneys who will be taking the cases, and for the PD office, which from what I’ve read probably won’t even unlock its doors on Wednesdays.
Or, how about Fridays? Everyone gets a 3 day weekend during the summer.
Or, fund public defenders in general. Maybe every law firm should have to pay a percentage of their billable income or something similar to fund the Public Defender Service. A special tax on law firms. It's not as if they can't afford it.
If the 1/5 of the people is less than 1, it would be hard.
Anyway, it just seems like they won't handle cases that require public defenders on Wednesdays. That's it. Won't change much other than maybe delays.
Ironically, DC doesn't have a voting senator or representative. So, none of the senators or representatives have constituents that are affected by this
Nitpick: For a long time it said "Taxation Without Representation" (because that's what they are subject to) and a few years ago they changed it to "*End* Taxation Without Representation" to put a finer point on their demand.
"No Taxation Without Representation" is the revolutionary ideal we learn about in US history, but it has never been the reality for everyone, everywhere.
Nah remember any property that gets destroyed it voids your protests. You also cant make people be inconvenienced at all or they will turn against you.
Ask a MAGAt what they think about the protestors a while back in a liberal east coast city that destroyed a bunch of corporate property and tossed it off a nearby pier. Tell them that some of them even got voted into office after that.
When they are done blathering on about how unpatriotic and evil those actions are, just happen to mention you just now remembered that event happened on Dec 16, 1773 when colonists protested the new tea taxation.
You'll either get called an asshole and they will stomp off, or they will start talking about how "its different" without ever being able to say why they think that out loud (white adult men protesting is serious business, minorities and women and younger adults are just childish and petty)
The Congress and Senate tend to fuck over DC's residents and local government in every way imaginable that they can get away with while still being able to administrate their affairs from the city and it comes down mostly on the heads of the big percentage of Black people who live in DC.
Are the DAs also furloughed? I mean I know the disparity in resources between the DA and public defenders office is awful and this is likely just another example of the inequality and justice gap, but at one point do we make it an actual issue. How is IAC not a viable claim when they do not have the resources and now are not able to work even a full week. I know many will be working unpaid on those days but it’s despicable.
Oh for sure. It just really bothers me the disparity in funding. The courts only have legitimacy when enough people believe the system is as just as it can be. Where I am the funding for investigation is way higher in the DA office than PD office. In smaller areas they might assign someone to defend someone, or contract with a firm. It’s really problematic to think a low income defendant ends up with an attorney that doesn’t normally practice criminal law.
Funny. I bet making the furlough day Wednesday is an intentional strategy move. Seems like it would be the MOST disruptive day for the Courts. Many trials and other procedures would have to start and start in the middle of every week.
This would not only bring attention to the funding issue but may also serve the indigent defendants by forcing delays.
Individual judges can set their trial days, at least in CA. Might not be disruptive to one judge but would be super disruptive on the entire court system as a whole to take away 1/5 of all potential hearing/trial dates.
In my county, DAs and PDs are paid the exact same amount. The office budgets are different though because of a differing amount of administrative work. But I think the equal pay is super important and it should be like that everywhere.
Equal pay is important but you should you also be able to mount resources to your defense. If the prosecution has limitless budgets to hire “experts,” conduct testing and whatever else - you should also have some ability to do the same.
In Sam Alito's favorite witch hunter's day, if you were accused of a felony you were specifically denied a lawyer. Because being innocent made you the best speaker of all when you were compelled to testify in your trial.
In my area, all criminal court cases are lumped on the same day at the same time each week. It wouldn't be an issue for the courts to not hold criminal court on Wednesday, just probably annoying.
no, that's Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. the downtown magistrate is in fact the only one held every day at the same times, but it really wouldn't be an issue to shift the clients to the other 4 days. it's not particularly busy. it may result in some scheduling delays.
prelims. we aren't required (and often are not able) to have a PD at arraignments. I've been told one day trials are the most common and only a complicated case would go past 3 days, but not an atty/can't say for sure.
Instead of low paid overworked public defenders, why not just make all licensed attorneys served X hours per year doing pro bono public defense as a requirement to stay licensed in their state?
You'd have contracts attorneys trying to argue criminal law, would never work the law is to broad and lawyers are too specialized would be a disservice to the ones needing defense
Lawyer here but not a criminal lawyer. You do not want me arguing your criminal case. You want the public defender that's in the courtroom every day and knows all the ins and outs.
Great idea. Then we can force other licensed attorneys with no criminal law experience to do the ineffective assistance of counsel appeals after the clients of the first cohort get convicted.
Probably for the same reason they don't force anyone else into community service.
The bar is already a racket, adding indentured servitude to the list is a bit extreme.
They already make us do pro bono and imo it’s bullshit. Doesn’t make a dent in the problem of legal access and it’s not like doctors have to work for free to keep their licenses.
In my state the pro bono hours are only “aspirational.” I work for a pro bono firm and we average about 6,000 clients a year without about half the cases having some pro bono involvement. It’s only civil legal so no criminal matters but it’s still only a drop in the bucket when it comes to the justice gap. We also have to limit cases and rarely can take on something that will be complex because we have to train the volunteers, and unless there is a big law firm involved our tools are limited. For example we can rarely depose anyone or even issues subpoenas because of the costs involved. I wouldn’t mind if the requirement was mandatory but 50-60 hours is not enough to take much of a case and realistically the focus would probably be on clinic matters.
You'd have contracts attorneys trying to argue criminal law, would never work the law is to broad and lawyers are too specialized would be a disservice to the ones needing defense
Because that doesn't make any sense at all. The vast majority of lawyers are not criminal lawyers. The vast majority of lawyers are not even litigators. Criminal defence isn't something you can just dabble in. Nobody is well served by forcing wills and estate lawyers, or patent lawyers, or in-house counsel to do work they are not qualified to do - which, at least in my jurisdiction, would violate the rules of professional conduct.
A trial requires an absolutely massive amount of work, it’s not “a few hours.” Also I don’t see you clamoring for the government to make you do your job for free.
Did you not read my comment? I was agreeing with you. If we force community service onto lawyers to make them do their job for free, are we no better than the slave masters old?
There is nothing worse than forcing someone to work for no pay against their will, no matter that potential benefit to society.
I assumed you were being sarcastic, because while I don’t like the idea, it’s nowhere close to enslavement.
Edit: [This you](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/1ckqlem/you_have_the_right_to_an_attorney_just_not_on/l2q3207/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3)? Seems like you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth
Sorry, I thought you were the same person I originally replied to when I commented and decided to be extra snarky. My main point was that mandated community service is not enslavement and I'm glad we agree there.
Government enforced “mandated community service” sounds like slavery to me. Would we be forcing lawyers to work for free, against their will, and using their livelihood against them to do so? You gotta be in middle school to think that sounds any different than slavery and even more so with your a “few hours” of “mandated community service”. I have a sneaking suspicion that you guys think most lawyers are rich and have all sort of extra time.
Yeah, I don't think you learned what slavery is in school, so I don't think this is a worthwhile conversation.
You can tell your friends you won an argument on the Internet.
Slavery is the practice of owning humans as property.
Mandatory uncompensated labor is common in slavery but neither necessary nor sufficient. Children born or sold into slavery are enslaved before they're capable of working. Some enslaved people were and are paid for their labor; this is common in modern human trafficking where debt is used as a tool of control, but was also occasionally seen in historical slave economies. Meanwhile, most young Americans are required to do community service to earn a high school diploma; this is not slavery.
Everyone is, but that's not the situation we're talking about. This would be a requirement to obtain and maintain a state issued license. Absolutely no one is forced to get that license.
Congress is currently pathetic, an embarrassment to America and a warning to all democratic countries. This is what happens when the inmates take over the asylum.
So just for some perspective, contrary to this headline there is other representation for indigent defendants in DC. Aside from the PD office there are also private attorneys who sign up to be court-appointed attorneys and are paid with public funds. These are everywhere and often take the cases where PD offices have a conflict or are otherwise unable to represent. Of course those programs are generally underfunded themselves and this will put a lot of strain on that system. And in other cases counsel can be assigned/re-assigned the following day.
The point being that the problem wont be actual denial or unavailability of representation, rather the true problem is that public defense and overall legal services for the poor are way underfunded and overstressed, even when it is assigned. In a generally pay-to-play legal system this creates problems far wider, deeper, and more insidious than what this article covers.
You know how fucking hot it gets in DC in July?
If you're gonna do crimes and get caught on the day everyone's off, enjoy your night of swamp ass until Thursday morning.
DC also does not want to be part of another state, both for local reasons (they don't want Richmond or Annapolis to have a say in their affairs) and for national ones (they want to add two reliably Democratic senators in the process).
The latter point is for sure a bit cynical, but in fairness to them, the politics around adding/splitting states has always been a bit cynical in this respect going back centuries; just look at the Missouri Compromise.
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem is the job pays poorly in a market where there is a rather high entrance fee and a semi-ok job market for alternative jobs.
Having done both medicine and law, I think more jobs need a residency style/apprenticeship style approach. There are definitely abuses with residency/apprenticeships overworking low-rung employees that cant really say "no" to abuses. However, they do offer a nice ramp for new people willing to put in high end work and to provide services for people/populations that would otherwise be SOL for quality services.
A legal apprenticeship would dip into law schools funding, and force schools to form connections -- which shady money vacuum low tier schools wouldnt be able to provide. So likely this would never happen.
In other news, maybe instead of a draft, the US really needs a civil serice forced draft on young people. Most counties require service of citizens, the US doesnt. Would be a good way to staff needed civil services such as this, get kids actual experience (instead of just what their parents lie/pay for), and force young people to experience areas/populations outside their norms.
We are all at fault, too. We keep buying at big corporations because it's convenient and flood them with money that ends up in a few private pockets, leaving the public parts of society underfunded, leading to cuts all over the place.
The public defender system in the US is laughably underfunded.
It is, I think it just gets by because I know a few lawyers to quote “got tired of doing evil shit for corporate America” so they switched to public defenders.
>The public \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ system in the US is laughably underfunded. This works as a general statement tbh
Well.. doesn't work with "law enforcement" when they've got the money to buy surplus equipment from the military.
To be fair, they're also the group that gets to mug people legally so they get an extra revenue stream.
It's hard work seizing assets, that's why the union needs to call your house to solicit additional donations
More so that they are the defenders of capital.
They are just arresting money - it’s not like they’re stealing it. /s
Nah, it still is underfunded, it's just unequally underfunded. Police are over funded when it comes to street level crime patrol, but are laughably underfunded when it comes to training to deal with anything other than violent crime with more violence. Meanwhile, regulation is terribly underfunded. And enforcement of white collar crime is underfunded as well.
Which explains why so many regulators prefer to go after private organizations that can pay multi-million-dollar fines if caught dodging regulations. Gotta recoup the expense of regulatory enforcement somehow.
And that doesn’t even begin to cover courts and corrections, the other 2 parts of our CJS. Corecivic and other private groups make money while the BOP are having to use cooks and clerical staff as reserve guards.
Guess u/Indocede hasn’t seen “The Wire.” The policemen on that show are mostly detectives, and they constantly have to deal with funding shortfalls regarding their day-to-day operations.
Which is funny, because US law enforcement is underfunded and under staffed compared to Western European counterparts. They buy military surplus because it's cheaper than buying things on the civilian market for the same purpose.
Undertrained, too. I think it’s six months in most European countries? Maybe a month average in America.
Six months?? Lol, In Germany its 2-3 years, in France its 1,5 years, in Spain its, depending on the education and what qualificaitons you have, anywhere between 8 months and 3 years... On average, Police training in Europe is around 2 years.
On top of the period of police academy, Spain requires a full year as a trainee officer in which you can't sign any kind of document without supervision from a senior officer and in which any offense against the code of conduct (except these qualified as minor offenses) gets you instantly fired and banned from reapplying to any public service, for life.
Holy shit, now I'm wondering *why in the crippling fuck* American police only have to go through only a month of training?! (Is it really just one month?!?) This is the scene playing out in my head: *"Oh yeah, you want to be a cop? Ok well you're only required to train for a month! And afterward, you can carry a gun and use lethal force 'when you feel it's justified'! But you only get one month to learn what that means, so fuck it, just know we will protect you if you accidentally (or purposefully, wink wink) kill someone you don't like the look of. I mean, who are they going to call? THE COPS?"* I'm horrified.
Can't speak for the whole country, but the west coast is about 5-6 months for the academy, and I know where I live they have 3 more months both before and after the academy followed by 4 months riding with and being evaluated by an experienced officer... So 9-12 months before they are in the public working and another 4 months grading before they're alone.
Badly trained. Increasing the length of training would probably just result in the same bad training, but taking 4x longer.
The problem is US cops are trained by Israeli forces in the “It’s a War Out There” mentality, with predictable results. Prepare for battle with your own people, and you WILL have a war.
What requirement is met by a MRAP?
A vehicle that can be used as cover by SWAT teams when apprehending suspects of violent crimes who are armed with guns. Can't just bring a normal car because bullets go right through normal cars.
Definitely why every podunk town should spend a couple hundred thousand a year on them. What do you think law enforcement did before the DoD started 'giving' them away? edit: ie- is that a _requirement_ that the PD/county had? or a justification for dick swinging?
When things like [this](https://apnews.com/article/officers-killed-charlotte-north-carolina-warrant-64a4a9c849b721631cd2f8872945e08d) happen to police who serve warrants without these vehicles, it's pretty easy for them to justify why they'd need something like an armored car to prevent it from happening. This is especially true as police tactics shift away from the door-kicking version of warrant services to the surround-and-call version, where they wait people out rather than rush in in the interests of de-escalation. Gotta have somewhere safe to stand if you're going to give someone the home field advantage every time. And I don't think this is nor should be something every agency has, but more of a regional asset for those more rural areas. Major cities should absolutely have them so there's no excuse to need to rush into things.
So they should take MRAPs out for every warrant? Also - those were federal agents, they had everything reasonable at their disposal. APCs/MRAPs weren't reasonable given what they knew, and if they thought they'd need one to serve a warrant in a neighborhood, they should probably rethink the details on how to serve it. If you're arguing they need to have something as a response- sure, and there are lot of options that are more reasonable than every town getting their own MRAP.
What's as cheap as secondhand military stuff and able to withstand gunfire? And yes, they should take an armored car out for every warrant service where they believe the suspect has access to guns, such as with the link I posted where he was literally wanted for being a felon with a gun... How would you arrest an armed violent criminal if not containing him to one specific location and using negotiators to get him to surrender? I do not understand what you want cops to do to keep themselves from being shot by murderers when every first world nation's police uses vehicles like what you're complaining about. This isn't an American police issue, the whole world uses them because there are sociopaths who believe they don't have to follow the rules and can hurt anyone they want, including the people we as a society demand hold said sociopaths accountable.
They generally aren't purchasing them. They are getting them for free on a grant/lease program
The operating costs/maintenance/initial outfitting is in the 10s or 100s of thousands.
That's a number pulled out of nowhere. Since mechanics are employed by agencies anyway, you are claiming they have to replace hundreds of thousands of dollars in parts each year?
This is what happens when you sell military-grade weapons on the open market. Our society is doomed because we are in an arms race death spiral and the weapons manufacturers are laughing all the way to the bank.
Anyone who thinks that unions are useless should look at the police.
Most of that comes from the 1033 program where the equipment is actually free.
The difference is the police don’t exist for the public welfare.
What if we tied teacher pay to cop pay?
Man acting like cops are paid so generously or something. Ain’t not public servant making any significant amount of money unless they hold public office.
Cops get massive overtime, Teacher do the same amount of overtime without pay
lol- don't be silly...the military donates that equipment so it is "free".
The town next to me is tiny, with a population of around 12,000. The police there have an armored Hummer parked out front.
Except police *are* underfunded. Specifically their training budget. They "buy" surplus military stuff at a fraction of cost, and havent actually done that since the late 90s and early 00s, most PDs buy law enforcement specific stuff, it just happens to be visually similar to military equipment. Police are understaffed, underpaid, under trained, and way too much is expected of them.
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Like an MRAP for 2000 dollars. Wait a minute…
For bonus points, a system that conflate wealth with morality pretty much rewards immoral actions (especially if it leads to opportunity or immoral actions towards further wealth).
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not everything is underfunded, a lot of it is mismanagement of funds.
Mismanaged doesn’t equate to underfunded
It’s by design
Everyday someone learns that the system is working as intended.
“It’s not a bug. It’s a feature,” but for politics.
I think it’s more so because judicial system funding is not a sexy campaign issue. Nobody cares. Nobody wants to raise taxes so that accused individuals (who are really guilty 98% of the time) can mount a slightly better (but still doomed) defense.
The sad thing is PDS is one of the better funded ones.
My wife did something fuckingly stupid that landed her in criminal court. Instead of relying on a PD, I shelled out a couple thousand for a local attorney that not only knew the local landscape, he used to be the fucking MAYOR. He knew the landscape. Not only did my wife end up with no more than probation, he got all the appearances AND fees waived for her. And for anyone wondering, don't ask me why I didn't call a divorce lawyer instead of a defense one. I'm not having that fuck-ass conversation again.
I would estimate most first-time misdemeanor or lowest-level felony offenders only get probation, so I’m not sure how your comment is saying that was a success impossible for a public defender to achieve… Without more details, it’s hard to say that a paid attorney made any difference.
No probationary fees, no appearance requirements... she wasn't even required to pay restitution in any form. Told by others it was highly unusual.
I feel like a lot of lawyers tell clients that so that they "feel lucky" and are much more likely to hire them (or any lawyer) in the future, if needed. Hell, I would, if I were a lawyer.
A close family friend ran into that recently. She had a great and highly recommended public defender VOLUNTEER to help her son but the judge refuses and instead assigns someone with zero experience in the case specialty. The whole system has been jerking her around and just simply being cruel, and the only lawyer she can afford it blatantly doing bare minimum so can milk her often "forgetting" to submit stuff or inform her of dates. Many judges are untouchable petty kings in their domain, it a revenge system not a justice system if don't have money. This woman despite being burnt out working, trying to help her son, and get a crooked contractor that literaly destroyed her house to pay for repairs she still finds time to help manage a soup kitchen. Just wish she could get ONE break instead of always digging out of a hole dug by someone else. Givers always seem to attract Takers like a swarm of mosquitos.
The Federal Judiciary in general is badly underfunded, and the employees are bound to not make any public statements, so it’s difficult for anyone to advocate for more. This includes not only the Federal Public Defenders and the courts themselves, but also Probation and Pretrial offices. Large annual cuts supposedly won’t have an impact on anything “because of the increased use of technology.”
How better to make sure citizens get fed into a for-profit prison system where they perform slave labor for corporations?
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Does D.C. contract with for-profit prisons? I don’t think any states really do. For-profit prisons is mostly a federal offender type of thing.
Once you’re in the system, you’re in. The point is to feed people into this pipeline, create a permanent caste of second-class citizens, and provide cheap labor to corporations.
Why should the poor people get a fancy lawyer for free when I have to pay for mine? /s
> According to their most recent budget, $3 million of their $53.6 million budget can only be used for a relocation this year. The service recently moved offices, and at this point, News4 has learned, the PDS doesn’t need that money to move anymore. They need it for salaries -- but since the cash came from Congress, the problem won’t be fixed without a literal act of Congress. This isn’t a lack of funding, it’s them accounting an extra 3 million jobs to their budget that was exclusively earmarked for a move and making decisions based on that.
Last time I got in trouble I got the same plea deal as some guy who arguably did worse things than me. I graduated everything early and was prepared with questions for my court ordered classes. I wonder what happened to that guy, who also cut in front of me in the probation office line. I didn't say nothing but oh my goodness that guy was a jerk.
I surprisingly have meet some REALLY GOOD. As far as good people and professional and legally competent public defenders. These are the unsung heroes of our country…
Went to court once. The public defender said "look, I gotta go, your judge hates drug charges byeee" then he left.
I have always thought that anyone who has an active law license should be obligated to complete a certain number of Pub Defender hours per year. A lot of professions have obligated continuing education hours,this could just be considered a mandated test of defense quality. BUTTTTT I'm sure it would be a pain in the butt to implement and I'm sure every lawyer would lobby against it in congress, and I'm sure if it ever did pass every other lawyer would come up with loop holes or exceptions. But I feel it would overall be an improvement over the current system and it may in fact improve public perception of lawyers, and the wins could be credited to their law firms and help with publicity in some cases.
That doesn't make any sense at all. The vast majority of lawyers are not criminal lawyers. The vast majority of lawyers are not even litigators. Criminal defence isn't something you can just dabble in. Nobody is well served by forcing wills and estate lawyers, or patent lawyers, or in-house counsel to do work they are not qualified to do - which, at least in my jurisdiction, would violate the rules of professional conduct.
And this will always be the case when you try to pretend that the labor service of another human being can be a 'right'. "right to counsel" is a point where 'legitimate public need', 'slavery is prohibited', and 'economic reality' come together to teach a harsh practical lesson. Remember the Public Defender system the next time someone feels froggy about a 'right' to healthcare or a 'right' to housing.
What
'Rights' to goods and services are silly because, as it currently stands, scarcity exists. Which is to say, human labor is required to produce these goods and services. Humans cannot be forced to work, nor forced to work for an employer they do not desire. Therefore, access to these goods and services are limited by the amount of labor willing to produce them for the group with the 'right'. The example used here, the public defender system, is in shambles because most lawyers would rather work in just about any other capacity. This is because working as a public defender sucks. You would see a similar effect if you tried to implement something like the right to counsel in healthcare or housing. You might have those entitlements on paper, but good luck getting anything of substance or quality in the real world.
>'. The example used here, the public defender system, is in shambles because most lawyers would rather work in just about any other capacity. This is because working as a public defender sucks. Tell me you have no idea what you're talking about without telling me you have no idea what you're talking about.
They're understaffed, under-resourced systems often handling the least knowledgeable clients. The work sucks.
This is why I move my summer crimes to Florida
Summer crimes and some are not
Summer Crimes would be cool band name imo
They don’t operate on weekends here. So you have to summer weekday in Florida, and summer weekend in DC
When the base salary for a ~~new~~ attorney is [just $80,000 in Washington DC](https://www.indeed.com/career/public-defender/salaries), this furlough becomes just another penalization against public defense attorneys for choosing a pathway of public service
And there are lots of jobs that pay better with less stress here. This will only make it worse. Esp those that need a decent lawyer that can focus on their case.
That number says average base salary, not for new attorneys specifically. Must include the people who stay with the job for 7+ years. Even NYC legal aid, one of the largest PD offices in the country serving our most populous city, starts somewhere around $73,000. When I started at a PD office (not too many years ago) they had us at $55,000, which is a great deal less than the median income for the area. And given the student loan payments and outrageous rental prices, I’m pretty sure that we’d have all qualified for Legal Aid ourselves. Not to mention that poor funding meant we were perpetually understaffed and overworked while dealing with a workplace of mouse infestations, ceiling leaks, broken floors, busted computers, and a public parking lot that was generally safe, except for all the incidents of vandalism, theft, and the times they found bodies. All for a job where even the court staff and half the population treats you with derision. The health plan was decent though.
Oh wow. Revised my earlier statement
Yeah I remember doing intakes for drunk driving guys in the jail and having to be like "sir you don't qualify... you make more than my boss."
One time I was doing intake for a guy and had to tell him that he likely wouldn’t qualify, to which he responded “Do you know what it’s like to try living around here on 60k a year?” and I said “No but I’ve been hoping for a raise.”
Is $80k supposed to be low or high?
For DC a good lawyer can make much more. That and 80k a year means you will probably never be able to afford a house. Maybe a condo further out or the east side of DC.
It’s very low in DC.
No. Look up the locality and GS scale for lawyers in DC. They usually start at GS-13 and go up to GS-15 easily.
You think that's bad? Here in the UK, new lawyers start off around £45k (~55k USD). https://www.reed.co.uk/average-salary/average-lawyer-salary So the average salary for a junior lawyer in the US is literally 3x that of a junior lawyer in the UK https://uk.indeed.com/career/junior-lawyer/salaries/England https://www.indeed.com/career/junior-lawyer/salaries?from=top_sb
That's not unique to lawyers. Median pay in the UK is $20k lower than the US. And the differences get even worse as you move up percentiles. At the 75th-90th percentile, UK (and most of Europe) pay is laughable in comparison.
Lawyers in the UK don't need as many years of education, though. So there's a lot less debt.
The difference is 1 more year in the US (6 years in the UK vs 7 years in the US) and the average debt difference is only 10k (£96k/$120k USD in the UK vs 130k USD in the US) > Elsewhere, research by money.co.uk recently found the average law student will accumulate £96,444 of debt upon graduation. > The average law student graduates with $130,000 in student loan debt, according to the American Bar Association (ABA). Not nearly enough to justify a 3x lower starting salary
It pays well in the US because our national pastime is suing each other.
It's not a terrible big difference, only about 25% more - >The U.S. has about a quarter more suits per capita than does the U.K http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/papers/pdf/Ramseyer_681.pdf
Thank god we’ve got a 14 year old 44 page paper from Harvard to barely disprove a joke, we wouldn’t want someone citing my Reddit comment in a dissertation.
Hey, misinformation is so rife on the internet these days, it doesn't hurt to clarify!
I also think maybe the US is an outlier when it comes to some wages, the UK may be low but I have a feeling it won't be as low compared to other countries.
I would guess DC is a moderate to high CoL area. And then factor in any health insurance higher than barebones and that 80k isn't as much anymore. US employers aren't giving anyone free money. They're paying the same minimums as anywhere else to attract competent enough workers.
Did you even click on my link? It has nothing to do with DC. I was comparing the NATIONWIDE average pay of junior lawyers in the UK (£45k) and the nationwide average pay of junior lawyers in the US ($120k USD). The junior public defenders in DC are paid well below the average. Also, anyone who's working as a lawyer will have highly robust health insurance, it's not like they'll will have many medical expenses out of pocket. Plus the lower taxes in the US. IMO the main thing is that Americans are just used to significantly higher salaries (especially as shown in fields like tech, finance, and law) and companies need to pay that to keep their American employees.
Well when we graduate 300k lawyers for 120k job openings that $80k+benefits/pension starts looking a lot better.
While personally I agree that law schools seemingly churns out more attorneys than we as a society "need," I think it's still appropriate to be dismayed whenever public servants are furloughed due to incompetence or nefarious dealings by our elected leaders. We should not have gotten to this point, and those offices absolutely deserve more funding (and more consistent) The individual who chooses to rack up hundreds of thousands in debt to focus on a career in defending those who are unable to defend themselves should be lauded
Well, can't they arrange that 1/5 of the people are off Mondays, 1/5 off Tuesdays, and so on? HR is hard.
[удалено]
I think this exactly. It’s super disrupting to the Courts which will put a spotlight on the issue. Plus, any trials longer than a day or two well have extra start/stop dates. For defendants, that can mean an extra day or two of freedom.
I can’t speak for the DC courts but a lot of counties I know have separate courtrooms for PD cases with Judge assignments rotating in and out, at least for misdemeanor cases. Felonies are generally less numerous thus easier to be scheduled around. Keeping the furlough all on the same day is very likely to make things simpler and more streamlined for the courts and the PD office, the court-appointed attorneys who will be taking the cases, and for the PD office, which from what I’ve read probably won’t even unlock its doors on Wednesdays.
Or, how about Fridays? Everyone gets a 3 day weekend during the summer. Or, fund public defenders in general. Maybe every law firm should have to pay a percentage of their billable income or something similar to fund the Public Defender Service. A special tax on law firms. It's not as if they can't afford it.
If the 1/5 of the people is less than 1, it would be hard. Anyway, it just seems like they won't handle cases that require public defenders on Wednesdays. That's it. Won't change much other than maybe delays.
Sounds like Congress and the senate need to get their asses in gear and help their constituents.
Ironically, DC doesn't have a voting senator or representative. So, none of the senators or representatives have constituents that are affected by this
Huh, maybe the citizens of DC should drop by Congress and dump tea everywhere
I love that DC license plates say "No Taxation Without Representation". Whoever decided to put that on their plates needs a pay raise lol
Nitpick: For a long time it said "Taxation Without Representation" (because that's what they are subject to) and a few years ago they changed it to "*End* Taxation Without Representation" to put a finer point on their demand. "No Taxation Without Representation" is the revolutionary ideal we learn about in US history, but it has never been the reality for everyone, everywhere.
Nah remember any property that gets destroyed it voids your protests. You also cant make people be inconvenienced at all or they will turn against you.
Ask a MAGAt what they think about the protestors a while back in a liberal east coast city that destroyed a bunch of corporate property and tossed it off a nearby pier. Tell them that some of them even got voted into office after that. When they are done blathering on about how unpatriotic and evil those actions are, just happen to mention you just now remembered that event happened on Dec 16, 1773 when colonists protested the new tea taxation. You'll either get called an asshole and they will stomp off, or they will start talking about how "its different" without ever being able to say why they think that out loud (white adult men protesting is serious business, minorities and women and younger adults are just childish and petty)
Fun fact #2: the population of DC is larger than the population of the majority of states at the time of the Constitution.
And larger than 2 states currently (Wyoming and Vermont)
They have one who gets to vote... for the president. That's it.
DC residents are taxed without representation.
It's even on our license plates!
The Congress and Senate tend to fuck over DC's residents and local government in every way imaginable that they can get away with while still being able to administrate their affairs from the city and it comes down mostly on the heads of the big percentage of Black people who live in DC.
Hi! You must be new here! Welcome to the US government!
Are the DAs also furloughed? I mean I know the disparity in resources between the DA and public defenders office is awful and this is likely just another example of the inequality and justice gap, but at one point do we make it an actual issue. How is IAC not a viable claim when they do not have the resources and now are not able to work even a full week. I know many will be working unpaid on those days but it’s despicable.
Probably two different pots of money altogether.
Oh for sure. It just really bothers me the disparity in funding. The courts only have legitimacy when enough people believe the system is as just as it can be. Where I am the funding for investigation is way higher in the DA office than PD office. In smaller areas they might assign someone to defend someone, or contract with a firm. It’s really problematic to think a low income defendant ends up with an attorney that doesn’t normally practice criminal law.
DC does not have Ada’s btw. They utilize AUSAs for serious offenses and AGAs for lesser crimes.
Funny. I bet making the furlough day Wednesday is an intentional strategy move. Seems like it would be the MOST disruptive day for the Courts. Many trials and other procedures would have to start and start in the middle of every week. This would not only bring attention to the funding issue but may also serve the indigent defendants by forcing delays.
I don't know, Trump's trial is off every Wednesday and it doesn't seem to be causing too many issues.
Individual judges can set their trial days, at least in CA. Might not be disruptive to one judge but would be super disruptive on the entire court system as a whole to take away 1/5 of all potential hearing/trial dates.
Will never happen but the public defender’s office should get the same funding as a prosecutor’s office.
In my county, DAs and PDs are paid the exact same amount. The office budgets are different though because of a differing amount of administrative work. But I think the equal pay is super important and it should be like that everywhere.
Equal pay is important but you should you also be able to mount resources to your defense. If the prosecution has limitless budgets to hire “experts,” conduct testing and whatever else - you should also have some ability to do the same.
I don’t think anyone said prosecutors officers have limitless budgets. That would be absurd.
They do have insane budgets to prosecute cases. The OJ trial cost the state of California millions.
I have never even thought about that before. Fucking hell. I don't even want to think about that. It would just make me more disgusted at our country.
All money seized through civil forfeiture should fund the public defender's office. Watch that shit stop immediately.
If you're innocent, why are you poor and accused of a crime? /s
In Sam Alito's favorite witch hunter's day, if you were accused of a felony you were specifically denied a lawyer. Because being innocent made you the best speaker of all when you were compelled to testify in your trial.
In my area, all criminal court cases are lumped on the same day at the same time each week. It wouldn't be an issue for the courts to not hold criminal court on Wednesday, just probably annoying.
You live in a pretty small town, don't you? That doesn't really work in a city of any real size
no, that's Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. the downtown magistrate is in fact the only one held every day at the same times, but it really wouldn't be an issue to shift the clients to the other 4 days. it's not particularly busy. it may result in some scheduling delays.
Are those for arraignments, or hearings? Because those can be fast but trials can easily take at least one week, for a simple one.
prelims. we aren't required (and often are not able) to have a PD at arraignments. I've been told one day trials are the most common and only a complicated case would go past 3 days, but not an atty/can't say for sure.
Instead of low paid overworked public defenders, why not just make all licensed attorneys served X hours per year doing pro bono public defense as a requirement to stay licensed in their state?
You'd have contracts attorneys trying to argue criminal law, would never work the law is to broad and lawyers are too specialized would be a disservice to the ones needing defense
Lawyer here but not a criminal lawyer. You do not want me arguing your criminal case. You want the public defender that's in the courtroom every day and knows all the ins and outs.
I'd still take that over nothing. Eventually you'd get better at it
An easier idea to implement would be more funding for public defenders.
But the alternative *isn't* "nothing".
Great idea. Then we can force other licensed attorneys with no criminal law experience to do the ineffective assistance of counsel appeals after the clients of the first cohort get convicted.
Probably for the same reason they don't force anyone else into community service. The bar is already a racket, adding indentured servitude to the list is a bit extreme.
They already make us do pro bono and imo it’s bullshit. Doesn’t make a dent in the problem of legal access and it’s not like doctors have to work for free to keep their licenses.
Mhm. I work for a non profit and already don't get paid enough.
In my state the pro bono hours are only “aspirational.” I work for a pro bono firm and we average about 6,000 clients a year without about half the cases having some pro bono involvement. It’s only civil legal so no criminal matters but it’s still only a drop in the bucket when it comes to the justice gap. We also have to limit cases and rarely can take on something that will be complex because we have to train the volunteers, and unless there is a big law firm involved our tools are limited. For example we can rarely depose anyone or even issues subpoenas because of the costs involved. I wouldn’t mind if the requirement was mandatory but 50-60 hours is not enough to take much of a case and realistically the focus would probably be on clinic matters.
You'd have contracts attorneys trying to argue criminal law, would never work the law is to broad and lawyers are too specialized would be a disservice to the ones needing defense
Because that doesn't make any sense at all. The vast majority of lawyers are not criminal lawyers. The vast majority of lawyers are not even litigators. Criminal defence isn't something you can just dabble in. Nobody is well served by forcing wills and estate lawyers, or patent lawyers, or in-house counsel to do work they are not qualified to do - which, at least in my jurisdiction, would violate the rules of professional conduct.
Terrible idea. Spoken like someone who has no clue what a courtroom or criminal lawyer’s job even looks like.
So you want to enforce slavery essentially?
Yup, because a few hours of mandatory community service is 1 step away from enslaving lawyers.
A trial requires an absolutely massive amount of work, it’s not “a few hours.” Also I don’t see you clamoring for the government to make you do your job for free.
Did you not read my comment? I was agreeing with you. If we force community service onto lawyers to make them do their job for free, are we no better than the slave masters old? There is nothing worse than forcing someone to work for no pay against their will, no matter that potential benefit to society.
I assumed you were being sarcastic, because while I don’t like the idea, it’s nowhere close to enslavement. Edit: [This you](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/1ckqlem/you_have_the_right_to_an_attorney_just_not_on/l2q3207/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3)? Seems like you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth
Sorry, I thought you were the same person I originally replied to when I commented and decided to be extra snarky. My main point was that mandated community service is not enslavement and I'm glad we agree there.
Holy shit, y’all suggesting this idea and downvoting me and you think it’s “a few hours of community service”. How stupid can you be?
No, we're down voting you because you literally said mandated community service is slavery dumbass.
Government enforced “mandated community service” sounds like slavery to me. Would we be forcing lawyers to work for free, against their will, and using their livelihood against them to do so? You gotta be in middle school to think that sounds any different than slavery and even more so with your a “few hours” of “mandated community service”. I have a sneaking suspicion that you guys think most lawyers are rich and have all sort of extra time.
Yeah, I don't think you learned what slavery is in school, so I don't think this is a worthwhile conversation. You can tell your friends you won an argument on the Internet.
So uh what is slavery to you if that’s not slavery?
Slavery is the practice of owning humans as property. Mandatory uncompensated labor is common in slavery but neither necessary nor sufficient. Children born or sold into slavery are enslaved before they're capable of working. Some enslaved people were and are paid for their labor; this is common in modern human trafficking where debt is used as a tool of control, but was also occasionally seen in historical slave economies. Meanwhile, most young Americans are required to do community service to earn a high school diploma; this is not slavery.
Do you consider yourself a serious person? Like, when you say stuff like this, are you being serious in a way you think people should engage with?
I’m pretty serious about being against government mandated free labor
Everyone is, but that's not the situation we're talking about. This would be a requirement to obtain and maintain a state issued license. Absolutely no one is forced to get that license.
Congress is currently pathetic, an embarrassment to America and a warning to all democratic countries. This is what happens when the inmates take over the asylum.
What programs did the city decide to keep funding at the expense of people getting a fair trial?
So just for some perspective, contrary to this headline there is other representation for indigent defendants in DC. Aside from the PD office there are also private attorneys who sign up to be court-appointed attorneys and are paid with public funds. These are everywhere and often take the cases where PD offices have a conflict or are otherwise unable to represent. Of course those programs are generally underfunded themselves and this will put a lot of strain on that system. And in other cases counsel can be assigned/re-assigned the following day. The point being that the problem wont be actual denial or unavailability of representation, rather the true problem is that public defense and overall legal services for the poor are way underfunded and overstressed, even when it is assigned. In a generally pay-to-play legal system this creates problems far wider, deeper, and more insidious than what this article covers.
I’m just going to assume to prosecutors office is similarly underfunded.
Doubtful
You know how fucking hot it gets in DC in July? If you're gonna do crimes and get caught on the day everyone's off, enjoy your night of swamp ass until Thursday morning.
Did you know that you have a presumption of innocence in the US? Being arrested is a very different thing from having done crimes.
[удалено]
Maryland has publicly declared it does not want that part back and that makes the situation very complicated.
DC also does not want to be part of another state, both for local reasons (they don't want Richmond or Annapolis to have a say in their affairs) and for national ones (they want to add two reliably Democratic senators in the process). The latter point is for sure a bit cynical, but in fairness to them, the politics around adding/splitting states has always been a bit cynical in this respect going back centuries; just look at the Missouri Compromise.
As a Marylander, no thank you lol. We already have Baltimore, that's enough. (I love it but it's a mess.)
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nottheonion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is there a Morty available?
Just hire a lawyer dog. They work on any day.
The problem is the job pays poorly in a market where there is a rather high entrance fee and a semi-ok job market for alternative jobs. Having done both medicine and law, I think more jobs need a residency style/apprenticeship style approach. There are definitely abuses with residency/apprenticeships overworking low-rung employees that cant really say "no" to abuses. However, they do offer a nice ramp for new people willing to put in high end work and to provide services for people/populations that would otherwise be SOL for quality services. A legal apprenticeship would dip into law schools funding, and force schools to form connections -- which shady money vacuum low tier schools wouldnt be able to provide. So likely this would never happen. In other news, maybe instead of a draft, the US really needs a civil serice forced draft on young people. Most counties require service of citizens, the US doesnt. Would be a good way to staff needed civil services such as this, get kids actual experience (instead of just what their parents lie/pay for), and force young people to experience areas/populations outside their norms.
Iyxagucaz. PP
We are all at fault, too. We keep buying at big corporations because it's convenient and flood them with money that ends up in a few private pockets, leaving the public parts of society underfunded, leading to cuts all over the place.
I wanna say Obama getting rid of habeas corpus has something to do with it.