Are Some Lives Worth More Than Others?: Only Your Prosecutor Knows

Today, two people will be sentenced for killing innocent others. One person will have made a series of very bad decisions while intoxicated ending in her killing a young girl age 11. The other will have made a conscious decision to kill 11 people. The former will receive a sentence of 12 years in jail. The latter will be released after only doing 8 years while he awaited sentence. The former is a young mother of a pre-teen girl, the latter was a mob hitman. The former, the mom who killed an 11 year old by driving recklessly while intoxicated, spawned a law that makes it a felony to drive intoxicated with a child in the car. The latter Mob hit-man will reinforce the idea that you can kill at will as long as you are willing to give up others, even if you lie to do it.

The young mother is Carmen Huertas. She made a decision to get into a car with 6 children (one was her own) and drive them home from a slumber party after she had embibed enough alcohol to blow a .13 BAC. (Not that I think BAC's are the least bit accurate but given her other behaviors that night I would think there was enough other evidence of intoxication to prove she was guilty. You can read the story here and decide for yourself. She was sentenced to a indeterminate sentence of 4-12 years in jail. She could theoretically be eligible to get out on parole in three years and five months
but given just the fact that this was a DWI and the fact that it was the type of death that brings out everyone against the defendant, she will likely do the whole sentence before she is released less any "good-time" she may accrue (about 1.8 years off the top number or 10.4 years in prison so far.)

The mob hit man is Sal (Good Looking Sal) Vitale, former underboss of the Bonanno crime family. Sal was an early follower of another neighbor Joe (Big Joe) Massino, the boss of the Bonnano crime family. Both men grew up in my old neighborhood in NY. Sal was always noted for how good his hair looked. I should know, he used to go to get his hair cut in the same barbershop as I did. He was a big deal there among the Italian barbers. They all knew who he was. I blissfully did not. I did notice he seemed like any other guy who went there. Slightly pampered and otherwise kind of nice. He always went with friends.

About 10 years ago, Sal and his Brother-in-law childhood hero Joe Massino got indicted. Joe was pretty jealous of Sal's popularity among the other under bosses in "the family". He was afraid that Sal may be so much better liked than he, that he ordered someone kill him. The feds moved in to save Sal's life. Sal was infuriated and so he turned on Joe and everyone in the old life. He had enough information to identify over 500 men as either members of or affiliates to the five families of NY. He also had enough information to put 50 of these men behind bars for a long time, some even for life.

Sal Vitale was a cold blooded killer. He didn't have to be. He had smarts. He was a former corrections officer, and he owned a series of small businesses that would have made money for him with or without patronage from Joe Massino and company. Instead, he helped end the lives of at least 11 men and maybe more. He made it possible for others to kill without being punished. He ran loan-sharking and illegal gambling operations. He provided protection for drug dealers and houses of Prostitution. He also however danced to the Governments tune. He turned and he will be rewarded. Is he sorry he was a creep, a killer, a monster? Only he knows. He knew however he created that man. If he could, would he turn down the life he led? Would he walk away from the jaunts to Vegas and Atlantic City? Would he give up his house in Dix Hills for all those years. Would he not have had the fancy haircuts and manicures he got that earned him the nickname "Good looking Sal"? If he knew he would never get caught would he? Or would he have preserved that life even if it meant killing eleven more people. Eleven more fathers brothers sons?

Carmen Huertas, a 31 year old mother who would like to take back about 2 hours of her life. Whether she was found guilty or not, the taking of that child's life would have stayed with her forever. Her chance of ever getting behind the wheel of a car drunk again, would be less than zero.

Jail is supposed to be for punishment and corrections. I fail to see the sense in this today. Carmen Huertas should have been sentenced to 1-3 years and should have been ordered to a program to address her drinking issues. Sal Vitale should have been sentenced to at least a long long period in jail. He could have gotten Death had he not cooperated. His getting a free pass calls into question every detail to which he testified. His testimony was bought and paid for by the government. He knew if he danced to their tune he would walk away, a free man, new identity, new home, new business.

As she addressed the court she said ""I am not a monster," "I am a loving mother who made a terrible decision that caused the death of a wonderful child."

She is right, her behavior was monstrous, but she herself is not a monster she just in fact made a horrendous decision that will forever effect the world of Leandra's family and her own.

Does anyone wonder if Sal Vitale could make the same statement? Is it fair that the prosecution can make these decisions based on how much they were helped? Is it fair that Vitale's victims should get nothing in the way of satisfaction for the loss they suffered?

Huertas is in jail, mostly because of who her victim was, and what that victims family wanted. Vitale is free despite what his victims want and despite what fairness dictates. She is sorry. Given the chance she would not be likely to repeat her poor judgment. He, well you decide: is he sorry or sorry he got caught? Given the chance, would he have turned down all the things his life gave to him and his family or would he have killed again and again, knowing he would never get caught?

The lives of poor people and the lives of rich have different values in a court of law. The lives of people who die at the hands of those that can give the prosecution what it wants, and the lives of those killed by someone who has nothing but remorse to give, have different values. Neither of these are fair, they just are.

If you ever serve on a jury however, when one of these rich powerful guys testifies, and he says he is not getting anything for his testimony, remember, that is just not true. Never was, never will be. They are just monsters who the government is paying to be tell they government's story, whether it be true, or not. Whether they be monsters... or what?

Here is the NY Post's coverage of the sentencing hot off the presses.

The Battered Woman Syndrome Defense Scores a Big Win in Butterknife Stabbing Case: Some SOBs Just Need Killin."

When the Prosecution opens the trial with:"Kevin Cobb may not have been a husband or father any of us would want to have..." That ought to be the first clue there is going to be a problem with the prosecution.

When the next thing the prosecutor says is: the husband (Kevin Cobb) was out using coke, returning home around 3 a.m.

And when the alleged victim has done upstate time for drug and violent crimes, well then that would be a trifecta for a good reason not to bring a charge of Murder (or even assault First degree.

But when the defendant has suffered from "...bruises and (a) black eye and (a) punctured ear drum" all at the hands of the alleged victim...then you know you probably should have offered a plea bargain.

Note to prosecutors: "Some SOBs just need killin." It is not necessarily a valid defense but jury's do understand it. It is one thing for a defense attorney to stand before a jury and protect an accused who is also a miserable person, it is far different for a prosecutor to use the state to prosecute someone who is basically a good person ( Ms. Cobb is a nurse and the mother of six kids) and take the side of the miserable SOB who has been abusing them for years. Sounds like the jury understood that Kevin Cobb was one of those SOBs who got far less than he deserved.

Man a butter knife... OUCH!

HAT TIP:ABA Journal
and for some of the quoted material above the NY Daily News

By the way, gotta love the NY Daily News Headline in this case"I killed my coke-fiend husband in self-defense." Kind of says it all n'est-ce pas?

San Diego Gestapo...uhhh police...Arrest Innocent Jet Fan

People ask sometimes ask me "what can be worse than the murder of an innocent person by a violent criminal?
For me that is an easy answer: Members of the government allegedly acting on my behalf,and at my expense, who abuse their authority and arrest an innocent person. I am not going to get into the whole thing about allowing 100 guilty men to go free so that one innocent man is not imprisoned, but watching this tape enrages me just as much as the acts of these two idiots in Connecticut.

Thank goodness, a thoughtful fan from San Diego used his camera to record what can only be described as a totalitarian behavior from San Diego's men in blue.

These cops shamed their city, their taxpayers and their badges/uniforms. If I were Mayor of NY I'd be calling for an investigation, and if I were Mayor of San Diego there would be one ongoing right now. A bunch of cops would be on desk duty and a few would be looking at demotions and other discipline! Here is the story in the NY POST

Just Some Interesting Links

A court found a 91 year old man who hallucinates due to dementia legally able to stand trial on a murder. He killed a nursing home attendant who happened to come into his room. He thought the guy was an intruder. God Bless the Criminal Defense Lawyer in that one.

Hattip: ABA Journal News Now.

Haven't blogged about the sale of the Obama Senate seat. Why? Cause everyone else has. I did wonder why I hadn't seen a high profile NY Washington or Chicago White Collar lawyer on the matter. This post From the Online Wall Street Journal tells us. The Governor of Illinois can't pay his legal bills.

Finally I found this interesting piece on adult entertainment and law. It deals with how feminists can impove the Porn biz. What I find interesting in it is that here is another pro-sex Feminist. Like Camille Paglia, Tatiana Von Tauber is saying that feminists that rage against women in porn are not any more interested in women making decisions about their body than Phyllis Schlafly. They just want to control them in their own way. If Feminism is to mean anything, it means that women have the same rights to use their bodies any way they want the same way as men can. Take a look and tell me what you think.

Hattip: The Legal Satyricon.

Around The Blogosphere The Week of November 11, 2008 Part III of III* : Of Women, Music and All That Jazz.

*I know I previously said four. I reserve the right to consolidate because I am tired.

Here is my last installment from the Week of November 11, 2008.

1.Two Sex-Workers Talk About the Sex Trade.(Links are NSFW).

I spend a lot of time representing men and women who are involved in the Business of Sex. Some of their pursuits are legal, some not legal, some straddle the boarder. Occasionally I write about the experience. I also however keep up with what some of the people in the provider and "hobbyist" side of the field are saying.

This week the New York City Sex Bloggers rolled out their 2009 "pinup"calendar to benefit the Sex Workers Awareness (an education and outreach program)which I am told is a non-profit organization I have seen the way people treat Sex workers. I have seen the way that police discount them and how they have been marginalized though many are smart and hard working mothers, caretakers, students, and just regular folk. I would not treat a dog the way our criminal justice system treats these people. Hence I am giving their calendar a shout out here. I would have been at the rollout party last night but for a pressing and late breaking personal issue.

Meanwhile I thought I would highlight two posts from Sex Workers blogs.

A. This one at "The Real Princess Diaries" is about the way most sex-workers view their clientele. It doesn't apply to all and it doesn't apply to the entire strata anymore than any opinion piece can sum up the position of all workers in any field. It is indicative of how most of the clients I have see the scene.

B. Renegade Evolution is a blog, and from what I can gather a person too. She is a sex blogger and worker. She is opinionated, blunt and usually succinct. In this post she talks about a fact in the sex field that makes it hard to help sex workers (providers) and stops them from uniting. It is the Sex Worker Caste System and I see it everyday.

Stop a topless dancer and tell her she is a sex worker, she will tell you she is involved in a legal business and she is a good girl but that escorts are whores. She will tell you all she does is expose her body and people give her money for the privilege of seeing the Hand of God in her beauty.

The High end Escort will tell you that the stripper is the real whore, selling her body and teasing her clients for a buck here or there. She on the other hand does not expose herself before countless others. She only "dates" nice wealthy men who she would likely sleep with anyway if they met under other circumstances. In addition unlike the Porn star or stripper, her work is done in private and is "confidential".

The Porn Star thinks they are both insane. She will tell you she sleeps with men she knows and many whom she loves, she makes a lot of money far more than the others and she is engaged in a safe and legal field where the women call a lot of the shots.

Renegade Evolution thinks they should put away the Bull and unite to help each other. I have to say I agree with her. It is about time workers in the field get out of each others way, acknowledge the business they are all in and try to improve conditions for all. The fight is like criminal lawyers not acknowledging the work of litigators or transactional lawyers. It is all law just different...

2..The Music Scene

A. Wynton Marsalis and Jazz at Lincoln Center (JALC) have been celebrating Louis Armstrong and Thelonious Monk. Two of my all time favs. Here is a link to the post about the Armstrong speech and this one on e nights of Thelonious Monk tribute concerts.

B. Probation in Plea Deal for Blogger Who Leaked Guns N’ Roses Songs. Blogger streamed 9 G'n R songs on his blog, busted for the Copyright Infringement. Getting Probation, hasn't told where he got the songs from... still may however. I wonder if he had streamed only snippets of each song if that would have been protected speech??? IP Genius' any ideas?

C. "Tuba Man" Murdered by Teens, Seattle Mourns

Every city has a person or two who are as big if not bigger than that city itself. He is half village idiot, half sage, but he is beloved and the city adopts him. In NY it is the "Naked Cowboy", In San Francisco it's Frank Chu, In Washington DC it is President Bush, but in Seattle Washington it was Edward Scott McMichael aka "Tuba Man". He was a "busker" a man who made his living making his music on the streets. He was a guy who seemed to pop up everywhere, asking "DO YOU WANT TO BE A PART OF IT?? Who didn't want to be a part of it. He could take your worst day and make you smile with the "Um pa pa" of the Tuba.

"Tuba Man" was murdered allegedly by a group of teens who didn't recognize him. He didn't have his Tuba with him that day.
Story from the NY Times

Money Quote: “Ed would ask in his unmistakable baritone, ‘John, do you want to be a part of it tonight?’ ” Mr. Tangeman recalled. “This statement was part of the genius of Ed, as if contributing to Ed’s efforts, one was not only being a part of Ed’s life but being a part of something much larger, something almost unobtainable.”

That's it for now. I may or may not post another part later. If I do, consider this III of IV. Otherwise, who knows.