For the first time I'm seriously considering suicide.

[franznietzsche]

More seriously...I'm really worried for him.

We all are Moonbear, even me.

 

[Evo]

tribdog is family, it is very upsetting. Certainly the check cashing place will agree to settle. I think they'd rather collect. It's not looking like an admission of guilt, it's looking like you're willing to give them the money they've lost out of good will (and to keep your butt out of jail). What's worse, look like you're guilty and stay out of jail, or look innocent and go to jail? You may be able to press charges against that loser, but you already know nothing will come of it.

 

[plover]

tribdog:
Well, that just extravagantly sucks to hell and back.

If you have access to the court records, then you should be able to see the record of your previous appearances. If the record shows that the judge said you would be informed if charges were re-filed, and you were not, you should find out if that would constitute enough of a technical problem to get the charges dropped again.

So is this guy Jon in jail in Maine? Is there any information about his prosecution there that might help? (I mean from the actual DA's office—I don't know how much cooperation there is on this stuff between states though.)

There should definitely be a grievance process through which a new public defender can be requested, though I suspect the exact process varies by state, and if they really aren't taking into account the circumstances concerning the previous occasion of these charges, there might be an argument that the defender isn'r doing their job.

You might consider contacting the officer who arrested you the first time (the one who believed you) and seeing if he would make a statement for you.

Your boss sounds cool. Does he know any lawyers? He might just know people who work on business contracts and such, but maybe he could ask them if they know anyone who might be willing to do the case cheap, or at least offer some advice.

There are sites like LawGuru on the net where you can ask questions free, but I don't have experience with any of them, so I don't know whether to recommend them or not. I looked through LawGuru a little, and it seems like it might do well at least for straightforward questions.

There also ought to be local organizations that help with legal advice. Even if the ACLU isn't the right one to help for your situation they probably know who is.

Good luck!

 

[franznietzsche]

If you have access to the court records, then you should be able to see the record of your previous appearances. If the record shows that the judge said you would be informed if charges were re-filed, and you were not, you should find out if that would constitute enough of a technical problem to get the charges dropped again.

Freedom of Information Act, if he requests the files they have to release them to him. However, getting they already refiled the charges once, so they would probably do so again. However if it can help you get ahold of the previous PD, or even to show that they don't have sufficient evidence, i woudl recommend it.

There should definitely be a grievance process through which a new public defender can be requested, though I suspect the exact process varies by state, and if they really aren't taking into account the circumstances concerning the previous occasion of these charges, there might be an argument that the defender isn'r doing their job.

I was thinking the same thing, anything you can do to get back the previous attorney.

You might consider contacting the officer who arrested you the first time (the one who believed you) and seeing if he would make a statement for you.

I don't know if that would do much, just because he's not a witness and he'd be a weak character witness, just simply since he doesn't know you. And as someone said if the DA is out to prove something by winning cases, his testimony probably won't carry much weight.


Also as someone suggested that other guy's fingerprints should be on the orignial check, and if he's got felony convictions for former fraud and forgeries, then he should show up under a fingerprint comparison. That itself proves to the court that he was involved, and helps corroborate your case.


Really hoping this works out for you tribdog.

 

[plover]

Freedom of Information Act, if he requests the files they have to release them to him. However, getting they already refiled the charges once, so they would probably do so again.

For "if you have access" read "since you have access" in my earlier post—that was the intended meaning. They probably would file charges again, but it would give him more time to figure how to deal with things if he's not being pressured to accept a deal.

I was thinking the same thing, anything you can do to get back the previous attorney.

Yeah. The only problem is that if the guy is as overworked as most PDs, he might not remember the case.

I don't know if that would do much

I was just throwing out ideas.

Also as someone suggested that other guy's fingerprints should be on the orignial check, and if he's got felony convictions for former fraud and forgeries, then he should show up under a fingerprint comparison. That itself proves to the court that he was involved, and helps corroborate your case.

This did seem like one of the better ideas here to me too.

 

[Smurf]

See how much support you have tribdog! The whole forum is behind you! Don't give up hope!

 

[check]

:( Good luck, trib.

 

[Tsu]

We're with ya, trib! Hang in there, little buddy!

 

[tribdog]

Oh, I won't do anything stupid, but this sucks. Thanks for all the support.

 

[Grizzlycomet]

Good luck, Tribdog. Hope everything works out for you.

 

[humanino]

Tribdog : do not let them put you in jail.
You are innocent

 

[Moonbear]

Oh, I won't do anything stupid, but this sucks. Thanks for all the support.

Well, we can't become lawyers overnight to help as much as you need that, but you sure have our collective ability to search the internet for resources at your disposal.

As someone already pointed out, PDs are overworked, so the more you hand to your PD of research you've already done for them, the more likely they'll be to take notice and take an interest in your case because it means they don't have to do all the legwork on their own.

 

[Andy]

Good luck tribdog, hope this all works out for ya, think i'll leave off being a dick to you for a while. Have to pick on jimmyp instead!

 

[jimmy p]

Hey! Woah... I'm sorry to hear that Trib. My best wishes go to you!

 

[the number 42]

Tribdog: Don't know what to say except that I hope it works out for you. That Moreno guy sounds like a virus, but the legal system sounds lazy/stupid. Sounds like they can't catch the guilty guy, so they settle for the innocent. You can't allow that to happen. Anyway, what right do they have to pester you even once about this? Your taxes pay them to protect you, not hound you.

 

[franznietzsche]

the legal system sounds lazy/stupid. Sounds like they can't catch the guilty guy, so they settle for the innocent. You can't allow that to happen. Anyway, what right do they have to pester you even once about this? Your taxes pay them to protect you, not hound you.

Welcome to America.

 

[Moonbear]

Welcome to America.

Yep. Sadly, it seems our laws do far more to protect the guilty than they do the truly innocent. tribdog, if you get convicted, I'm going to be sorely tempted to join Ivan and Tsu on their migration to Canada! I really hope there's some justice left in our justice system.

 

[graphic7]

Yep. Sadly, it seems our laws do far more to protect the guilty than they do the truly innocent. tribdog, if you get convicted, I'm going to be sorely tempted to join Ivan and Tsu on their migration to Canada! I really hope there's some justice left in our justice system.

I've seen the magnitude of the idiotism (I hope this exist, otherwise I've created a new word) present in the court systems. I've witnessed them convict without having a shred of evidence, with only the legal, elegant, hogwash from the prosecutor. Keep in mind this was in the South, concerning a computer crime, which most of the South is technically challenged.

In this instance, the convictee was guilty the moment he/she stepped in court, and no evidence was prsented. Wam bam, and an instant conviction is given. Talk about a serious deprivation of human rights, eh?

Maybe someday I'll write about it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'm going to be sorely tempted to join Ivan and Tsu on their migration to Canada!

Hey, its a another party! Should we get another bus?

 

[the number 42]

Welcome to America.

Scarey. We have our problems over here too, but I didn't think it was so accepted in the US. It sounds very unjust, and worrying too.

 

[franznietzsche]

Scarey. We have our problems over here too, but I didn't think it was so accepted in the US. It sounds very unjust, and worrying too.

It is. I've argued many times that the justice system here has serious problems, but 9 timesout of 10 the response i get is: well its better than the alternative! Which really irritates me. What alternative? As opposed to an actually good system?

 

[Moonbear]

It is. I've argued many times that the justice system here has serious problems, but 9 timesout of 10 the response i get is: well its better than the alternative! Which really irritates me. What alternative? As opposed to an actually good system?

The concept of innocent until proven guilty just seems to go against human nature I think. How many of you will pass someone being led away in handcuffs by cops and not think, "I wonder what he did wrong?" Do you ever question, "Gee, I wonder if that guy really did what he's being arrested for?" And now we have the same people sitting on juries. Look how easily people can be led to believe evidence exists where there is none, and you start to see the flaws in the system.

I watched some Court TV once upon a time (or some show like that where they tape actual court proceedings). The density of the lawyers was so incredibly frustrating to me. I remember this one lawyer dancing all around a question, asking 10 different things, when there was one clear question that kept jumping into my mind...just answer that one question and your innocence would be obvious (or maybe that person wasn't innocent, so they lawyer purposely avoided the question...I don't know). I don't know how the jury could have decided the case, because the lawyers never asked any of what I thought were the right questions to get straight to the heart of the matter. Maybe they are too busy grand-standing for the cameras on those shows.

I'm just so afraid that's what's going to happen to tribdog. The lawyers and the jury are going to look at his signature and thumbprint on the back of that check and jump to the conclusion he's guilty, when the burden of proof for this case is to show he knew it was a forgery. Is it his handwriting on the "Pay to" line? Or in the "amount" line? If the check cashing place didn't immediately recognize it as a forgery when that's their job to check, how could he have known what to look for? There is no way you can prove he knew it was a forgery when he accepted it and cashed it.

Actually, one thing that might help is that he's used this particular check-cashing place before for his paychecks. It might be suspicious if he never used the place before and then decided that one time to take it to a new place. But if that was his regular venue for cashing checks, it would help show there was nothing unusual about this pattern, that he wasn't going out of his way to avoid recognition, or anything like that.

When you use a check cashing place like that, don't you need to give them an address or something? Afterall, wouldn't they want a way to contact you if there was a problem with the check? If so, shouldn't they have tried contacting you to notify you of the problem?

Who is the one pressing the charges anyway? The check cashing place, or the person whose check was forged, or both? One piece of important evidence would be to show the handwriting on the check "Pay to" line doesn't belong to either the rightful account owner or tribdog, but to the third party who forged the check.

Look into how the original case was dismissed too. Was it dismissed without prejudice, or just dismissed? In the former, that leaves it open to have charges re-filed, but otherwise, you shouldn't be able to be charged more than once for the same thing. If it was dismissed, that should be the end of it. Look carefully how the records reflect the case being dismissed.

 

[Lyuokdea]

tribdog, I'm sure your best bet to proving your innocence, since obviously they don't have to prove your guit, is to look up a handwriting expert, unless you wrote the pay to line on the front, You should have an expert who could testify that the other guy did, if whoever gave you the check wrote your name on it they should be able to tell by comparing that to his signature, which should exist somewhere as he is currently in jail. If they can show that the check was signed by another guy currently in jail for the same crime on multiple charges, I think you have a pretty strong case.

Also, try to find out if you can match the printer that printed it with a printer that printed his other checks, people with records of bank fraud often have a system they go by and if a forensics expert can say that they both came from the same printer, you should also have a strong case.

Good luck, get rid of that dumb defense lawyer, even if you have to pay for another one, it will be worth it, it might cost you a lot more than you ever got for it, try to get that back in civil court, but don't let them take your freeedom.

~Lyuokdea

 

[Gokul43201]

It certainly looks like the DA has a lousy case, at best, on this one. I've no doubt that tribdog can beat this easy.

 

[franznietzsche]

It certainly looks like the DA has a lousy case, at best, on this one. I've no doubt that tribdog can beat this easy.

I sure hope so. But it doesn't sound like his PD is very success or justice oriented.

 

[Evo]

It certainly looks like the DA has a lousy case, at best, on this one. I've no doubt that tribdog can beat this easy.

The question here would be, what happened when they asked for repayment? The first thing the company would have done is ask for repayment (I would imagine) it seems they would have only pressed charges if their requests for reimbursement of the bad check continued to be ignored?

I actually am in a simular situtation. My car insurance is automatically deducted from my checking account. AAA (don't EVER use them). Instead of deducting $127 for my monthly premium from my account, they deducted $1,270. This caused my house payment to bounce. I contacted my AAA insurance rep that admitted they had made a mistake, but sorry, AAA would not credit my account back electronically, they would have to send me a check. They sent me a check a month later, which after I deposited, their accounting office screwed up and stopped payment on, which caused my car payment to bounce. I am the victim here, I have been without over $1,000 in my bank account that should be there because of AAA's error. I am STILL waiting for AAA to get my money to me. I however have had to repay my bank for the bad check AAA wrote to me. I cashed what turned out to be "bad check". It is MY responsibility to the financial institution to pay them back, even though I did nothing wrong. I payed my bank back. It was tribdog's responsibility to repay the financial institution that cashed that bad check, just like I did. Yes, it caused me a financial hardship, I am still waiting for my money. It's been over two months.

The only difference is that AAA isn't intentially criminal and they will be reimbursing me for all returned check fees, late payment fees as well as a letter of explanantion to the credit bureau and financial institutions involved of their error.

My question is - what steps did the financial institution make to collect the money from tribdog before they turned this over for prosecution? If they made no attempt to collect the money from trib before prosecuting, they may have no case.

I find it hard to believe that if they had contacted tribdog and asked for the money back and he payed them that this would have gone to court.

 

[Moonbear]

tribdog can't go to prison! JimmyP would drive us crazy complaining about how much he misses him again! The lamentings of JimmyP the last time tribdog disappeared on him just returned to memory, so I had to say it.

But, hey, nowadays, it seems going to prison is in vogue! Maybe you'll meet some really cool celebrities there. Just don't drop the soap!

If the winner of the Funniest Member contest can't fulfill his obligations, for any reason, do we get to throw the runner up into the volcano instead?

 

[revelator]

Been a while since tribdogs made a post.. Regardless, best of luck to you tribdog! Fight the power man!

 

[Moonbear]

Been a while since tribdogs made a post.. Regardless, best of luck to you tribdog! Fight the power man!

Okay, I'll admit it, I'm not really worried about JimmyP, it's me who's already missing tribdog! And he's only been away two days! Where will I go for humor if he goes to prison? I've grown fond of the pup!

 

[Evo]

If tribdog was advised not to pay because it might make him look guilty, those people that advised him need to be shot. I'd rather be "just a victim" than a "victim and in prison".

I hope he works this out quickly. I think paying back the money is the smartest way to go, have the whole thing dropped and chalk it up to a learning experience.