4 ms·

I don't understand what process was going on here. Why was police showing up on her doorstep and having a back and forth if they had evidence? File charges and

I don't understand what process was going on here. Why was police showing up on her doorstep and having a back and forth if they had evidence? File charges and she can fight them. Why is she supplying evidence to the police dept? If they haven't filed charges just ignore them? If they have, evidence goes to court.

mindslight 11mo ago
This isn't television where a bunch of attorneys immediately show up because they are actors paid by the production company. Going to court is an extremely heavyweight and expensive process. Retaining a criminal defense attorney will cost you a $10k retainer to start. Most people will talk to the police to try to head off the situation from escalating that way.
- BizarroLand 11mo ago
  $10k is a massive exaggeration. Many lawyers can be retained for $500, and if you can show that affording that is untenable they will work out a payment plan for your court appointed lawyer.
  - mindslight 11mo ago
    $500 is two hours of time for a very low hourly rate. You might luck into finding an attorney that is chummy with the right policy/prosecutor to clear something like this up that quick, but I doubt it. $10k has been the standard retainer for a few other legal issues I've dealt with lately, and I doubt most criminal defense attorneys are going to want less if they foresee any chance of the case dragging out. > they will work out a payment plan for your court appointed lawyer Have you actually been there and done anything like this? From what I've seen, the reality is much much much different than the marketing.
    - BizarroLand 11mo ago
      It's been a minute, but I've retained a lawyer in the past. The $500 was just to have a conversation and to lay out the plan of attack if needed. Fortunately, it didn't go anywhere after that and the whole matter was dropped, but I didn't have to roll in with $10k just to get started.
      - mindslight 11mo ago
        $500 makes sense for a few hours conversation. Once they start talking to people on your behalf, writing letters, etc, that same hourly rate applies but its other people running up your clock. As you were discussing a plan of action, did that attorney give you any idea what costs you were looking at if the situation started to require serious work on their part?
        BizarroLand 11mo ago
        It was a simple criminal matter, dismissed for lack of evidence and I was innocent besides. I work with lawyers now and the highest paid lawyer I know charges $1,200/hr. The associates charge $350/hr. $10k is still insane unless you're getting a named partner to run your case or if you're in for a serious crime.
        mindslight 11mo ago
        Maybe criminal matters are much less time-intensive than I am used to? $350/hr matches my experience. I just figured attorneys would expect to use at least 20-30 hours on a criminal case, the same way they expect to use at least that much time on straightforward civil matters.
        BizarroLand 11mo ago
        Maybe it's a terminology thing. To me, a retainer is just the amount of money you pay upfront to retain the services of the lawyer, and it does not cover the entire anticipated fee of the lawyers' services. If you go through a trial with a personal lawyer for anything more complicated than, say, a DUI, you would be lucky to only spend $10,000 no matter how short the trial is, but either way the balance of the bill would be due either during the course of the trial to cover expenses or after the trial once all matters have settled.
- sidewndr46 11mo ago
  I don't know where you are but a criminal defense attorney does not start at $10,000. Also talking to the police is a great way to wind up in jail for a long time
  - mindslight 11mo ago
    > Also talking to the police is a great way to wind up in jail for a long time Or it's a way to clear up a situation without incurring a life-altering debt and criminal record. We hear about the horrible stories, but people are generally people. If you're facing serious (felony) charges, actually guilty and they're building a case, don't know how to talk without spilling a bunch of possibly-incriminating details, think the cops have it personally out for you, etc, then of course shut the fuck up and assert the full extent of the process. But for many situations this can actually be terrible advice. I was actually just on the other side of this with a juvenile first time offender (property crime). The kid was obviously guilty, open and shut evidence, and admitted it to the detective. The detective advocated for him (them), encouraging me to settle for a small informal cash restitution payment rather than insisting it go to trial. That kid has now been hopefully scared straight, without having a criminal record hanging over his head. I hope he can keep it that way.
    - Citizen8396 11mo ago
      They are not mutually exclusive. You can cooperate with police at a lawyer's recommendation. If someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer, they're doing it to manipulate you to their advantage. In your scenario, first time youth offenders almost always will have diversion as an option. If the situation can be remediated so easily, then the cost would not be too great. It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer.
      - mindslight 11mo ago
        > someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer add that to the list of when one should pull the ripcord on DIY and find/demand an attorney > It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer. So in my case the outcome was a restitution payment of a few hundred dollars. I don't know what the bottom of the market for attorneys looks like, but I would be highly surprised if you could find one to get involved for less than a two hour commitment (let's say $500). So right off the bat, that would have tripled the cost of the outcome. Never mind when the detective now sees mom, despite being ostensibly "poor", has enough money to afford that attorney (and make the detective's job harder!). So he stops telling me that I should be content with a few hundred dollars, and I instead claim a much higher amount of actual damages including the time I had to spend. (Note that my comments on this matter are all modulo assuming the kid is guilty. There was pretty strong evidence left behind the scene, and yes, I am mostly just taking the detective's word for it. Obviously if the kid was innocent and being framed by some other kid, then the downside to not hiring an attorney becomes a bit harder to stomach, despite the same financial incentives remaining)
keernan 11mo ago
If I read the story correctly, he was delivering the summons. Therefore she was charged and a court date was pending.
- advisedwang 11mo ago
  So that means the case has been referred to a prosecutor who has already started the criminal case, right? So why the hell is the police having a back and forth with the defendant about the case? Why is she talking to the police and not the prosecutor, who at that point is needed for a dismissal on the law enforcement side? It just all seems weird and contrary to my understanding of the system
  - keernan 11mo ago
    >>So that means the case has been referred to a prosecutor who has already started the criminal case, right? I certainly do not know how every state sets up their Judicial system but in my experience most states have a County Court System where jury trials take place. Appeals are taken to an intermediate court (usually referred to as Appellate) and above that is the final and highest court (usually referred to as the Supreme Court; but interestingly enough, NY refers to their trial court as Supreme Court). There is usually a separate local system commonly referred to as Municipal Court. I spent my career in the trial courts at the County or Federal District Court level, so I don't have intimate knowledge of the ins and outs of Municipal Courts. But, to the extent I had any interactions at that level, the majority of the cases in Municipal Court are traffic offenses (some can be quite serious such as DWI or when someone died in a car crash). But it has been my experience that most Municipal Courts do not have a jury box and do not handle jury cases (although I have a vague memory of being in a municipal court in a large city that had a jury box). Municipal Court often have different Rules of Court than do the County Courts. Often appeals of Municipal Court are handled at the County Trial Court level with a brand new trial, instead of by the County Appellate level. And Municipal Courts work hand in hand with the local prosecutor and local police (this is a local town court remember). Cases often are seen by the prosecutor for the first time when he arrives in Court (usually open just one night a week in towns, but during the day and perhaps every day for larger cities). Usually the police are free to dismiss charges on their own depending upon the seriousness of the charge and whether or not the prosecutor has become involved in the case. In this case we know the charges were dropped by the police department, not the prosecutor, so that suggests to me the prosecutor was likely never aware of the incident or the charges.

mindslight 11mo ago

This isn't television where a bunch of attorneys immediately show up because they are actors paid by the production company. Going to court is an extremely heavyweight and expensive process. Retaining a criminal defense attorney will cost you a $10k retainer to start. Most people will talk to the police to try to head off the situation from escalating that way.

BizarroLand 11mo ago
$10k is a massive exaggeration. Many lawyers can be retained for $500, and if you can show that affording that is untenable they will work out a payment plan for your court appointed lawyer.
- mindslight 11mo ago
  $500 is two hours of time for a very low hourly rate. You might luck into finding an attorney that is chummy with the right policy/prosecutor to clear something like this up that quick, but I doubt it. $10k has been the standard retainer for a few other legal issues I've dealt with lately, and I doubt most criminal defense attorneys are going to want less if they foresee any chance of the case dragging out. > they will work out a payment plan for your court appointed lawyer Have you actually been there and done anything like this? From what I've seen, the reality is much much much different than the marketing.
  - BizarroLand 11mo ago
    It's been a minute, but I've retained a lawyer in the past. The $500 was just to have a conversation and to lay out the plan of attack if needed. Fortunately, it didn't go anywhere after that and the whole matter was dropped, but I didn't have to roll in with $10k just to get started.
    - mindslight 11mo ago
      $500 makes sense for a few hours conversation. Once they start talking to people on your behalf, writing letters, etc, that same hourly rate applies but its other people running up your clock. As you were discussing a plan of action, did that attorney give you any idea what costs you were looking at if the situation started to require serious work on their part?
      - BizarroLand 11mo ago
        It was a simple criminal matter, dismissed for lack of evidence and I was innocent besides. I work with lawyers now and the highest paid lawyer I know charges $1,200/hr. The associates charge $350/hr. $10k is still insane unless you're getting a named partner to run your case or if you're in for a serious crime.
        mindslight 11mo ago
        Maybe criminal matters are much less time-intensive than I am used to? $350/hr matches my experience. I just figured attorneys would expect to use at least 20-30 hours on a criminal case, the same way they expect to use at least that much time on straightforward civil matters.
        BizarroLand 11mo ago
        Maybe it's a terminology thing. To me, a retainer is just the amount of money you pay upfront to retain the services of the lawyer, and it does not cover the entire anticipated fee of the lawyers' services. If you go through a trial with a personal lawyer for anything more complicated than, say, a DUI, you would be lucky to only spend $10,000 no matter how short the trial is, but either way the balance of the bill would be due either during the course of the trial to cover expenses or after the trial once all matters have settled.
sidewndr46 11mo ago
I don't know where you are but a criminal defense attorney does not start at $10,000. Also talking to the police is a great way to wind up in jail for a long time
- mindslight 11mo ago
  > Also talking to the police is a great way to wind up in jail for a long time Or it's a way to clear up a situation without incurring a life-altering debt and criminal record. We hear about the horrible stories, but people are generally people. If you're facing serious (felony) charges, actually guilty and they're building a case, don't know how to talk without spilling a bunch of possibly-incriminating details, think the cops have it personally out for you, etc, then of course shut the fuck up and assert the full extent of the process. But for many situations this can actually be terrible advice. I was actually just on the other side of this with a juvenile first time offender (property crime). The kid was obviously guilty, open and shut evidence, and admitted it to the detective. The detective advocated for him (them), encouraging me to settle for a small informal cash restitution payment rather than insisting it go to trial. That kid has now been hopefully scared straight, without having a criminal record hanging over his head. I hope he can keep it that way.
  - Citizen8396 11mo ago
    They are not mutually exclusive. You can cooperate with police at a lawyer's recommendation. If someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer, they're doing it to manipulate you to their advantage. In your scenario, first time youth offenders almost always will have diversion as an option. If the situation can be remediated so easily, then the cost would not be too great. It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer.
    - mindslight 11mo ago
      > someone tries to pressure you from talking to a lawyer add that to the list of when one should pull the ripcord on DIY and find/demand an attorney > It seems far more likely to result in a better (or at least neutral) outcome with a lawyer. So in my case the outcome was a restitution payment of a few hundred dollars. I don't know what the bottom of the market for attorneys looks like, but I would be highly surprised if you could find one to get involved for less than a two hour commitment (let's say $500). So right off the bat, that would have tripled the cost of the outcome. Never mind when the detective now sees mom, despite being ostensibly "poor", has enough money to afford that attorney (and make the detective's job harder!). So he stops telling me that I should be content with a few hundred dollars, and I instead claim a much higher amount of actual damages including the time I had to spend. (Note that my comments on this matter are all modulo assuming the kid is guilty. There was pretty strong evidence left behind the scene, and yes, I am mostly just taking the detective's word for it. Obviously if the kid was innocent and being framed by some other kid, then the downside to not hiring an attorney becomes a bit harder to stomach, despite the same financial incentives remaining)

keernan 11mo ago

If I read the story correctly, he was delivering the summons. Therefore she was charged and a court date was pending.

advisedwang 11mo ago
So that means the case has been referred to a prosecutor who has already started the criminal case, right? So why the hell is the police having a back and forth with the defendant about the case? Why is she talking to the police and not the prosecutor, who at that point is needed for a dismissal on the law enforcement side? It just all seems weird and contrary to my understanding of the system
- keernan 11mo ago
  >>So that means the case has been referred to a prosecutor who has already started the criminal case, right? I certainly do not know how every state sets up their Judicial system but in my experience most states have a County Court System where jury trials take place. Appeals are taken to an intermediate court (usually referred to as Appellate) and above that is the final and highest court (usually referred to as the Supreme Court; but interestingly enough, NY refers to their trial court as Supreme Court). There is usually a separate local system commonly referred to as Municipal Court. I spent my career in the trial courts at the County or Federal District Court level, so I don't have intimate knowledge of the ins and outs of Municipal Courts. But, to the extent I had any interactions at that level, the majority of the cases in Municipal Court are traffic offenses (some can be quite serious such as DWI or when someone died in a car crash). But it has been my experience that most Municipal Courts do not have a jury box and do not handle jury cases (although I have a vague memory of being in a municipal court in a large city that had a jury box). Municipal Court often have different Rules of Court than do the County Courts. Often appeals of Municipal Court are handled at the County Trial Court level with a brand new trial, instead of by the County Appellate level. And Municipal Courts work hand in hand with the local prosecutor and local police (this is a local town court remember). Cases often are seen by the prosecutor for the first time when he arrives in Court (usually open just one night a week in towns, but during the day and perhaps every day for larger cities). Usually the police are free to dismiss charges on their own depending upon the seriousness of the charge and whether or not the prosecutor has become involved in the case. In this case we know the charges were dropped by the police department, not the prosecutor, so that suggests to me the prosecutor was likely never aware of the incident or the charges.