The Continuing Trial of david_deacon

[farchivist]

And boy howdy, is it continuing.

We need a recap. Let me be frank about what he's in for. I could post the criminal complaint here, but I won't because it contains the minor's name and I won't do that.

Comments

[farchivist]

DD was aware of the charges against him, as he signed to it when he was first offered bond on 12/3/12. The charges were written in nice big letters, "Indecency with a child" and so on. He was read out his charges on that same day in court. This was previous to Mr Bond being appointed as his attorney.

After Mr Bond was appointed as his attorney (1/4/13), Bond issued his own motion requesting that bond be reduced. It was summarily enied on 2/5/13. The grand jury indictment occurred on 2/12/13 - and a copy of that indictment was served to DD in jail by hand via process, complete with an explanation of each of the three charges. Co-signed on the delivery was Mr Bond's signature.

After that, things didn't move until May. What Mr Bond has been doing since then is delaying the trial as much as possible for reasons of discovery....and if I read between the lines, to get a plea deal going with the prosecutor. And DD has been hostile about it

[nesmith]

That sheds a lot more light on it; and I should have figured that taking anything that DD says at face value is buying into bullshit.

[theweaselking]

I fully and entirely agree with your premise that the real problem ACTUALLY IS that DD is a useless shitbag. I've read his posts, and am willing to believe that his real life matched his internet life.

At the same time, his allegations are relevant and, if true, damning. And that's why a competent lawyer will be able to disprove them in approximately zero seconds. And if Mr Bond cannot belie them, then DD has a point about his lawyer being bad at lawyer.

EVEN IF everything he says about his lawyer is a lie, his lawyer should be able to show that he's lying. A lawyer who can't show that he's lying (at least as well as you have) is by definition not competent to present a criminal defense.

And if any of the things he's accusing his lawyer of IS true and/or not disprovable by his lawyer, that's bad shit. Because even useless shitbags are entitled to good representation.

[madra_liath]

Do you mean the time he tried to sue his college because the evil feminist cabal expelled him for merely saying "hello" to someone?

I heard his failure was EPIC.