A Gift From God

 

by Kerry Thomas

June 17, 2008

 

 

There’s an old adage that says those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.  At least, that’s what I thought as I read through the letters to the editor in the last couple editions of the News Review.

 

In an attempt to refute a small portion of Karen Meyer’s June 3 letter to the editor of the Vilas County News Review, a letter in which Karen Meyer’s support for the Protect America Act mentions trial lawyers as an obstacle to the passage of that legislation, attorney Steve Lucareli writes about being proud to be a trial lawyer.  He goes on about how it’s trial lawyers who stand up against “big business.”  Overlooked in Mr. Lucareli’s scenario is the fact that those big businesses also have trial lawyers on their side.

 

The attorney Mr. Lucareli is describing is a defense attorney, a trial lawyer who specializes in defending suits brought by other trial lawyers.  When you’re sued, you want a good defense attorney on your side.  .

 

You also want a good defense attorney in a criminal trial, and especially in a criminal proceeding where the opposing attorney has few legal scruples, who would even stoop so low as to commit prosecutorial misconduct in an effort to win at all costs.

 

Some people might remember, Mr. Lucareli was once Vilas County’s District Attorney.  (see below)  When the Wisconsin Court of Appeals stated that Mr. Lucareli had committed prosecutorial misconduct as Vilas County’s District Attorney, the excuse for Mr. Lucareli’s actions was that he might have forgotten about the trial judge’s prior ruling on the matter in question.

 

The Court of Appeals found that “The suggestion…that Lucareli "may have forgotten" about the court's ruling is an unacceptable excuse for his behavior.”

 

The legal profession is supposed to be self-regulating.  That means, the good attorneys are supposed to weed out the bad attorneys.  But in reality, you almost have to commit a felony before you’re disbarred.  .

 

The legal profession has done a very poor job of holding its members accountable.

 

Unscrupulous trial lawyers are the ones who file the frivolous lawsuits, who sue over the smallest of conflicts, whose vision seems only to go as far as a person’s or a corporation’s bank account.  The profession refuses to accept the notion of “loser pays” because that would actually penalize these unscrupulous trial lawyers.

 

Mr. Lucareli also notes, almost braggadociosly so, that the jury system is assisted by trial lawyers.  Such a misguided view, Mr. Lucareli.  For all their legal doublespeak, for all their stretching the truth to the breaking pint, trial lawyers are little more than slick salesmen.

 

It is the Juror who has the ultimate power in a courtroom.  Each Juror has the power to decide, on his or her own, not only the facts of any particular case, but also the power to judge the law itself.  Some people call this jury nullification.

 

Citizen Jurors must know their powers.  In Wisconsin, every Juror has "the power to do what they want in a given case because neither the prosecution nor the court has the authority to compel them to do what they should." State v. Bjerkaas, 472 N.W.2d 615, 619 (Wis. App. 1991).

 

Mr. Lucareli may think he has power in a courtroom.  But neither he, nor any lawyer, nor any judge, has the power to compel a Juror to compromise his own principles simply because the law tells him he should.

 

Rebecca McDowell might do well to think about that for a moment.  Trial lawyers are not the last line of defense in a courtroom.  Both sides have trial lawyers.  Informed Citizen Jurors who know their powers are a citizen’s last line of defense in a courtroom.

 

Rebecca McDowell’s letter is full of hatred for President Bush (and all things Republican), but lacks any examples to justify her hatred.  Statements such as “the most unpopular president in history” demonstrate her lack of any historical perspective.  Isn’t it ironic that yet another poll was released this week, showing that, even though President Bush’s popularity is low, the popularity of this Democrat-controlled Congress is even lower.

 

Rebecca McDowell’s letter concludes, “Some congressmen are finally standing up to the half-truths, exaggerations and downright lies of this administration — and they should be commended for it.”  She does a good job of parroting the liberal talking points, yet fails to cite one example of the charges she levels.  She wants us to commend the Members of Congress who’ve stood up to President Bush, yet fails to name a single Congressmen or cite one example of the specific actions for which we are supposed to commend them.

 

Rebecca McDowell’s disparaging reference to Newt Gingrich and the (as she calls it) “Contract on America” (it was a contract WITH America) further amplifies her lack of historical perspective.

 

I remind you that the reason a Contract With America was needed was that the Democrats who controlled Congress in 1993 refused to even allow a vote to take place on 10 key pieces of legislation.  The contract simply promised a vote on this legislation, which was fulfilled within 100 days of the new Congress being sworn in.

 

Rebecca McDowell also displays an unfounded hatred for Robert Novak.  She allows that hatred to substitute for any attempt to discover the truth of the whole Novak-Wilson-Plame incident.

 

In another letter, Glenn Krohn also asks if Robert Novak leaked out a CIA undercover agent.  No, Novak did not.

 

After Robert Novak’s column of July 14, 2003 was used as the basis for claims that White House officials outed Valerie Plame, the facts behind the original article were fully disclosed by Robert Novak himself, on October 1, 2003 in his townhall.com column.

 

In his July 14 column, Novak reported, “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.  [Plame was not a covert or undercover agent.]  Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report.” 

 

Note these are two sentences.  The first points out that Joe Wilson was not a CIA employee, but his wife was.  The second says administration officials told Novak that it was Wilson’s wife who suggested sending Wilson to Niger.  This does not say administration officials told Novak who Joe Wilson’s wife was.  That fact was commonly known in Washington circles, as Novak pointed out in his rebuttal column of October 1.

 

Te reason I say history repeats itself is that I’ve previously written extensive columns on these subjects on kerrythomas.com.  Go through my archived editorials from 2003-04.  If I can find this Information, you can, too.

 

As we plunge headlong into the rest of this year’s political races, please, if all you’re going to do is parrot the same old worn out catch phrases, without doing any of your own research, save a tree and keep your thoughts to yourself.  Yes, you have freedom of speech and of the press.  But as Pope John Paul II said, “Stupidity, too, is a gift from God, but it shouldn't be abused.”

 

*** UPDATED MATERIAL – July 1, 2008 ***

 

But, of course, Steve Lucareli just couldn’t take this without some sort of response.  But, then again, what else would one expect from a trial lawyer who says he’s proud to be a trial lawyer?  Read his well-reasoned, thoughtful, articulate come back here.

 

Surely, a man of Mr. Lucareli’s education and professional service can do better than to resort to name calling and insulting my hometown?  But, then again, maybe not.

 

After all, in it’s 1996 published opinion, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found that, as Vilas County’s District Attorney, Steve Lucareli’s “prosecutorial misconduct deprived [the defendant] of a fair trial and prejudiced his defense, especially in light of the closeness of the case and the seriousness of Lucareli's misconduct.”

 

Subsequently, the State Bar filed a complaint against Lucareli based upon his behaviors in the case.  An Office of Lawyer Regulation referee subsequently decided that Lucareli’s original and belated charges against the defendant’s attorney were okay. Mr. Lucareli claimed forgetfulness as his defense.  The Board appealed the decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which upheld the referee’s determination.  (see analysis here.)

 

Now there’s something to be proud of.