PDA

View Full Version : UPDATE: Dale Wayne Eaton's latest appeal DENIED


LooksLikeCRicci
08-20-2008, 08:24 PM
This just in, courtesy of the Billings Gazette:

Dale Wayne Eaton, convicted killer of Lisa Marie Kimmell, has lost his latest bid for an appeal in his murder conviction. The case has been sent back to the lower court to have an execution date set. Read more about it here: http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/08/20/news/local/24-kimmel.txt

While there's nothing the justice system can do to bring Lisa back to the Kimmell family, I'm glad to see that they are at least one step closer to final resolution of this case.

kadrmas15
08-21-2008, 05:20 AM
Well, the execution date is a mere formality. The lower court will set it, then Eaton, assuming he wants to keep appealing this will then appeal to federal court which will issue a stay. Eaton's state appeals have been exhausted but he still has appeals to Federal District Court and the Federal Court of Appeals which will take years to resolve. I think it will be at least another 5 years, maybe more before he is actually executed.

Todd Mueller
08-23-2008, 10:40 PM
Thank God that once in a while justice really is served. :)

He better never see the light of day as a free man again. . .

shek
02-25-2009, 09:05 PM
Just letting you know that we got word today (2/25/09) that US Supreme Court has now denied Eaton's appeal. We were rather shocked because it took the WY State Supreme court about 3 years and this decission came in about 3 months. He still has a few steps he can take that may still delay the process.The next one would be what they called an application for post conviction relief (what ever in the heck that means) and must be submitted before May 20th of this year. I'll let you know if we hear more.

Todd Mueller
02-25-2009, 09:44 PM
Thanks for the update, shek!

It just breaks my heart that on top of all you have been through this piece of garbage still gets appeal after appeal. I commend you for your resolve.

Sending you our best wishes and hope that this will be resolved quickly and finally.

Take care...

7hurricane
02-25-2009, 10:40 PM
I know we are really discussing Eaton here, which btw I'm so glad he was captured and will be sentenced to death.

There are just so much about this case I'm still confused about. This one always baffled me, especially after I heard someone was captured for the murder. First off how did Eaton get a hold of Lisa? Second what about all the supposed sightings of her and her car supposedly after police suspect that she was dead? Has their ever been anything released by Eaton that would explain more?

Todd Mueller
02-25-2009, 10:54 PM
I know we are really discussing Eaton here, which btw I'm so glad he was captured and will be sentenced to death.

There are just so much about this case I'm still confused about. This one always baffled me, especially after I heard someone was captured for the murder. First off how did Eaton get a hold of Lisa? Second what about all the supposed sightings of her and her car supposedly after police suspect that she was dead? Has their ever been anything released by Eaton that would explain more?

This thread (http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=121064&highlight=kimmel) should answer most of your questions. (In case you don't know, our forum member named "shek" is Lisa's mom, so your are definitely getting the straight scoop.)

LooksLikeCRicci
02-26-2009, 11:25 PM
If you want to know that whole story, you may want to check out that book that's Shek's avatar. It walks through the whole terrible ordeal. You may want to block out a big amount of time if you choose to read the book, though. I read the whole thing in almost one sitting....

Also, on a legal sidenote: I'm also shocked at how quickly the U.S. Supreme Court made a decision in regard to Eaton's appeal. I'm just glad to see that you didn't have to wait for another three years to hear THIS news.

kadrmas15
02-27-2009, 10:16 AM
Did the U.S. Supreme Court actually hear Eaton's case? If he was applying for a writ of certiorari than he was applying for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. Only a miniscule fraction of these type of cases or really any type of cases get heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. My guess is that Eaton will next apply to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming in Casper or Cheyenne for a writ of habeas corpus. If and when that is denied he would then be able to go to the 10th circuit court of appeal headquartered in Denver. If and when he failed there than he would be in essence out of appeals unless the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. The three federal judges in Wyoming, one was appointed by Ford, one was appointed by Reagan and one was appointed by Clinton. Out of the 22 judges on that court, the vast majority, 15 out of the 22 were appointed by republicans. 6 were appointed by Reagan, one by George H.W. Bush, 6 by George W. Bush, two by Nixon. Out of the ones appointed by democrats, 4 were appointed by Clinton, two were appointed by Carter and one was appointed by Johnson. So yeah I would say Eaton's chances are stacked against him although it will probably take another 5 years, maybe longer before his appeals are exhausted. I am not a supporter of the death penalty but if and when Eaton is executed I do hope it brings you shek and your family some peace. I hope I do not sound condescending when I say that?

shek
02-27-2009, 02:53 PM
Did the U.S. Supreme Court actually hear Eaton's case? If he was applying for a writ of certiorari than he was applying for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. Only a miniscule fraction of these type of cases or really any type of cases get heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. My guess is that Eaton will next apply to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming in Casper or Cheyenne for a writ of habeas corpus. If and when that is denied he would then be able to go to the 10th circuit court of appeal headquartered in Denver. If and when he failed there than he would be in essence out of appeals unless the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. The three federal judges in Wyoming, one was appointed by Ford, one was appointed by Reagan and one was appointed by Clinton. Out of the 22 judges on that court, the vast majority, 15 out of the 22 were appointed by republicans. 6 were appointed by Reagan, one by George H.W. Bush, 6 by George W. Bush, two by Nixon. Out of the ones appointed by democrats, 4 were appointed by Clinton, two were appointed by Carter and one was appointed by Johnson. So yeah I would say Eaton's chances are stacked against him although it will probably take another 5 years, maybe longer before his appeals are exhausted. I am not a supporter of the death penalty but if and when Eaton is executed I do hope it brings you shek and your family some peace. I hope I do not sound condescending when I say that?

Sorry, I stand corrected, let me clarify that the US Supreme Court "refused / denied" to hear Eaton's appeal meaning he didn't get to first base with them in his appeal effort. I am not very good at this legalese stuff. Then all I know is what they told me the next would be which was to petetion for post conviction relief. To whom? I have no clue! Then of course we know that it is just another step in the process and others may follow. You probably know more about them than I do.

And I am not offended if you are anti death penalty, however I am not opposed to it before or even after our tragic event. And no, we take no pleasure in it and especially now having to deal with it in an upfront, close and personal way. There is no way we could intentionally hurt, let alone kill anybody. I am also pro life, so go figure. Nor do I have any idea what in world politics have to do with any of this and the chances being stacked against him (Eaton) has to do with with this what so ever. This isn't a game of poker. Or am I to assume it has something to do with being a Republican or Democrat? Liberal or conservative? Christian or non Christian? Black or white? Forgive me but I just didn't understand what your point or question was or was there one?

Find peace? Thank you but regardless of the the out come and what the future holds, we have always said that this is something we'll never get over but have learned to move on with our lives and get past it. We have also come to realize this will always be a part of our lives in some fashion or another. My husband said at a press conference that a song by Reba McEntire summed it up the best for him, "The world doesn't stop for my broken heart".

And, nah! I didn't take offense to your comments and didn't take them as condescending and I hope you accept my comments in kind. True, I didn't understand some of them but if you do have questions I can answer, please let me know.

My Best,
Sheila Kimmell

kadrmas15
02-27-2009, 03:35 PM
No Shek, I did not take offense. I get what you are saying and I am glad you did not take offense to what I said. The reason I mentioned the politics to try to speculate how conservative or liberal the court may be in deciding Eaton's and other death row inmates appeals. Since the courts in that area are overall more conservative that decreases the chances his appeal will be granted. In this instance, I would agree with his appeal being denied. I saw nothing law wise or whatever that was wrong with his trial or that would have caused the jury to rule differently than what it did. You overall got it right, I was not even basing so much on party as I was on ideology of the individual judges. I myself am an overall conservative republican although I like you identify myself as pro-life.

Basically, both your families struggle and what happened to your daughter have stuck with me since I first learned about it. I was very young, like 5 or 6 years old when I first saw the segment. My parents watched Unsolved Mysteries every week and I would watch it with them. I remember it gave me nightmares. Watching the segment again brought the memories back but I was at least satisfied to see the crime solved and the murderer brought to justice so he cannot do this to anyone else.

I was curious where to obtain the book on the case? Do they sell it on Amazon? I would like to read more about the case to better educate myself on the events and circumstances of the case. Anyway, I wish you and your family well and I am happy my comments did not offend you.

yuppielawyer
02-27-2009, 07:01 PM
I personally do not believe in the death penalty, but I do believe that if we are going to have it in this country, it should be saved for those who commit the most heinous crimes. Putting Lisa through the torture that he did over six days and then brutally murdering her qualifies, in my opinion.

Mrs. Kimmell, I know that there is really no such thing as closure when you lose a child, especially to murder, but, I hope that you and your family are at least comforted by knowing that her killer is behind bars, and can never hurt anyone again. Your daughter sounds like she was a lovely young woman, and I hope that you are also comforted by the wonderful memories you all had together.

yuppielawyer
02-27-2009, 07:02 PM
One thing I just noticed in refreshing my memory on this case from Wikipedia is that Eaton is also considered a suspect in the Amy Bechtel case. Does anyone know anything more about that?

TracyLynnS
02-27-2009, 08:02 PM
Find peace? Thank you but regardless of the the out come and what the future holds, we have always said that this is something we'll never get over but have learned to move on with our lives and get past it. We have also come to realize this will always be a part of our lives in some fashion or another. My husband said at a press conference that a song by Reba McEntire summed it up the best for him, "The world doesn't stop for my broken heart".

Sheila,

I have often thought of Lisa over the last 20 years. When her case was recently presented again on UM, I explained what I knew of the situtation to my 21 year old son, who was watching with me.

I hope it can bring you some level of comfort to know that Lisa's memory has lived on in the minds of those who never even knew her, but remember, and care, and we are introducing her to the next generation, so she will never be forgotten.

-Tracy

shek
02-28-2009, 04:37 AM
One thing I just noticed in refreshing my memory on this case from Wikipedia is that Eaton is also considered a suspect in the Amy Bechtel case. Does anyone know anything more about that?

All I can tell is what I know that comes directly from a relative of Eaton's. The story, in short, goes like this. Eaton was visiting them for a few days and when leaving that morning (same day of Amy's disappearence) he asked if could borrow a fishing pole because he thought he would stop at one of their favorite fishing spots on the way home. Later on the news, it was annonced that Amy's was missing but her car was found on Loop Road and his relative's immediate reaction was, "Hey! That's were Dale was going fishing!"

He did report it to the authories some time down the road but was blown off because by this time they were so bent on the therory that the husband did it. Since Eaton's arrest, the authories now publicly say, at least, that Eaton is a person of interest. But that's about it.

And to everyone, Thank you for your thoughtful kindness and words of comfort. Then without trying to stir the death penalty debate, the odds are more likely that Eaton will die of natural cases in prison before he ever has to face the lethal injection. With that said, we do find a measure of peace in at least knowing he's in a place were he cannot prey on other innocent victims.

Kadrmas - yes, you can order the book on Amazon or you can PM me and I can ship one directly to you.

atomicfizz
02-28-2009, 11:12 AM
I just saw this segment (I'm catching up on the DVR), and I just want to say what a scumbag. Shek I am so sorry for what happened to your daughter. I will definitely be checking out your book.

capt777737
11-27-2009, 12:20 PM
Shiela

I just got this from the Casper Paper this morning on Eaton.
Printed it's entirety. (I heard from a friend he does have an execution date of Dec. 20th this year) so I went and found this.
I figure the next step is thru Judge Brimmer out of Cheyenne (He gave Harlow a stay, then he eventually got off DR).
I wouldn't mind having a copy of the book you wrote, as I am a Wyoming Native.
Another one you should read is "Legacy of Fear" by Marion McMillan Huseas, who does write for the paper.
"Legacy" deals with the details of Mark Hopkinson and the Bridger Valley Murders, and it's a horrible read, but the facts have to be got out.

http://www.trib.com/news/local/article_9419d6f7-8841-56dd-bd54-c2b0ffe2e4ba.html

Death-row inmate asks federal court for attorney
Wyo high court denies Eaton petition

By JOSHUA WOLFSON - Star-Tribune staff writer | Posted: Thursday, November 26, 2009 12:00 am | (4) Comments

The Wyoming Supreme Court has denied the latest petition from the state's lone death-row inmate.

The court also lifted its yearlong stay on Dale Wayne Eaton's execution and ordered a Natrona County judge to issue a new death warrant for the convicted murderer and rapist.

Eaton had asked the justices to examine a ruling made by Natrona County District Judge David Park, who rejected an appeal last month that claimed Eaton didn't receive a meaningful Supreme Court review. The appeal also claimed Eaton shouldn't be executed because of his mental status.

In a one-page order filed Tuesday, the justices declined to review Park's decision. They did not explain their reasoning.

A Dec. 14 hearing has already been scheduled in Natrona County District Court to consider Eaton's death warrant. However, District Attorney Michael Blonigen, who successfully prosecuted Eaton, said he doesn't expect the execution to happen soon.

"What this probably marks is an end to the state phase (of appeals)," he said. "The usual next step is a federal review."

Last week, Eaton asked a U.S. District Court judge to appoint an attorney to help him pursue additional appeals. He also submitted an affidavit showing he can't afford his own attorney.

Diane Courselle, director of the University of Wyoming's Defender Aid Program, assisted Eaton with the request, but told the court she didn't have the time or expertise in capital cases to serve as his attorney. Courselle did not respond to a message left for her Wednesday at the Defender Aid Program.

Eaton has been on death row since 2004, when a jury determined he should die for the kidnapping, rape and murder of Lisa Marie Kimmell. He hit the 18-year-old in the head and stabbed her multiple times before throwing her body from Government Bridge west of Casper.

Kimmell disappeared in 1988 while driving from Denver to Billings, Mont. Fishermen found her body floating in the North Platte River eight days after she vanished.

Prosecutors charged Eaton with the killing in 2003 after finding her car buried on property Eaton once owned near Moneta.

Reach reporter Joshua Wolfson at (307) 266-0582 or at josh.wolfson@trib.com.

All I can tell is what I know that comes directly from a relative of Eaton's. The story, in short, goes like this. Eaton was visiting them for a few days and when leaving that morning (same day of Amy's disappearence) he asked if could borrow a fishing pole because he thought he would stop at one of their favorite fishing spots on the way home. Later on the news, it was annonced that Amy's was missing but her car was found on Loop Road and his relative's immediate reaction was, "Hey! That's were Dale was going fishing!"

He did report it to the authories some time down the road but was blown off because by this time they were so bent on the therory that the husband did it. Since Eaton's arrest, the authories now publicly say, at least, that Eaton is a person of interest. But that's about it.

And to everyone, Thank you for your thoughtful kindness and words of comfort. Then without trying to stir the death penalty debate, the odds are more likely that Eaton will die of natural cases in prison before he ever has to face the lethal injection. With that said, we do find a measure of peace in at least knowing he's in a place were he cannot prey on other innocent victims.

Kadrmas - yes, you can order the book on Amazon or you can PM me and I can ship one directly to you.

kadrmas15
11-27-2009, 01:57 PM
Well, I am not a supporter of the death penalty. However I will say, if we insist on having a death penalty, Dale Wayne Eaton is the perfect candidate for it. I did read about how just recently his latest state appeal was denied. However all this really means is that his state appeals have run out. His appeals are actually proceeding at what I would say is an overall average pace.

His appeals will now enter the federal system, his federal habeas has to be submitted to the U.S. District Court within one year after his last state appeal was denied. So it has to be submitted to the district court by next November.

Even after that appeal is filed, the state will not file their response until 6 months after the defense files there and then they will go back and forth. So it will be anywhere from a year to possibly 3 or 4 years before the federal district court will even rule on Eaton's habeas. Assuming they deny it, than his appeal would go to the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver. So in actuality, even though his state appeals appear to have run out, he gets this new round of federal appeals so I would say it will still probably be another 5 years at least before he is actually executed.

kadrmas15
11-27-2009, 02:10 PM
In terms of those courts, well, in the U.S. District Court of Wyoming there is 4 judgeships but only 3 are filled as President Obama has not made a selection for the 4th opening yet although I expect he will at some point appoint Governor Dave Freudenthal to that opening. The other three judges, one was appointed by Ford, one by Reagan and one by Clinton. The oldest is 87 years old, the youngest is 63 years old.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit is headquartered in Denver. Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming take up the 10th circuit. Out of the 19 judgeships in the Circuit, there is currently one opening that has not yet been filled by President Obama. Out of the other 18 judges, one was appointed by Johnson, two by Nixon, two by Carter, six by Reagan, four by Clinton, one by Bush Sr and five by Bush Jr. So overall more conservative courts out there. So I say the chances of Heaton's appeal succeeding are slim at best but it will still be at least 5 years before his appeals are actually out.

capt777737
11-28-2009, 01:01 AM
You know this is what scares the hell out of me.
This bastard can get out because of liberal lawyers. I have a new method of execution for this guy, the wood chipper.
The other 2 will follow in another post., there is where I need need help here
To follow.



Well, I am not a supporter of the death penalty. However I will say, if we insist on having a death penalty, Dale Wayne Eaton is the perfect candidate for it. I did read about how just recently his latest state appeal was denied. However all this really means is that his state appeals have run out. His appeals are actually proceeding at what I would say is an overall average pace.

His appeals will now enter the federal system, his federal habeas has to be submitted to the U.S. District Court within one year after his last state appeal was denied. So it has to be submitted to the district court by next November.

Even after that appeal is filed, the state will not file their response until 6 months after the defense files there and then they will go back and forth. So it will be anywhere from a year to possibly 3 or 4 years before the federal district court will even rule on Eaton's habeas. Assuming they deny it, than his appeal would go to the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver. So in actuality, even though his state appeals appear to have run out, he gets this new round of federal appeals so I would say it will still probably be another 5 years at least before he is actually executed.

kadrmas15
11-28-2009, 01:23 PM
Well the guy is entitled to appellate lawyers... As an aspiring defense attorney and a conservative republican, I take issue with your assertion that all defense attorney's are liberal. That is simply not true. However in any event, in this particular instance the lawyers are not trying to 'get him off' rather they are trying to save his life. That is their job to do that. The key words there are 'a job' nothing more and nothing less. If they did not try to do that, he would probably get an appeal granted then for ineffective assistance of counsel. I do not think this guy will get a new trial. At best he would get a new sentencing hearing and I am even doubtful that would happen.

shek
11-29-2009, 06:20 AM
Well the guy is entitled to appellate lawyers... As an aspiring defense attorney and a conservative republican, I take issue with your assertion that all defense attorney's are liberal. That is simply not true. However in any event, in this particular instance the lawyers are not trying to 'get him off' rather they are trying to save his life. That is their job to do that. The key words there are 'a job' nothing more and nothing less. If they did not try to do that, he would probably get an appeal granted then for ineffective assistance of counsel. I do not think this guy will get a new trial. At best he would get a new sentencing hearing and I am even doubtful that would happen.

kadrmas- I will apologize in advance because this is going to be harsh BUT some things to ponder.
1. What was Lisa entitled to? Her pleas and appeals to Eaton to spare her life were all denied.
2. Then where in the hell were all these defense lawyers (ya know, the ones just doing their 'job') that are trying to "save Eatons life" to defend Lisa while he was torturing and murdering her?
3. Have you considered the other side of what it was like for the victim? Oh yes, but she is already dead so that doesn't matter anymore and now we must focus on saving this perverted piece of humanity.
4. It's just a job? So, it's just a pay check, huh? And at who's expense?
5. Eaton's trial had nothing to do with his quilt or innocence, it was ALL about the death penalty from the onset. But you already know that.
6. WY State Law - no one can overturn the jury's decission with out granting a complete "new trial." So the there is no possiblility of just a new "sentence hearing." And you are absolutely correct that he has a zero chance of that because there were no significant legal errors in his case. I must also commend his defense lawyer because he didn't "fall on sword" to build errors into the case. So WHY are we further delaying the inevidable? Oh wait, I forgot about the "just doing their job" part and earning a paycheck. (Sorry, but my emotional bank account is currently overdrawn.) Then I must ask, why do you guys turn on each other like a pack of rabid wolves when the outcome isn't favorable to the perp and claim ineffective defense. Ah, yes, it must be that job or paycheck thing again. It seems that right or wrong doesn't have anything to do with it. I won't even go into taking the moral high ground regardless of which side of the issue you stand on. I could care less if they are a liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, etc. He did the crime, let him face the highest court. May God have mercy on his soul.
7. What about the secondary victims (that being her family)? We have been dealing with this for over 21 years. When is enough, ENOUGH? And at who's expense mentally, emotionally and financially? Eatons? Oh please, give me a break.

FYI, we still speak to students at Universities seeking various careers in the criminal justice system and strangely enough the past few years we have been invited to speak to inmates in the prison system. I tyically avoid the death penalty issue but on this one occassion, it came up about how cruel the death penality was in a state juvenile corrections class I was speaking to. My response to him was that he must be there for some reason and to learn a lesson about his actions before he left there. Then I simply asked him if after he was released if he intended to do anything that would land him on death row. His answer of course was 'no' so I told him then it should be a non issue or anything for him to worry about then. That was the end of that debate. On a lighter note, at the federal Super Max in CO., in a group discussion, at the end, an imate stated that he was a "career criminal" in and out of the system since 1978 and thanked me for coming to their class. I couldn't help but ask him he considered changing "careers" once he got out.

The point of sharing that is to point out that we try to remain balanced and help educate both sides. Even if we have to disagree on the death penalty. But I am getting a little bit weary of all these rights that the perp has (or entitled to as you aptly put it) and little if any are extended to the victims. Well, enough said.

kadrmas15
11-29-2009, 01:58 PM
Hey Shek, well, I really did not take any offense to what you said. I certainly cannot imagine how you feel nor do I blame you for how you feel. I guess the reason I view this issue differently from you is that I do not view it based on emotion. I think people sometimes get the mistaken impression that because someone is defending a certain person in court that it means the lawyer likes the person they are defending or thinks the person is innocent when most of the time the person they are defending is not innocent and a lot of the time these people are certainly hard to like.

However if a defense attorney were to view a case purely on emotion, how could they present a proper defense? I mean, it is something, you kind of have to suspend your disbelief and just go and do your job. It is a job, just like it is the prosecutors job to get a conviction, it is a defense attorney's job to present reasonable doubt, poke holes in the prosecution theory, etc.

In terms of the drawn out appeals, it was not my idea to make it that way. Nor was I really defending the process. I mean yes in some instances the drawn out appeals process has saved innocent defendants from execution. However more often than not you are correct in that it has drug things out for a ridiculously long time. The problem is that there is no differential between who gets executed faster.

It should be an issue, that where there is no question of a defendants guilt such as in Eaton's case, that he should be on a fast track for execution. Kind of a one and you are done appeal sort of thing. That is actually how it used to be, one and you are done, but after the death penalty was thrown out back in the early 1970's, the rules were changed, so instead of having an average of 3 to 5 years before execution like how it was then, you instead now have an average of 15 to 20 in most places except for a few southern states like Texas, Virginia, etc.

So Shek, I hope you do not find me condescending, as I am not telling you how to feel or trying to imagine how you feel because truth be told, I have no way of knowing how you feel and I would certainly hope that I never find out. I would not wish on anyone what has happened to you and your family and what continues to go on every day.

In terms of Eaton's appeal, well, like I said, I seriously doubt he will get his conviction overturned. I just do not really see any issues there that he could use to get his conviction overturned. The only real potential issue I see him doing is challenging Wyoming state law that does not allow a judge to overturn a jury's recommendation. That is actually an unusual quirk and one I think the State of Wyoming should have corrected long ago to keep that from being an appellate issue.

As you may or may not know, something somewhat similar came up earlier this decade in a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Ring v. Arizona in which Ring challenged his conviction saying that he was illegally sentenced to death because at that time in Arizona, a jury did not make a recommendation or a sentence, only the judge did. The court agreed that a jury had to make a recommendation for the sentence so Ring's conviction and a bunch of other convictions were overturned. Basically anyone convicted after Ring also got a new sentencing hearing at least, a few got new trials altogether.

In terms of rights to victims, well I am not really sure what rights a victim would be entitled to? I mean of course ideally no crime, particularly violent crime would happen to anyone. I am not trying to sound flip about it, but it is a legitimate question on my part. I mean, yes the defendant does have some rights entitled to him, that is in the Constitution of the United States.

Now at that time of course, the founding fathers had no idea how drug out the process would become. I think the problem more is that the process has been drug out, by overwhelmed appellate courts and by what sometimes are bogus appeals. Now, in the federal system, this is a bit harder to accomplish than it used to be because AEDPA (the Anti Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) make it harder to even file a federal habeas corpus but it made it nearly impossible to file successive motions. Whereas it used to be people would file just repeated habeas corpus's whereas now, most defendants get only one habeas corpus petition. AEDPA has helped with the appeals process some but the problem is there is more people on death row than ever before. Thus you have more people filing appeals than ever before. Thus the courts get clogged up more than ever before. Thus the times the appeals go is longer and the time it gets drug out is longer.

The above will not be popular. However I am just saying it from a Constitutional standpoint, not an emotional standpoint as while I can try to imagine what you feel I have no real way of being able to comprehend it in terms of how you actually feel. I hope this does not evolve into a big fight or something as that was not the intent on my part and I do not think it was on your part either.

sdb4884
01-25-2010, 08:23 AM
When is he to be executed?

shek
01-25-2010, 08:29 AM
When is he to be executed?

Not anytime soon. That was just another step in the process. He has now exhausted all of his state appeals and now it goes to the US Supreme Court for review. His status is "stayed".

Apostapler
01-25-2010, 10:20 AM
I hope he is miserable until the day he dies.

kadrmas15
01-25-2010, 11:03 AM
He made yet another writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court? Well those are unlimited, he can actually make as many as he wants but the odds of the Supreme Court taking his or anyone else's case really are quite slim. I imagine if he has not already he will file a writ of Habeas Corpus in the U.S. District Court in Casper. If they deny it then it will go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th circuit in Denver. If they deny it, well, then he in essence would be out of appeals but I would say it will be another 5 years or so at least before that happens.

Hambone2421
01-25-2010, 02:51 PM
Well the guy is entitled to appellate lawyers... As an aspiring defense attorney and a conservative republican, I take issue with your assertion that all defense attorney's are liberal. That is simply not true.

Why do you take issue with it if you are a conservative republican? Or, are you just saying your a conservative republican because you are a democrat and are upset that someone said all defense attorneys are liberal.

I agree that not all defense attorneys are liberal but I'd be willing to bet that the overwhelming majority are. Probably 90%. I think any defense attorney that succeeds in getting sex offenders, murderers, rapists, etc.. found not guilty, should be forced to have those same people live next door to them or babysit their children. Then we'll find out how much that paycheck really means to you.

kadrmas15
01-26-2010, 04:11 AM
Hambone, I am not going to argue with you about why defense lawyers do their jobs. Well I took issue with the comments that all defense lawyers or people who want to be defense attorneys are liberal. In fact that is not true. I know this because I am a conservative republican, I just believe in the Constitution too and the last I checked, people in the Constitution are entitled to legal representation. We are an innocent until proven guilty society. But yup, give prosecutors a pass including those that throw innocent people in jail (you demonstrate your lack of knowledge about law because it is not even unethical for a defense attorney to get a guilty person 'off the hook' but it is unethical for a prosecutor to try someone that they do not think is guilty).

The reason why this is, is simple. It is because our system was designed so that it would be better to let 10 guilty men go free then put 1 innocent man in jail. When you become a defense attorney, you are supposed to get the best possible outcome for your client. I mean, do you know how high the conviction rate is in this country? Huge. You act like all of these people are getting acquitted all the time when acquittals are not common at all it is just that when they do happen the media goes hog wild on them to make it look like the person escaped justice. First off, most cases do not even make it to trial. Prosecutors plead guilty people out for wrist slaps all the time. Interesting how the defense attorney that wants to defend the client is the bad guy but the prosecutor that gave the wrist slap is the good guy. Probably about 95 percent of cases in this country end in a plea bargain in one way or another. Out of the rest that go to trial, 9 times out of 10 it ends in a conviction.

Trust me, I am certainly not aspiring to be a defense attorney because of all of the love and support I would get from the general public. Since your average person pretty much hates all lawyers in general but especially defense attorneys this is to be expected with the territory. Basically it is a thankless job. Sometimes you are representing sleaze's or people that are trash. Basically there is no glory in the job and not even really much chance of winning cases. Contrary to popular belief though the majority of defense attorneys are not like the F. Lee Bailey, Johnnie Cochran, Mark Geragos, Bruce Cutler, Mickey Sherman's of the world that are millionaires or in Cochran's case since he is dead, was a millionaire. No, the majority of defense attorneys have small practices or are in a public defender's office. They make low wages, have large case files. I mean it is hardly glamorous. Chances are, when I get done with law school I will be a public defender. It is something I have always wanted to do and I truth be told do not see what is so bad about that?

However instead of attacking me, how about you respect my career goals. You do not have to like them or agree with them, however I said nothing to intentionally disrespect you or anyone else so do not do it to me. Interesting how I am a bad person because I want to be a defense attorney. Yet if I wanted to be a prosecutor you would be saluting me. Yup, keep hating on defense attorneys until you or someone you know or care about gets in trouble with the law and then you need one. I don't blame prosecutors for doing their jobs but just like they are an advocate for victims, defense attorneys are supposed to be advocates for their clients. In your state of Texas I have seen shameless, despicable conduct both by prosecutors and defense attorneys alike. Prosecutors going after people they are not even sure are guilty and defense attorneys for throwing a case because they think their client did it. I find it very ignorant of you that you sit there and throw bricks even though your state executed at least one innocent man. His own attorney threw the case and basically admitted as much. Truly disgraceful. But if you added me on facebook, well, you would see I am hardly the bleeding heart you make me out to be.

Hambone2421
01-26-2010, 09:21 AM
Hambone, I am not going to argue with you about why defense lawyers do their jobs. Well I took issue with the comments that all defense lawyers or people who want to be defense attorneys are liberal. In fact that is not true. I know this because I am a conservative republican, I just believe in the Constitution too and the last I checked, people in the Constitution are entitled to legal representation. We are an innocent until proven guilty society. But yup, give prosecutors a pass including those that throw innocent people in jail (you demonstrate your lack of knowledge about law because it is not even unethical for a defense attorney to get a guilty person 'off the hook' but it is unethical for a prosecutor to try someone that they do not think is guilty).

The reason why this is, is simple. It is because our system was designed so that it would be better to let 10 guilty men go free then put 1 innocent man in jail. When you become a defense attorney, you are supposed to get the best possible outcome for your client. I mean, do you know how high the conviction rate is in this country? Huge. You act like all of these people are getting acquitted all the time when acquittals are not common at all it is just that when they do happen the media goes hog wild on them to make it look like the person escaped justice. First off, most cases do not even make it to trial. Prosecutors plead guilty people out for wrist slaps all the time. Interesting how the defense attorney that wants to defend the client is the bad guy but the prosecutor that gave the wrist slap is the good guy. Probably about 95 percent of cases in this country end in a plea bargain in one way or another. Out of the rest that go to trial, 9 times out of 10 it ends in a conviction.

Trust me, I am certainly not aspiring to be a defense attorney because of all of the love and support I would get from the general public. Since your average person pretty much hates all lawyers in general but especially defense attorneys this is to be expected with the territory. Basically it is a thankless job. Sometimes you are representing sleaze's or people that are trash. Basically there is no glory in the job and not even really much chance of winning cases. Contrary to popular belief though the majority of defense attorneys are not like the F. Lee Bailey, Johnnie Cochran, Mark Geragos, Bruce Cutler, Mickey Sherman's of the world that are millionaires or in Cochran's case since he is dead, was a millionaire. No, the majority of defense attorneys have small practices or are in a public defender's office. They make low wages, have large case files. I mean it is hardly glamorous. Chances are, when I get done with law school I will be a public defender. It is something I have always wanted to do and I truth be told do not see what is so bad about that?

However instead of attacking me, how about you respect my career goals. You do not have to like them or agree with them, however I said nothing to intentionally disrespect you or anyone else so do not do it to me. Interesting how I am a bad person because I want to be a defense attorney. Yet if I wanted to be a prosecutor you would be saluting me. Yup, keep hating on defense attorneys until you or someone you know or care about gets in trouble with the law and then you need one. I don't blame prosecutors for doing their jobs but just like they are an advocate for victims, defense attorneys are supposed to be advocates for their clients. In your state of Texas I have seen shameless, despicable conduct both by prosecutors and defense attorneys alike. Prosecutors going after people they are not even sure are guilty and defense attorneys for throwing a case because they think their client did it. I find it very ignorant of you that you sit there and throw bricks even though your state executed at least one innocent man. His own attorney threw the case and basically admitted as much. Truly disgraceful. But if you added me on facebook, well, you would see I am hardly the bleeding heart you make me out to be.

Here we go...

First of all, just because you are a conservative republican (not even sure why you keep bringing that up as it really doesn't hold any water in this debate) does not mean you automatically know more than anyone else about the judicial system. "I know this because I am a conservative republican."

Secondly, you said "You act like all of these people are getting acquitted all the time when acquittals are not common at all it is just that when they do happen the media goes hog wild on them to make it look like the person escaped justice." I never acted like all these people were getting acquitted. Not sure where you dreamed that up. However, if even 1 person is acquitted when that person should have been convicted, thats one too many. I guess I need to apologize for being upset when justice isnt served.

Thirdly, you said that I'm ignorant because my state of Texas executed an innocent person. Yep, that's all my fault. I was the judge and jury in those cases. You've proven your ignorance by that statement. I have never served on a jury or ever had any outcome in a trial, yet you blame me for something Texas has done. Also, you said you've seen both prosecutors go after someone that they aren't sure is guilty and defense attorney's throw a case because of their clients guilt. I want documented proof of these things that "you've seen". Not just second hand information or "Well I know its had to have happened." Post a link on here or private message it to me.

Lastly, you rambled incoherently toward the end so I just stopped reading as I felt I may fall asleep.

kadrmas15
01-26-2010, 10:20 AM
Where did I say I knew more about the judicial system because I was a conservative republican? I was merely point out that not all defense lawyers or aspiring defense lawyers are liberal, that is why I brought that point up. I did not say it was your fault, I was telling you there was corruption in Texas as well as all other states in the criminal justice system. You took greatly what I said out of context and read too much into certain things I said when frankly there was nothing there to read into. We have a system because that is way the founding fathers set it up. It is not perfect, not by any stretch of the imagination. I get upset when justice is not served too hambone. However the reason why some people get acquitted that should not and that some people get convicted when they should not is because, well, when it comes right down to it, we are all humans and we all mistakes. We all have our own flaws.

Hambone2421
01-26-2010, 10:39 AM
Where did I say I knew more about the judicial system because I was a conservative republican? I was merely point out that not all defense lawyers or aspiring defense lawyers are liberal, that is why I brought that point up. I did not say it was your fault, I was telling you there was corruption in Texas as well as all other states in the criminal justice system. You took greatly what I said out of context and read too much into certain things I said when frankly there was nothing there to read into. We have a system because that is way the founding fathers set it up. It is not perfect, not by any stretch of the imagination. I get upset when justice is not served too hambone. However the reason why some people get acquitted that should not and that some people get convicted when they should not is because, well, when it comes right down to it, we are all humans and we all mistakes. We all have our own flaws.

Dude, if there's nothing to read into there, then why did you say it?

Also, you did allude to knowing more because you say you are a conservative republican...

"Hambone, I am not going to argue with you about why defense lawyers do their jobs. Well I took issue with the comments that all defense lawyers or people who want to be defense attorneys are liberal. In fact that is not true. I know this because I am a conservative republican." <--------- Thats your direct quote. I didnt make that up. You said it.

Also, what the hell are you blathering about when you said I need to respect your career goals. Look if you wanna be a defense attorney, then more power to you, but your incoherent rambles are starting to get annoying.

1. I never said anything negative about you or your career goals.

2. You said you know more about this stuff because you are a conservative republican. You may know more about it, but I doubt its because you are a conservative republican. I'm also a conservative republican but that doesn't mean I know more about certain topics.

3. You said I was being ignorant because Texas (my home state) has put to death innocent people, because prosecutors go after people they believe are innocent (which you have yet to show proof of) and other despicable acts as you called it (still no proof, just your opinion).

Look, if you believe in something, fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But don't backtrack and say you didn't say something when you obviously said it, as with the conservative republican comment and saying I shouldn't say anything because Texas has done some thing wrong.

mikewho
01-26-2010, 11:10 AM
i dont agree with sending innocent people to prison,etc but its clear that eaten was not innocent. Wasnt he linked through 1)dna, and 2)lisas car buried in his backyard?

If so then this guy deserves what he gets. I feel for what lisas mom(and family) has gone through. And we can never forget what lisa went through. If i ever met lisas mom i would give her a big hug and tell her there are many of us out there who would give our support and help to the family.


As far as im concerned eaton deserves no sympathy.

kadrmas15
01-26-2010, 11:58 AM
Hey Mike, no I do not disagree. I mean I disagree with the death penalty from a moral standpoint and in principle. But no, I am not arguing that Eaton is innocent. He is not innocent and he is right where he belongs. I do not dispute any of that. If and when he gets the needle, I will not shed any tears over it. It was something, I was trying to express a view and the argument got kind of ugly because I have a tendency to be defensive because I feel like I am always on the defensive.

mikewho
01-26-2010, 02:59 PM
oh my post wasnt aimed at you or meant to be negative towards anyone but eaton.

that eaton guy is pure evil and deserves what he gets

mattc
01-27-2010, 02:42 AM
For what it's worth, I just wanted to add a quick comment here:

1) Hambone: I don't think you read Kadrmas' post, b/c if you had, you would not have written what you did.. you clearly didn't understand it (but Kadrmas can respond to you).. I just don't think it's cool to be that rude to somebody else, which you were.

2) Onto my main point: I also graduated from law school, and worked as a public defender for a while, and, while I respect your career goals Kadrmas, I just want you to know that in addition to it being a thankless job at times (and rewarding sometimes), it can be very morally difficult. As you rightly pointed out, you will have to defend people you know are guilty... when I started out, I had to go into court and be an effective attorney for wife beaters, child rapists, abusers, etc. If I wanted to be a good attorney, that meant being obligated to point out technicalities or take advantage of mediocre prosecuting attorneys' mistakes, even if I KNEW that my client was guilty... of course, if the person confessed, I could get out of it ethically (although few defense attorneys actually do that unfortunately).

My point is, when you say "I don't see what is so bad about that," just know that there will be situations where you will be forced to take the ethical low road. It was bad enough that I stopped doing.

I hope this doesn't come off as patronizing in any way... just wanted to chime in. Good luck with whatever you decide, and I hope the discourse can be civil, despite Hambone's rather dismissive comments.

shek
01-27-2010, 06:34 AM
From Kadrmas - "In terms of Eaton's appeal, well, like I said, I seriously doubt he will get his conviction overturned. I just do not really see any issues there that he could use to get his conviction overturned. The only real potential issue I see him doing is challenging Wyoming state law that does not allow a judge to overturn a jury's recommendation. That is actually an unusual quirk and one I think the State of Wyoming should have corrected long ago to keep that from being an appellate issue.

As you may or may not know, something somewhat similar came up earlier this decade in a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Ring v. Arizona in which Ring challenged his conviction saying that he was illegally sentenced to death because at that time in Arizona, a jury did not make a recommendation or a sentence, only the judge did. The court agreed that a jury had to make a recommendation for the sentence so Ring's conviction and a bunch of other convictions were overturned. Basically anyone convicted after Ring also got a new sentencing hearing at least, a few got new trials altogether."

HUH???? Kadrmas, you just contridicted yourself. If the Ring vs AZ. is stated correctly than that would mean that WY did it right.

kadrmas15
01-27-2010, 06:48 AM
Shek, I did not contradict myself from what I can tell. Mainly because in Ring v. Arizona, what that had to do with was the jury had nothing to do with the sentencing. They did not make a recommendation one way or the other. In the event someone was convicted of first degree murder than it was the judge that decided whether the defendant got life or death and that was all. The reason why Ring v. Arizona became an issue was because if the jury had been allowed to make a recommendation, they might recommend life when a judge if they were deciding alone might just sentence a person to death because it would make them look good or to pad their stats.

Wyoming's procedure in this instance is different because a jury decides whether a person gets life or death and a judge is required to honor whatever they decide and cannot over turn it. This is unusual and Wyoming might be the only state that has a law like that. Most if not all other states allow a judge to overrule a jury's recommendation of death although only a couple allow a judge to overrule a jury's recommendation of life, I believe Florida and Alabama are the only ones. Florida and Alabama are also two of the only states where a jury's death recommendation does not have to be unanimous.

Now, if one were to get technical, yes I suppose that Eaton's case was not technically a violation of Ring v. Arizona because his challenge I am assuming will be that the judge could not overturn a death recommendation in Wyoming. Ring's decision had to do with the jury not being able to make a recommendation in the first place, it had nothing to do with the judge, other than the judge being the only one that got to decide life or death. Whereas in Wyoming the judge really does not have any discretion, they have to go along with what the jury recommends. That is basically, the only real appellate issue that Eaton has at this point is challenging his sentence. His conviction in my opinion will never get thrown out but his death sentence might if he can convince a judge that Wyoming's death penalty sentencing process is unconstitutional because it does not allow a judge to consider mitigating and aggravating factors. Despite the differences between his case and the Ring decision, I expect he will still cite it in his appeals. Practically everyone in a death penalty appeal does cite that case when trying to convince a court that their death sentence is unconstitutional.

shek
01-27-2010, 07:26 AM
That is basically, the only real appellate issue that Eaton has at this point is challenging his sentence. His conviction in my opinion will never get thrown out but his death sentence might if he can convince a judge that Wyoming's death penalty sentencing process is unconstitutional because it does not allow a judge to consider mitigating and aggravating factors. Despite the differences between his case and the Ring decision, I expect he will still cite it in his appeals. Practically everyone in a death penalty appeal does cite that case when trying to convince a court that their death sentence is unconstitutional.

That's not correct Kadrmas. The judge was allowed to consider the mitigating and aggravating factors. Upon reviewing them, he did have the power to grant him a new trial if he disagreed with the juries decision but he happened to agree with them. Plain and simple. And so has everyone else who have reviewed his case up to this point about a dozen times now. BTW the jury was only allowed to hear less than 1% of Eaton's prior criminal history, the judge, however, got to see it all in his PSI. (that imbellishes on the mitigating and aggravating circumstances) And I still don't see that there is even a close parallel in the Ring case vs what's happening in WY. So I highly doubt they would cite it. That would be like trying to compare a banana to a string bean, forget about apples to oranges.

kadrmas15
01-27-2010, 08:12 AM
They will cite it, trust me. Pretty much everyone does in a death penalty appeal even if it does not have anything to do with it. They will not say that Eaton should get a new sentencing hearing because of Ring but they will talk about the Ring decision I am sure and how this little law in Wyoming while not about jurors is about the judge not being allowed to overrule a jury unless a new trial altogether is granted.

Okay, I guess I was misinformed on this thing. I was under the impression that under Wyoming law a judge was not allowed to overturn a jury's recommendation or sentence or whatever you want to call it. Okay, so let me understand this to make sure we are on the same page. A judge cannot overturn a jury's recommendation in a capital case correct? Yes that is technically true I suppose based on what you said the judge was able to consider mitigating and aggravating factors but not really.

The problem with this law is that (I am basing this on the way you described it) the only way that a judge could in essence overrule a jury's death recommendation would be to give a whole new trial? I mean while that is not on the same parallel as Ring, it still could be interpreted as unconstitutional because in essence the only way a trial judge could overturn a jury's recommendation would be to grand a new trial altogether. So in essence this takes control away from the trial judge because in Wyoming, I don't know, they should have corrected this years ago because this just seems like an issue that any appellate lawyer with a functioning cerebellum would use.

I mean, I am not here to throw bricks and talk about what Eaton got or should get or whatever. I am merely looking at Wyoming law, specifically in this regard because I find law interesting. I will say, I have never heard of a law quite like it. The courts out there tend to be rather strict in terms of their interpretation of the law so I doubt Eaton would get a new sentencing hearing from them. Again, I do not even want him to get a new sentencing hearing, I feel people get the wrong idea about this. I do have concerns he might get a new sentencing hearing if he were able to convince a judge that Wyoming law in terms of the sentencing scheme and the way it goes down is not constitutional.

Again I am looking at this from a legal standpoint, not an emotional standpoint. I do not blame you for having the opinions you do, I have no idea what you must go through each and every day not just with what happened to your daughter but the ongoing saga with Eaton. I hope this does not sound condescending Shek because it is not meant to be and if you interpret it that way than I do apologize because it was not and is not my intent to be condescending.

Sorry about the confusion in the law, I got thrown off because in most states, in capital cases there is in essence two trials, a guilt phase and if there is a conviction than a penalty phase. While this appears to be true in Wyoming too the one difference is with the discretion of the trial judge. Again, I just have concerns that a court might find it unconstitutional that the only way a judge could overrule a jury's recommendation would be to grand an entire new trial. Like I said, that issue is just troubling to me and if Eaton's lawyer is any good, that is what the lawyer will argue because frankly, it is the only appellate issue that Eaton has is to get a court to get believe that Wyoming's capital murder sentencing procedure is unconstitutional.

shek
01-27-2010, 09:15 AM
Well, I guess all I can say is if they go down the Ring road - they are going sound pretty stupid but let them knock themselves out. They have already tried a lot of stupid stuff as it is to no avail. So whatever.

Kadrmas - I would like to add that I have upmost respect for the defenders of the underdogs and constitutional rights but consider this if you will as you embark on pursuing your passion to become a defense attorney. A quote from William Safire: "The Right to do something does not mean that it is the Right thing to do."

Kadrmas, I accept your many apologies in kind but you manage to push my buttons. You manage to send me over the edge sometimes and that is not my style. I, in turn am not trying to offend you or your superior intelligence on the law. If I wanted to become a lawyer or even brain surgeon, I would have gone to school to be one. With that said, even with my inferior education in law, I have learned more about it in the past 21 years than I ever wanted to know.

Also, often you say that you don't mean to sound defensive but hey! I think it will look great on your resume. I am a defensive defense attorney. (That was meant to be a joke.) But the fact of the matter is you might consider why you continue to draw such responses that constantly puts you on the defense.

Well, enough said for now. My best regards.

Hambone2421
01-27-2010, 11:33 AM
For what it's worth, I just wanted to add a quick comment here:

1) Hambone: I don't think you read Kadrmas' post, b/c if you had, you would not have written what you did.. you clearly didn't understand it (but Kadrmas can respond to you).. I just don't think it's cool to be that rude to somebody else, which you were.

Where was I being rude? I was accused of something that was not true so I defended myself. If that is considered rude, then I'm guilty as charged.

This is supposed to be a forum about Dale Wayne Eaton. This will be my last response to anything other than the conviction and (hopefully) eventual execution of Dale Wayne Eaton.

crystaldawn
02-09-2010, 08:48 AM
Sheila asked that I post this recent article for those of you that might be interested. Its about Dale Eaton's sister.

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=132334&catid=188

Hambone2421
02-09-2010, 09:59 AM
Sheila asked that I post this recent article for those of you that might be interested. Its about Dale Eaton's sister.

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=132334&catid=188

Wow, what a story. Also, they both seem convinced that he had something to do with Amy Bechtel's disappearance as well. I wonder if they know anything more than the general public about Bechtel?

Thinman
02-09-2010, 11:52 AM
One poster in particular needs to stop and realize that he is arguing with the mother of a murder victim. Maybe I am a little sensitive, but that could be considered poor form in some circles.

mozartpc27
02-09-2010, 12:15 PM
Also, you did allude to knowing more because you say you are a conservative republican...

"Hambone, I am not going to argue with you about why defense lawyers do their jobs. Well I took issue with the comments that all defense lawyers or people who want to be defense attorneys are liberal. In fact that is not true. I know this because I am a conservative republican." <--------- Thats your direct quote. I didnt make that up. You said it.

Not to jump in where I am not involved and don't belong, but I took this to mean that kadrmas IS a public defender, and a conservative Republican, and thus, QED, not all public defenders are liberals. In other words, he is not claiming special knowledge BECAUSE he is a conservative Republican, but rather stating that, since he is a conservative Republican and a public defender, he "knows" that not all public defenders are liberal.

Just thought I'd throw that in there, but, if I'm wrong, I apologize.

kadrmas15
02-09-2010, 03:48 PM
Yes Mozart, overall that was the point I was trying to make. However my goal is to be a public defender. I have not even started law school yet let alone completed it. But yes, the point I was trying to make was basically the one you were getting at.

Hambone2421
02-10-2010, 09:32 AM
Yes Mozart, overall that was the point I was trying to make. However my goal is to be a public defender. I have not even started law school yet let alone completed it. But yes, the point I was trying to make was basically the one you were getting at.

Then you should have stated it the same way Mozart did.