Tim Nelson

The Yellow Sheet reports that Jim Belanger, president of the Arizona Association of Criminal Justice, is defending the large number of criminal defense attorney contributions to Tim Nelson, the Democrat candidate for Maricopa County Attorney. Belanger said, “The list of lawyers that have contributed to Mr. Nelson include some of the best, most committed, and widely respected in the state…”

Oh really? Let’s look at a typical contributor:

Jason Lamm
http://www.cyberlawaz.com/child-pornography-attorney.asp
“Over the last several years Mr. Lamm has become recognized as the leading defense criminal defense attorney in the defense or child pornography charges and has handled dozens of cases not only in Phoenix and throughout Arizona, but all around the country.”

A prosecutor friend of mine says the list of attorneys who contributed to Nelson have collectively represented the most notorious rapists and murderers in Arizona’s history, including Sammy the Bull Gravano, Felipe Cisneros of the Cisneros crime family, Richard Lynn Bible, Kevin Roscoe,  Banzai Bob, and Donald Delahanty.

If Mr. Belanger believes that the attorneys who choose to represent the most heinous criminals in the world are the most respected attorneys in the state, what does he think of those attorneys who choose to represent victims and other noble causes? Are they less respectable because they have deliberately chosen not to represent the most vile members of society? Why is Mr. Belanger so concerned about helping Nelson get elected?

Mr. Nelson is not running for criminal defense attorney. He’s running for prosecutor. He has zero prosecution experience and currently works at a law firm full of criminal defense attorneys, Osborn Maledon.  If Nelson is elected, who is going to represent the victims and the prosecution side? Having received $15,000 so far from criminal defense attorneys, you can bet those attorneys are going to be asking for special favors when their cases come before the office for prosecution. My prosecutor friend said he looked at Nelson’s campaign finance reports and could only spot two prosecutors who had contributed to Nelson, and one didn’t live in this county and the other is currently practicing civil law.

Electing someone like Nelson takes a huge risk that his criminal defense comrades won’t talk him into allowing a murderer or child molester off the hook, free to go out and hurt others.  It is unbelievable that the Democrats are putting up someone this diametrically opposed to the function of the prosecutor’s office as their candidate.

Be sure to check out the blog that has been started about Nelson.

  News of Today:
The Arizona Republic
A judge released a top U.S. Olympic wrestling coach from federal custody Thursday so that he could help the team prepare for the Summer Games in Beijing. Flanked by family and friends, Roman Wroclawski walked out of U.S.
District Court in Phoenix after spending seven months in a private prison in Florence, where he had been held at the request of Polish authorities on claims that he falsified loan documents and embezzled money from companies he owned in Poland in the early 1990s.

News of Tomorrow:
The Arizona Republic
A judge released Charles Manson from federal custody Thursday so that he could help the U.S. fencing team prepare for the Summer Games in Beijing. Flanked by family and friends, Manson walked out of U.S. District Court in Phoenix after serving time for conspiracy to commit the Tate-LaBianca murders. The Magistrate agreed that special circumstances existed for Manson’s release pending a parole hearing in 2012 because the U.S. team was in desperate need of expertise with a blade.

   We commented some time ago on the “Life Means Life” initiative in Arizona, noting that Rep. Eddie Farnsworth (R-22) derailed this prudent proposal for some bizarre political motivations. The Arizona Republic’s Laurie Roberts recently revisited the issue, and, once again, Farnsworth is identified as the barrier to enhancing the rights of victims of crime in Arizona. Voters should remember Mr. Farnsworth the next time he places his political future in front of them. They should remember what he did NOT do for the rights of victims — they should remember when he had a chance to stand up for justice, he turned and ran.

   Based on Federal Crime Statistics, someone is murdered every day in Arizona, and five people are murdered every four days in Arizona.

Compounding this often overlooked Arizona tragedy is the fact heinous crime disproportionately affects helpless innocents and indigent poor.  These are the very same people who truly and desperately need government’s protection, but often don’t receive it because they have no organized voice.

In an effort to balance the scales of justice, Sen. Jim Waring (R-7) introduced Arizona Senate Bill 1062 (SB 1062) in January 2008.  The “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation stipulates a life sentence for first degree murder in Arizona will only result in a “natural” life sentence for the first degree murderer.  In other words, the first degree murderer would have absolutely no possibility of parole.  The life sentence would truly equate to a life sentence.

SB 1062 also seeks to protect families from the trauma of never-ending parole hearings.   A parole hearing for a first degree murderer who has received a life sentence with the possibility of parole is a horribly painful process for family and friends that unnecessarily add to their unrelenting pain, emotional suffering and feelings of injustice.  In Arizona, a first degree murder given a life sentence with the possibility of parole can be eligible for parole EVERY YEAR after only 25 years of confinement.  This is our law, but it is still unjust.

SB 1062, the fair and balanced truth-in-sentencing legislation, enjoys broad bipartisan support throughout Arizona.  It is also supported by the National Board of Trustees of Parents of Murdered Children, the Arizona Voice for Crime Victims (AVCV), and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.

On Monday, February 4, 2008, SB 1062 was approved by the Arizona Senate Judiciary Committee by a unanimous bipartisan vote of 5 to 0.

On Monday, February 25, 2008, SB 1062 was passed by the Arizona Senate by a virtually unanimous bipartisan vote of 28 to 1.

Despite overwhelming bipartisan support in the Arizona Senate and throughout Arizona, the “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation proceeded to languish in the Arizona House Speaker’s Office for a full month.  On Tuesday, March 25, 2008, SB 1062 was finally assigned to the House Judiciary Committee for public hearing.

After another two long, unforgiving weeks, Rep. Eddie Farnsworth (R-22), the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, reluctantly agreed to hear the “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation only if the supporters would consider a criminal-friendly amendment to provide the possibility of parole for some types of first degree murderers.

On Thursday, April 10, 2008, Rep. Farnsworth gaveled the House Judiciary Committee meeting to order and proceeded to place SB 1062 “on hold” in an effort to kill the legislation designed to ensure first degree killers stay in prison where they belong and where they can kill no more.

Rep. Farnsworth’s shocking last-minute decision to kill SB 1062 was unfair, unwise, undemocratic, and insulting to the core.  The “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation was and still is sound public policy in the best interests of Arizona and her communities.

SB1062 was not only granted a full and open public hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, it passed the Arizona Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support.  It was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee in good faith with the intention of a full public hearing and appropriate legislative vetting.

Countless hours were spent shepherding the “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation through the Arizona Senate.  Precious time and effort was expended to save the legislation from the lukewarm support in the House Speaker’s Office.   Numerous hours were spent crafting a compromise amendment to exclusively satisfy Rep. Farnsworth’s merciful inclinations towards first degree murderers in an effort to save some semblance of the legislation.

Despite all the noble cause and the good faith efforts, Rep. Farnsworth exercised his legislative (if not imperial) right as the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to single-handedly kill (dare I say, murder) the legislation without any notice, without any comment, without any compunction.  His individual decision to kill the legislation without any public debate demonstrated poor decorum at best and breathtaking arrogance at worst.

If the “Life Means Life” truth-in-sentencing legislation ultimately suffers the unceremonious conclusion Rep. Farnsworth deemed appropriate, his next run for office will most certainly be a rough one.  Rep. Farnsworth scheduled a public hearing, and he did not honor his word to have one.  Compromise legislation was drafted, and Rep. Farnsworth did not even have the courtesy to address it.  Arizonans cried for justice, and Rep. Farnsworth did not care to listen.  Innocents needed his protection, but Rep. Farnsworth was more concerned with protecting first degree murderers.

   Next week is National Crime Victims’ Rights Week, an annual observance started by President Ronald Reagan (who else?) in 1981 “to increase public awareness of, and knowledge among crime victims and survivors about, the wide range of rights and services available to people who have been victimized by crime.”

In Arizona the march is still on, but progress has been made. In 1990, a ballot initiative passed overwhelmingly amended the State Constitution, and created a Victims’ Bill of Rights. It should not be forgotten that it was the judicial establishment that fought the Victims Bill of Rights every step of the way, sending lobbyists and even Supreme Court justices to editorial board rooms to argue against the measure.

The judges did not want to give up their discretion, and they vigorously opposed such “onerous” changes to the law as giving victims the right …

To be treated with fairness, respect and dignity, and to be free from intimidation, harassment or abuse, throughout the criminal justice process.

To be informed, upon request, when the accused or convicted person is released from custody or has escaped.

To be present at and, upon request, to be informed of all criminal proceedings when the defendant has the right to be present.

To be heard at any proceeding involving a post-arrest release decision, a negotiated plea and sentencing.

To refuse an interview, deposition or other discovery request by the defendant, the defendant’s attorney, or other person acting on behalf of the defendant.

To confer with the prosecution, after the crime against the victim has been charged, before trial or before any disposition of the case and to be informed of the disposition.

To read pre sentence reports relating to the crime against the victim when they are available to the defendant.

To receive prompt restitution from the person or persons convicted of the criminal conduct that caused the victim’s loss or injury.

To be heard at any proceeding when any post-conviction release from confinement is being considered.

To a speedy trial or disposition and prompt and final conclusion of the case after the conviction and sentence.

To have all rules governing criminal procedure and the admissibility of evidence in all criminal proceedings protect victims’ rights and to have these rules be subject to amendment or repeal by the legislature to ensure the protection of these rights.

To be informed of victims’ constitutional rights.

You can visit http://www.justiceforvictimsAZ.com for more details about Victms Rights and how to mark the week in Arizona.