A Step in the Right Direction

    The Massachusetts state Senate unanimously passed a resolution Thursday to repeal a law requiring a driver's license suspension of at least six months for anyone convicted of a drug crime.  The law mandated suspensions for any drug offense, regardless of whether there was a motor vehicle infraction involved.  This is a great beginning for criminal justice reform in Massachusetts.  While the rationale for the original law may have had the intent to keep those under the influence from behind the wheel, it's true effect was to deny people the ability to get and keep jobs.
    If someone is arrested and convicted of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs, then of course they should lose their driving privileges.  We don't suspend licenses of those arrested for drunk and disorderly conduct, so we should not place a higher standard on those who are arrested for drug offenses.  Next, let's hope the legislature addresses the incarceration of those who need treatment for drug abuse, not punishment.

NSFW---Some things are just funny, enjoy

Welcome Francis

Prayer of St. Francis

Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith; where there is despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness, joy.

O, Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console; to be understood as to understand; to be loved as to love; For it is in giving that we receive; it is in pardoning that we are pardoned; it is in dying that we are born again to eternal life

Baby Bella--a systematic failure of family, neighbor, medicine and the state

    It seems the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families is in the middle of another tragedy.  Bella Bond, for months known as "Baby Doe" was identified and her mother and her mother's boyfriend were arraigned on charges related to her murder today.  The reality is Bella never had a chance.  Her mother had already lost two of her children to the system, when her parental rights were terminated.   Bella's family failed, Bella's doctors failed, as did her social workers and her neighbors.  
   When Rachel Bond was admitted to the hospital where Bella was born, the staff took her history.  It would have revealed that she had given birth in the past.  Further questioning, and they would have discovered that she had had her parental rights terminated.  At that point, the hospital's social service department could have implemented a plan to follow up on Bella, designating her as "high risk" of neglect and arranged for her and Bond to be monitored.  Is there such a system in place for high risk infants?  If there isn't, there should be.
   Baby Bella had family, we know of an Aunt, grandparents and a father.  Each and every one of them failed this child.  She disappeared from their lives, she disappeared from Facebook.  They dismissed the composite photo of "Baby Doe."  While the may be mourning, they should be examining the family dynamics that allowed a child to fall from view, without a word. The same can be said for her neighbors.
   Finally, DCF, no case that is supported for "neglect" should ever be closed.  Once neglect is found, the family should be followed until the child is safely into adulthood.  DCF should link to the child's daycare, pediatrician and schools.  If a child misses a scheduled medical appointment, they should be notified automatically, if they aren't in school or daycare for a few days without sufficient reasons, DCF should receive an alert. In addition, every child who has received DCF services, should be swabbed, and their DNA kept in a data base, this simple practice would have aided in the identification of Baby Bella, and brought her killer to justice sooner, and likely preserved crucial evidence.
   Would all these systems require significant investment, and monitoring?  Yes, it would, but at what point will we say the the most vulnerable among us, should be protected at any cost?

 

A film that demonstrates the devastating toll divorce, and custody fights have on children.  Great performances by Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep

Sometimes the fight isn't worth the payoff

   There often comes a time in a  conflict where you realize, even if you are on the side of "right" it may be time to drop the gloves and walk away.  This happens frequently in marriages, no matter how hard you may have tried to bridge the differences between you and your spouse, you are faced with a life altering choice.  Do you continue using temporary fixes, or sever ties? There is no right or wrong answer.  There is only your answer.

   First you have to identify were the conflict is.  Do you fight over trivial annoyances, or are your conflicts related to trust, values, financial security or family conflicts?  Pet peeves and inconsiderate behavior can change.  Fundamental differences about how you conduct yourselves as a married couple are often not reparable.

   Next, really take stock in how you feel most of the time, are you always angry, or frustrated, do you cry most days or nights?  If you are living every day in pain or conflict, then you aren't really living.  You're married because you wanted a partner, a person who brings pleasure, joy and comfort to your life.  No marriage is without conflict, the question is, has your marriage become one big battlefield?

   Finally, consider how your well being, or lack there of resonates among those around you. Your children, work colleagues and friends are like a pond, and you are a pebble thrown in the middle, sending ripples to each and every one of them.

   If you are in conflict, you may fight, you may win, but ultimately you've lost yourself.

Public Defenders

Sometimes someone else says it better than I ever could

The Lost Art of Conversation

  When was the last time you sat face to face with someone, with no distractions and actually had a conversation?  No mobile phone, no tablet or laptop.  Television and radios off.  Texting has replaced telephone calls, and when you have the rare opportunity to speak to someone, either in person or via telephone they are likely focusing on something along with you.

A 2012 survey identified communication problems as the #1 cause of divorce and marital discord.  Many marriage counselors recommend that couple sit face to face every day and and speak to one another.  Imagine that?  A counselor having to tell a married couple to sit and talk.  This isn't a new reality, mobile phones have replaced televisions and newspapers.  Think about yourself as a child, did you father or mother sit and talk to you, giving you their undivided attention?  It's not something we do naturally.

So try it.  The next time you have the opportunity to speak with someone, turn off all of your electronics.  Fold your newspaper and put it away.  Listen to them and don't interrupt them, look them in the eye.  Ask them questions and be engaged.  When they ask you questions, don't think about the best answer, give them the truth, your sincere thoughts.  Let them learn about you and come to understand who you are.  Your relationship will grow in ways you never dreamed.

Can you change a person?

   It's a pretty universal belief that you can't change a person, you may want them to change, you may be spot on that they need to change, but without their cooperation you're probably out of luck.  

There are probably a few people in your life that you would like to see change certain behaviors.  Your significant other may be late all the time.  Your mother may complain too much.   Your best friend won't break up with her boyfriend, even though she spends all her time fighting with and and filling you in on the dirty details.

Once these annoyances get tiresome, you may be justified in encouraging them to make changes.  Can you change another person's behavior?  Should you even try?

 You may be surprised to learn that you can help someone change their behavior, but it's primarily possible by changing yours. If your partner is always late, then you an decide to start your plans without him.  Instead of getting frustrated and nag, just go about your business.  Eventually they will realize that you aren't going to put yourself out anymore.  When your mother starts to complain, change the tone of the conversation, ask her "mom, how can we make this better?"  Don't entertain the negativity, be positive and look for the good in every situation.

You will be surprised how people around you change, when you make changes to the way you behave when you interact with them
  

Movie Friday

  So, those who know me, know that I am a movie buff.  So I thought on Fridays I would recommend or review (or both) a new or classic film, where the law is the a primary focus or theme.  So, today I thought I would encourage you to watch a classic legal drama,
  The Verdict, starring Paul Newman.  The film centers around a young mother who suffers catastrophic complications during child birth at a Catholic hospital in Boston, MA.  Newman plays a down and out, alcoholic lawyer who takes on the mighty Archdiocese of Boston.  With a stellar cast, the film of a tour de force for Newman and James Mason, along with the supporting cast.
  On a personal note, I was working as a legislative intern at the Massachusetts State House in the summer of 1982, when the movie was filmed.  It served as the courthouse.

Forgiveness

   "The only way to overcome pain caused by an instrumental figure in one's life is to forgive, but the definition of that word is often misunderstood. Forgiveness is about relieving oneself of resentment.    Forgiveness isn't about saying, 'It;s OK,' or that you 'accept' or 'approve' what happened, forgiveness is the acknowledgment that what happened, happened, and that you are now ready to set down the baggage, the pain and the fear.

   There simply is no other way, when a person forgives they no longer take action based on feelings of revenge, anger or fear, but instead make decisions based on their character.  If I consider myself a good person, a generous person, but then act meanly or selfishly because someone has treated me that way, then I allow their actions to determine my character and my actions.

Without taking the proper steps tp grieve and let go, pain can become part of one's identity.  (Retribution) does no virtue for you.  It will create the illusion that you've done something valuable for yourself.  Resolving the pain comes down to a key phrase: I remember the time that you did this, and I'm not going to let the memory of that event hurt me anymore".---various words of wisdom from Russell Friedman and Becky Blanton

Forgive those who have done you harm, not for them, but for you--don't let their actions define who you are, or who you can become.

Can Ignorance Really be Bliss?

   As a society are we too well informed about everything?  Every crime, illness, "scandal" is reported ad nauseam.  The details of every person's life is broadcast to all the world to contemplate.  Panic, fear, discord, misinformation seem to proliferate at an alarming rate.
 
   We live a world where everything that is happening, in every corner of the world is reported on multiple platforms. We no longer get our news once a day, at 6pm via the nightly news, or the morning newspaper.  There are 24 hour news channels, blogs, message boards, video channels, literally millions of sources.

   There is no longer "local news."  Everything is a national, and often an international story.  Because ratings, page views and sales are first and foremost, often the facts are overlooked.  Who can get the first quotes, or the first video to the masses?  Since anyone can broadcast the "news" the profession of "journalist" doesn't really exist, except among a very few.  Even well established news sources  like the Wall Street Journal, The New York Time, or broadcast new channels are so quick to be first, they lose sight of the truth, as well as the ramifications of unfettered coverage.
I was moved to write about this after seeing a recent news story about Dr. Kent Brantly, who had contracted Ebola last year while while treating patients in Liberia, and received treatment in the US.      Recall last year, the panic that was quite literally spreading throughout the world.  Despite the fact that the chance of contracting Ebola in the US was smaller than your chance of being struck by lightning, there were calls to close the boarders, to stop air travel from Africa.  Disinformation became the norm, setting off panics, racism and anger.
 
It happens nearly every day.  A shooting, violent attack, verbal misstep, or illness lead to a barrage of information, some true, most not.  People at both ends of the spectrum frame the information they disseminate  cloaked in their own agendas. "News" organizations are so fixated on getting something new to report,  they disregard the basic tenets of journalism.  Sources aren't vetted, innuendo and rumors are reported as fact.  Often times careers, marriages and lives are left in ruin.
It has wreaked havoc in our political process, in so much as people truly they think they are informed, yet nothing they believe is really true.

I am not advocating living in blissful ignorance of the world around me, I am however encouraging people to view the "news" they see with a critical eye, be aware of political and personal agendas, and pause before you hit "send."

A Rotten Human Being ≠ A Criminal

There is a criminal case playing out in Massachusetts that has created a great deal of controversy.  It is the case of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Michelle Carter.  Carter has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in the suicide of her friend Conrad Roy.  You would think that she must have given him a lethal dose of pills to take, or tied a noose around his neck, or in someway actively participated in his death.  Michelle's alleged crime is that she encouraged, and therefore contributed to his death.
Investigators say just prior to Roy committing suicide, he became scared, said he did not want to leave his family and as a result, got out of his car (in which he had begun filling with CO2 from the vehicle's exhaust). Carter then told him to "get back in" according to court filings. The teens exchanged 1000's of text messages in the days leading up to Roy's suicide, the text are in no uncertain terms disturbing, Carter appears cavalier, cold, uncaring.  As distasteful as the texts may be, can a person, no matter how vile, make someone take their own life?
You have most certainly said in anger "go jump off a bridge" or my family's favorite, "why not go play in some traffic."  If a friend did in fact jump off a bridge, could you reasonably expect to be arrested for their death?  It seem highly unlikely, but if you think logically and not emotionally  about Michelle Carter, then the answer is as obvious.

This is the first case of it's kind.  Those who have been charged in connection with the suicides of others (mostly teens) have not been charged for the death, but for charges related to bullying.  Usually harassment, stalking or making threats.  By all accounts Roy was a deeply troubled young man, My heart breaks for him family and friends.  In any suicide, grief compels us to find out "why?" It compels us to affix blame, to believe that the death could have been prevented.
That is the crux of the case, the Commonwealth has charged Michelle Carter with killing Conrad Roy with her ugly, uncaring and ugly words, they need to blame somebody, because as a society we are unable to accept, that someone would chose death.  Conrad Roy made the fatal decision to end his life, alone in his garage.  Michelle Carter should not be held criminally responsible

Do Your Job or Go to Jail

I can't help but recall the political rhetoric surrounding the Terry Schiavo case in Florida, when I read about the Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis.  Elian Gonzales also comes to mind.  These cases are similar, not legally, but politically, in that the legal outcome is a foregone conclusion, but the political fervor escalates to a fever pitch.
When Presidential candidates who are educated, and often attorneys disregard the rule of law in order to whip up the base, they lose all credibility.  My religious beliefs, or lack thereof cannot be used to refuse to do my job.  As an attorney, I can't refuse to represent a client because of their religion.

Let's for a moment consider that the government employee is a Judge, she is Catholic, and refuses to grant divorces. Would people be so quick to come to her defense?  Or consider a town clerk who is a Muslim, and he refuses to issue a marriage license to a couple where one is Muslim and one is Jewish. Would Presidential candidates consider him a "hero."
The reason politicians are blindly supporting the Kentucky clerk, is because the underlying "fight" is about gay marriage, an issue that gets people to reach into their pockets and contribute money to campaigns. They know however, that the law is clear and that she is in fact, rightfully being held in contempt.
Kim Davis is not in jail because of her religious beliefs, she is in jail because of her refusal to issue marriage licenses to individuals who are legally allowed to marry.  Her comparison to the fight of Martin Luther King should infuriate anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the Civil Rights Movement.
Recently, HBO aired a mini series called Show Me a Hero, it was based upon the refusal of the city of Yonkers to obey a Federal Court mandate to build low income housing.  The elected officials, whipped their constituents  into a frenzy about desegregation.  They violated the court orders and were hit with hefty fines, bringing Yonkers to the verge of bankruptcy.  (the fines against the individual councilmen were overturned by the Supreme Court, those against the city were not).
 The rule of law must be respected, we cannot deny individual their civil rights in the name of God.

When Ego Meets the Law

    In case you are wondering, I am a Patriots fan, I bleed the colors of Boston's sports teams. So, my bias is on the table.  I have however, done my best to keep that at bay as I have followed the story of "Deflategate." I've read the Wells Report, and the Decision of Judge Richard Berman.
    What has always stood out to me, is how that in all respects, a certain conclusion was desired, and the investigation was framed to reach that conclusion.  The level of proof is not that of a criminal action, (proof beyond a reasonable doubt) or a civil one (proof by a preponderance of the evidence),  But this blog isn't about whether any balls were deflated, or who may or may not have known what and when.  This is about my thoughts on when huge egos clash in court, or before they make it to court.
   When this happens, there are rarely settlements.  Both litigants are more interested in making the other look bad, puffing their chests, and digging in their heals.  In nearly 30 years of practice, I know one thing for certain, no one ever tells the full truth.  They may not lie, but they omit things that they think will portray them in a negative light.  It's human nature, we are told from early on, "put your best foot forward" "don't let them see you sweat," among other platitudes .
   Sometimes, however, we have to take our egos and set them aside, and look at the conflict from a conciliatory viewpoint.  In a divorce, for example, I will tell a client, "while I understand that on this point you are right, let's consider how your solution will impact your children."  Sometimes the result may benefit the client, but harm their children, or visa versa.
    In the case of "Deflategate" has either Brady or Goodell, taken themselves out of the equation, and asked "what is the best thing for the league, or the Patriots, or the fans?'  I honestly don't think so.
    Attorneys are told by judges all the time, "If you leave the decision up to me, someone will not be happy." Judges want cases to settle, that way both parties have some ownership of the resolution, Judge Berman did his best to encourage a settlement between the NFL and Brady, but it's clear, ego, and not reason ruled the day.
So, although there was a decision, which legal pundits with argue about until the end of time, the appeals process will drag the matter out for at least another year.  The parties will be distracted, and their heals will become full entrenched.