The 11th circuit said the reason this was not a poll tax was because the fines were part of a felon's punishment. There's no rule against paying off someone else's fines, even if it incidentally means they can now vote.
And it's not an incentive to vote because the felon doesn't have to make any promises to get the fine paid.
Indeed there are some people in the world who might see millions of dollars being paid into court systems and victim's funds from out of state as a good thing.
The presumption of regularity is hard to get past, but it's difficult to imagine an AG caring about these payments if the goal were not to deter voting.
This would be like if polling locations were only reachable by helicopter, and you prosecuted people for providing helicopter rides.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Ok, so let's go through the 2005 affirmance of Marcellus Williams prosecution.
According to the Supreme Court of Missouri, the evidence against Williams was:
1. His girlfriend 2. His cellmate 3. Items in the girlfriend's possession that belonged to the victim.
Williams' defense was that his girlfriend was a prostitute turning him in for a 10k reward who had actually been the person to rob the victim, and that she had lied about him giving her a ride because his car didn't work.
I think a reasonable juror could discount the testimony of the snitch and the girlfriend, but tough to get past the possession of the victim's items without some good evidence that the girlfriend committed the crime.
There are not a lot of people who can just wander into a diner or a donut shop and instantly connect with the people there. Retail politics is hard!
If I were going to offer some advice, try asking questions that have more open-ended answers. Not "how long have you worked here" but "what's the best donut here?"
Whenever I go to a small town courtroom, I inevitably start a conversation with someone about the best place to get lunch. Everyone has an opinion and it's a good chance to build a rapport.
Cities can be sued for the civil rights violations of their police officers when those violations are the result of a policy. Either official (mass arrest orders) or unofficial (looking the other way when bad stuff happens).
/1
A doctor and a lawyer are chatting at a party. But every few minutes, someone comes up and pesters the doctor about some ailment and asks for advice. After a couple of hours, the doctor, exasperated, asks the lawyer how it is that no one bothers asking HIM for advice?
The lawyer takes a sip of his whiskey and a drag on his cigar before responding that that used to be a problem for him, but now he just bills people who ask him for advice at his hourly rate. Once that happened a couple of times, nobody bothered him again.
The doctor thanks the lawyer and heads home. The next morning, he decides to take his advice. He writes up a few bills, seals them in envelopes, and puts on the postage. He's apprehensive, but a little excited.
When he gets to the mailbox there's a bill from the lawyer.
Ok so let's talk about mistrials and double jeopardy, since everyone is talking about it in the context of the YSL trial.
If a mistrial occurs, and the defense just DOES NOT OBJECT, the defendant can be retried. If it's defense requested, same deal.
/1
The only time that the defense can request a mistrial AND bar retrial is when they can get a judge to find that the State deliberately provoked the mistrial.
This is hard as hell because no prosecutor is going to admit that and the judge has to work with them every day.
/2
You basically have to make a record about how bad the case was going for the State and how they were definitely going to lose with this jury and now they get a chance to fix it.
And whatever the trial judge says, goes. Almost impossible to reverse.
/3