Leah67
06-03-2005, 08:40 PM
I realize this sounds crazy since I am a law student but here in California I have discovered that they way the legal system should work doesn't happen here and they have their own way of doing things so I decided to ask.
In my husbands first trial the attorney was an idiot. Plain and simple. It is a case of he said she said. However, there was evidence that this idiot did not present such as hotel receipts that clearly show we were somewhere else at the time. Other witnesses never called to testify etc.
IN all there is 15 witnesses that were never called by this fool.
Now we have a new attorney and we are motioning for a new trial based on the fact that not all defense evidence was used at trial
I am just wondering what the chances are of this happening.
The D.A. seems to care less that there is physical proof of the girl's lies and that we were in San Diego now Lancaster when we said we were. Hell the United States Navy even verified we were there and not here, but the fool attorney didn't use it in the first trial.
He just kept claming that my testimony was all that was needed because the girl changed her story so much. Even if knew that was B.S.
My husband also wanted to testify on his behalf and the first attorney told him know even though it was his right to do so. Sadly he never asked me about it until afterwards. He still wants to testify.
I simply do not know the chances of the judge actually granting the new trial based on incompetent representation.
In my husbands first trial the attorney was an idiot. Plain and simple. It is a case of he said she said. However, there was evidence that this idiot did not present such as hotel receipts that clearly show we were somewhere else at the time. Other witnesses never called to testify etc.
IN all there is 15 witnesses that were never called by this fool.
Now we have a new attorney and we are motioning for a new trial based on the fact that not all defense evidence was used at trial
I am just wondering what the chances are of this happening.
The D.A. seems to care less that there is physical proof of the girl's lies and that we were in San Diego now Lancaster when we said we were. Hell the United States Navy even verified we were there and not here, but the fool attorney didn't use it in the first trial.
He just kept claming that my testimony was all that was needed because the girl changed her story so much. Even if knew that was B.S.
My husband also wanted to testify on his behalf and the first attorney told him know even though it was his right to do so. Sadly he never asked me about it until afterwards. He still wants to testify.
I simply do not know the chances of the judge actually granting the new trial based on incompetent representation.