Hello all, you may remember me, former USPO, presentence writer. I posted a question smilar to this a while ago, but still confused. In chat room, got advice to post again, and maybe greyghost (?) could help.

As I stated before. Postal Inspectors arrested me in July of 2003, claiming they saw me in the act of stealing mail. Brought me to their office, printed, questioned, all my belongings confiscated, (was moving from office to office when pulled over), the whole works. Now, Sept. 2005, I am still not charged with a crime, my attorney, was presented with a "proposed Information and Plea Agreement" in April (05) which was ridiculously charging me with Bank Fraud, and rejected by him. My question is two-fold.

I seem to recall a statute (18 3551??)which says they have 60 days from arrest to charge me, is that so? If it is, why is my attorney apparently unconcerned about this? Second, the agents keep stating to the AUSA and others, that I was not arrested! My usband witnessed the whole thing, as well as several members of the community! Why are they denying, or is it because of the above? If so, again, why is my attorney avoiding this topic with me and seemingly unconcerned??

Please assist if possible, I thought I knew the system, apparently not!

Thanks!

I really can't help you, but I am posting hoping that this stays current until Greyghost can see it.

Just some random thoughts....were you read your miranda rights?
I have also heard something along the line of 60 days to charge.
Have you considered firing your lawyer?

[quote]I really can't help you, but I am posting hoping that this stays current until Greyghost can see it.

Just some random thoughts....were you read your miranda rights? Yes I was.

I have also heard something along the line of 60 days to charge. I found the statute, 18 USC 3161.

Have you considered firing your lawyer? Not until I put my questions in writing, and ask for a written reply. It seems like whenever we meet, one or both of us is in a hurry, and we usually seem to be meeting about some other issue. What frustrates me is that if this statute does, in fact, apply; the other stuff we are meeting about may be moot.
Thanks for posting!:)
Pam