Murder suspects get two lawyers each
Write a letter to the editor
Eighteen-year-old Michael Stuart Pritchett (right) appeared on a video screen yesterday at 12:55pm, five minutes before the capital murder suspect was scheduled to have a hearing. However, the Charlottesville General District Court hadn’t finished the misdemeanor trials of two young adults alleging police overreaction in their arrest.
So after nearly twenty minutes of watching the motionless image of Pritchett on the screen, wearing his striped jail jumpsuit, friends and family members strolled outside to Market Street. His hearing took place quietly and apparently without live input from him or his co-defendant, 22-year-old William Douglas Gentry Jr. (left), in the November 8 murder of Jayne McGowan.
Joining Rhonda Quagliana for Pritchett’s defense is Steve Rosenfield. Joining Lloyd Snook to defend Gentry is Richard Davis. The two suspects preliminary hearing is set for Valentine’s Day, February 14.
Pritchett’s friends and family declined comment, as did the woman who has been described as Gentry’s fiancée, Jenna Critzer, who, sitting beside her mother near the back of the courtroom, stared down with her chin tucked against her chest.
#
Two lawyers each?? And who pays the attorney fees? The quoted retainer for one of these attorneys in a civil case is $30K — I can’t imagine the tab these two scumbags will run up. Everyone deserves representation, but it would save the Commonwealth a great deal of money if these would just plead honestly and be sentenced.
Susan, the potential punishment for capitol murder is death. As an emotional reaction I think these guys should be burned at the stake. But rationally, how much sense does it make to show people that it’s wrong to kill others by killing them? Think of it another way, if they *don’t* have 2 lawyers each can you imagine the amount of money that will be wasted on YEARS of appeal(which you know will happen) if there is a sentence of death. If you’re *really* concerned about the amount of money the commonwealth wastes on crime maybe you could get them to stop busting and imprisoning people for nonsense like smoking grass(which isn’t even a crime under the common law). Or perhaps you ought to look into the retirement packages of your elected officials to see how wisely the state uses your money. So… be glad these guys have 2 lawyers each. For if a procedural defect is found in the proceedings, regardless of the innocence or guilt of the defendants, anything from nothing to an acquittal could occur. Let the lawyers duke it out now so that later on down the road an appeals court has no reason to overturn or revisit a guilty conviction. 1 last thing… what do civil attorneys have to do with a murder trial? These guys are being tried for a crime of violence not breach of contract.
Cletus, you really changed topic in your reply to me. First if all, I said “the quoted retainer for one of these attorneys in a civil case” as a comparison, implying that the costs for a criminal case (forensics, attorneys, etc) is much, much higher. Rosenfield represents clients in civil as well as criminal cases. I know, a family member had hired him for a civil case. I was not wrong in my comment.
Secondly, I never mentioned the death penalty. Are you saying that they need 4 attorneys so that they are not found guilty of capitol murder and waste (our) money on appeals? I don’t follow your logic.
These two guys killed an innocent woman. The law of our land entitles them to fair representation. Unless they can afford these four highly paid attorneys, they deserve nothing more than one court appointed attorney each.
Lastly, please don’t minimize my comments by stating, “If you’re *really* concerned about the amount of money the commonwealth wastes on crime…” How many PACs have you joined to better our society? I have put my money where my mouth is. Even though I don’t live in Charlottesville, I have done much to bring change to your local campus crime issues.
Susan, No… WRONG! These 2 guys DID NOT murder an innocent woman until a jury returns a verdict of “guilty”. As reprehensible as the crime was the maxim is presumption of innocence (no matter how much it hurts) until duely convicted by a competent court and a jury of your peers. “I don’t follow your logic.” Clearly not. 1st of all your allusion to civil attorney costs as a datum by which to measure other legal costs is bunk. You got caught red handed. You made no such allusion. It would have made infinitely more sense then to simply reference costs for a murder trial attorney. So it isn’t a way to compare costs it’s your way of back pedaling since you were observed to know nothing about the most fundamental aspects legal procedure. Why would a civil attorney be used for a murder trial? And the answer, of course, is that he wouldn’t (unless there were some other extenuating circumstances that the article does not allude to). I don’t know Mr. Rosenfield. It is true that a generic lawyer will often handle both civil and criminal cases. If a lawyer is bar certified they are, by definition, competent to practice law(even though we know this isn’t really true). If you are on trial for murder and may face death as a punishment do you want a criminal attorney who specializes in murder trials or any old lawyer that does wills, estates, taxes, parking/speeding tickets and the like? So would you prefer to see these “scumbags” represented by competent counsel *or would you rather see them go free on appeal for having inadequate counsel*? It happens. UVa has a fine law library. Look it up. Next, is joining a PAC the only way to better our society? If not why would it matter if I was a member of one? If you put your money where your mouth is I’ll bet you’re often sick and have difficulty speaking. Capital crimes are infamous for being punishable by death; that’s widely known. So you didn’t have to mention the death penalty. The article states “…the capital murder suspect…”. So I didn’t need you to say it was a capital crime. I was able to glean from the article all necessary information. Perhaps you should give that a try sometime. Third, what possible difference could it make whether the crime was committed on a campus or in outer space? So it is *precisely* the slack, slipshod, rush to judgment attitude you display that sets people like these “scumbags” free. In short I find your analysis strewn with gaping defects in logic. It is little wonder then that you can’t follow mine. In my opinion, your goal is the correct one(to put these “scumbags” away for life). However, if you want to do that there is a proper way to do it. If these guys are convicted that is only the begining of the process. By the way, do you know what it costs to put someone to death in the commonwealth since you are so concerned about how your tax monies are spent? Maybe you could get the judge to dismiss the charges with prejudice and then we wouldn’t have to spend any money.
Wow. You are an emotional chap. I prefer to dialogue with fact and not emotion or fiction.
PS Thanks for the character assessment. You’re lucky I didn’t return the favor.
Facts you say? Put up or shut up. As for a character assesment… knock yourself out. What makes you think I’m beholden to your estimate of me for my sense of self worth? So by all means and with all haste please feel free to identify where my facts/analysis are incorrect. Be specific and be prepared to offer an alternative. Otherwise what is your condemnation worth? That’s right… absolutely nothing. LOL!
I’ll pray for you.
Cletus, what’s your deal? You seem like a smart guy, and have brought up some valid and interesting points, but you’re coming off here as a tad deranged. I thought Susan was perfectly clear in her civil comparison. Caveat: I know Steve Rosenfield and am a fan of his work.
And here’s a newsflash for you: these two guys did actually and most definitely murder Jayne McGowan in cold blood. Not under the legal definition as we all understand it (innocent until proven guilty, etc), but in reality. They did it, and there’s not really any question about that. So, while we all support them getting an attorney each, and having the trial afforded to them under the law, frankly nobody gives much of a rat’s ass if they get anything beyond that.
Maybe people are just incredibly sick and tired of seeing the innocent get their rights trampled on, and only being able to get justice if they can afford a snazzy attorney, while the criminals are provided the finest in free legal assistance. Doesn’t mean we want to overturn the Constitution, just that folks are kinda sick of having their faces rubbed in endless stories of whiny criminals.
In my opinion, they’ll both plead, and this won’t even get to trial.