It’s all becoming clearer. Larry Little has just moved to admit Thomas Anthony Durkin as co-counsel for Judge DeLaughter. Here’s the motion.
Durkin is a prominent criminal defense lawyer in Chicago and a former assistant US attorney there.
He’s done Gitmo cases. Here’s something about him from a New Yorker piece:
Tom Durkin, the Chicago attorney—he defended Matt Hale, the self-proclaimed Pontifex Maximus of the World Church of the Creator—said that he “wouldn’t have missed this party for the world.” Over the past four years, Durkin has made seven trips to Guantánamo. Initially, he was hesitant to get involved with the defense project, which was assembled by the A.C.L.U. He recalled, “I said to them, ‘Let me speak to my managing partner and get back to you.’” He was referring to his wife, Janis Roberts, who stood beside him. “We have six kids who had to eat and go to college,” she pointed out. “He said, ‘I want to do this.’ And, in hindsight, I know we did the right thing.”
Here’s a biography of him from an ACLU site:
Thomas Anthony Durkin has been practicing criminal law in Chicago for almost thirty-five years and has a wealth of experience defending clients in complex cases, including cases involving classified evidence and allegations related to terrorism. For example, Mr. Durkin represented Dr. Abdelhaleem Ashqar, who was charged with providing material support to the Specially Designated Terrorist Organization, Hamas. That case required extensive pre-trial litigation regarding application of the Classified Information Procedures Act. Mr. Durkin also served as lead trial counsel for Matthew Hale, the self proclaimed Pontifex Maximus of the World Church of the Creator, an avowed white supremacist organization, on widely publicized charges that Hale solicited the murder of U.S. District Court Judge Joan H. Lefkow. The FBI designated Mr. Hale’s case as a “domestic terrorism” case, resulting in the Attorney General’s decision to impose Special Administrative Measures that restricted Mr. Hale’s ability to assist in his own defense. Mr. Durkin successfully challenged several of these restrictions on Sixth Amendment grounds. In the civil arena, Mr. Durkin challenged the constitutionality of the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act on behalf of the Global Relief Foundation, Inc., an Islamic charity whose assets were blocked after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Mr. Durkin is also lead counsel for two men currently imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, Walid Mohammad Haj Mohammad Ali (ISN 081) and Abdul Raham Houari (ISN 070). He presently serves on the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyer (NACDL)’s Select Committee on Military Tribunals and Terrorism.
Mr. Durkin, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, also has considerable experience with the death penalty. Not only has he represented defendants in capital cases, he currently serves as Chairman of the Expert Panel for Capital Appointments for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Mr. Durkin also serves as a liaison to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s Judicial Council Committee to Study the Appointment of Counsel for Indigent Habeas Corpus Petitioners under a Sentence of Death. Mr. Durkin is currently listed in the Illinois “Super Lawyers” Magazine indicating he is rated among the top 5% of Illinois lawyers.
Here’s his profile on his firm web page.
This looks interesting.
I’ll say it looks interesting — especially if Durkin is charging a fee commensurate with his top-5% rating, and li’l ol’ Bobby DeLaughter is paying it with his own dime.
All together now: Very Large HMMMMM.
If I hadn’t already used this trope one time this week, I would have posted “Bobby DeLaughter Goes National.”
I guess no deal consideration for DeLaughter (if there’s even one to consider…after he’d already turned one down).
I really didn’t think he’d go to trial but now I’m not so sure.
What’s the max he faces?
His lawyer will know the risks he faces and tell him, but will be ready and able to give him the best trial he can get if that’s what they decide to do.
lotus @ 1: for some reason that hmmm put this in my mind….
If it keep on rainin’ the levee gonna break,
If it keep on rainin the leveee gonna break,
Some people still sleepin’
some people wide awake.
I like it, BlackBear.
Patsy Brumfield reports this here, citing the same ACLU bio cited in the post above.
Interesting typo in Patsy’s story: “… Cynthia Speetjens of Madison exists because of a client conflict.”
That’s a very complex thought, Lotus. We should try to understand what it is meant to communicate….
Hmmm. “Cynthia Speetjens of Madison exists because of a client conflict.”
Somehow it brings to my mind both Sartre and quantum physics all at once.
“when these two particles collide over here, the Speetjens and the quark are created, but over there.”
The philosophical and existential point seems more difficult to express.
Aye.
Where on earth is DeLaughter getting the $$$? Does his family have money? Or did some of that Ed Peters money fall into his pockets (do robes have pockets?) after all?
Given the nature of the charges, if I were the feds, I would take a direct interest in this question.
Cynthia Speetjens of Madison exists because of a client conflict
Conflict is the begetter of all things, quoth Heraclitus.
Well there you go: existential mystery solved. Elegant, Anderson.
Yep, that’s what one can do with a philosophy major — the occasional obscure blog-comment reference.
Or, as I used to put it, advising the customer on the ontological implications of having fries with that.
it just dawned on me that actually it’s Durkin who exists because of a client conflict.
See, it is quantum mechanics. You expect something to pop out over here, and it pops out over there.
Maybe Bobby’s popped out with swee’ taties?
Anderson @ 11, it occurred to me that Peters secured a sweetheart deal for Speetjen’s fees for DeLaughter and that it was a coordinated defense from the beginning as to those two. Obviously his later cooperation prevents that now.
The least Ed could do for him is fund the legal defense, right?
Speetjen no longer exists. How do we know? The story now says she “exits”
Nothing worse than seeing one’s typos turned into literary sport in public.
Nothing worse than seeing one’s typos turned into literary sport in public.
I can think of someone in LCDC who might not agree . . .
Afternoon C-L headlines:
Chicago lawyer to defend Hinds judge
Unemployment tops 9 percent in Miss.
Judge puts $1B trade secret suit on hold
And my personal favorite . . .
Jackson mayor officially enters race for 2nd term
I wonder if that’ll help the Feds decide whether or not to retry Melton. Had he not submitted the paperwork, would it would have simply gone away?
Could Dickie be paying DeLaughter’s freight so that if he gets off he can say, “I only pled for my family’s sake — I wasn’t guilty of anything, and neither was Trent — I’m so glad Judge D has proved, now, that no crime occurred”? Far fetched? Maybe anywhere else in America, but this is Mississppi.
3dS @ 24 – Perfect defense to Wilson v. Scruggs, no?
Oh yeah, DeltaLawMama, at 25. At this point, for Dickie, isn’t it all about what John Grisham writes in the book?
That, 3dS at 26, as well as the “savings.”
Judge puts $1B trade secret suit on hold
Why on earth would Eaton send Reuben Anderson to argue its case before Swan Yerger?
… Can’t keep track whether this case is the one where Allred’s been referred to the Bar …
Amd it would appear Dickie’s foremost crime, in the eyes of his co-conspirators, was confusing the will and backbone of Allstate, USAA, Progressive and State Farm with the spines of the makers of Winstons, Salems, Philip Morris, Marlboros, Tareytons, Virginia Slims, Viceroys, Kents, Kools, Camels, Benson & Hedges, Lucky Strikes and Picayunes. Or did they come out allright in the tobacco litigation, too?
What’s the R.Anderson/Yerger history prompting your question, Anderson?
NMC @ 19, Speetjens still exists. How do we know? Because we saw her once before. That we don’t see her now just means we are not looking in the right place, which is predicted by quantum physics.
Larry Little is a very good man and lawyer. He did his part to put Hodgins where he needed to be. The Parole Board fumbled the ball on this one. Mr. Little tried for the death penalty and I would bet the jurors now wish they had given that pervert the needle.
#32, Yes! Larry Little is fine man and the municipal judge of Oxford. I’m sure he did his research to find the best lawyer available for his client. I just wonder what the connection is between Judge Little and Judge DeLaughter.
The connection between Little and Delaughter? They were both in the Miss Prosecutors’ Association for years. Delaughter would know that Little knows the prosecutors in this case well (one of them is an alum of the same DA’s office where Little was once an assistant DA). It’s a good pick because Larry Little is smart and above reproach. No need to look for some back channel or evil connection because there isn’t one. And no need to look for some payment connection between Scruggs, Peters or PL Blake because there isn’t one. How do I know? Because Larry Little wouldn’t touch a deal like that with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
You are right. Larry Little would not come near a “dirty” deal. However that Judge decided to hire him he did because he knows the respect everybody has for Mr. Little.
#34, thank you—that makes much sense. To both #34 and #35, let me apologize for my choice of wording “connection.” I did not mean that there was anything sinister about Judge Delaughter retaining Judge Little—I was just wondering how they knew each other which was easily explained by #34. Judge Little is one of the finest lawyers in the state. Please understand that when it comes to judicial bribery and such large amounts of money, I must be totally ignorant and naieve because I never knew such things happened around here. Judge Little is a very dignified and respected man, and he will do everything he legally and ethically can to represent his client.