Jackson Jambalaya

is this young entreprenuer is jail while he is waiting trail?

Why don't you read the post?

It's The DA's job to move cases through the system. If we had a DA, this would not be happening.

I agree with you @5:19 - I'm not sure what Weill has to do with this problem - when Michelle Purvis says "I'm not available to try the case" and the DA agrees that she is not (the request to move the trial was apparently a "joint" request by Purvis and the DA since those two are "the parties"), what was Weill supposed to do? I suppose he could hold Purvis in contempt again because she said she would not make herself available to try the case and then have another courtroom "protest" like Purvis staged before, but this time standing beside her would be the DA saying "I don't know why Judge Weill held her in contempt - I was fine with it being moved". Looks like Weill is da_ _ed either way. I've seen Weill in court move dockets along at warp speed compared to other judges - I just don't see why this issue falls on him instead of Purvis and the DA in this instance.

accused, private counsel, misinformation, yellow journalism, bad, stop..

This post was a shot at all of them, judge, prosecutor, public defender. I don't care who is at fault. Get this guy to trial. Period.

First of all, it's not the public defender or any defense counsel's job to "...move the wheels of justice towards a resolutions of cases such as this one." This comment shows a complete lack of understanding of what the responsibility of a defense attorney is. The attorney's responsibility is to the client and no one else. That's how the system was intended, and that's how it's supposed to be. We are in an adversarial system. Asking for a continuance for a case where the defendant is incarcerated is a bad move on the defense attorney's part...not for the general public. The man is in jail. If the trial is tomorrow or two months from now, he's not getting out of jail and the public is no more at risk if he's there in jail or at CMCF.

Most importantly, your investigative journalism is just...well, wrong this time. This defendant is represented by Faye Peterson. You can see her signature on the above document where there is an "Agreed Order of Continuance." She represents him on his outstanding case 12-1-318 and 14-0-824. It's all public record and took me 5 minutes to find out from the clerk's office. If there is no order that transfers representation, get mad at Weill or his "yes-women" that work for him. Or even Faye Peterson for not filing an entry of appearance. You ran with what you thought was a story where you could call out Michele Purvis-Harris, but your facts are wrong. Did you corroborate any of your findings or just start posting misinformation?

Lastly, you really should send a letter to Michele apologizing to her for calling her out for something that a private defense attorney did. It's just bad journalism, and sounds like something one of those editors would do that you're always consulting.

It's not the public defenders' fault. As long as their client isn't tried, he isn't convicted. So you can bitch about Purvis asking for a continuance but it's her job to defend him and not to force him to trial. The exception is where for some reason her client wants to exercise his non-existent speedy trial right.

From what I've seen, most of the judges let Peterson do anything she wants. She is a complete idiot but apparently she is buds with at least some of the judges.

I was unaware that Ms. Faye Peterson joined the public defenders office.

Weill selects the cases that are tried and those that are continued. Neither the DA nor the PD participates in the docket priorities. Also keep in mind that on any given trial week, there are always many, many cases that are "set for trial" and only one or two will actually get "called" for actual trial; the others get continued for a crowded docket.

That said, that order should have explained why counsel was "unavailable". Sick? Ok. Vacation? No way.

Delay or no delay, with Faye as his counsel, he's going down.

9:00
Actually, the Rules of Professional Conduct forbid the use of delays for the purpose of gaining a strategic advantage for your client. This is exactly the type of unethical conduct by defense attorneys which has led to there being a backlog of over 2000 cases pending trial in Hinds County.

1:34... perhaps Faye Peterson had to continue this case so she could prepare for the other trial she had this week in Weill's court where five minutes ago she got a NOT GUILTY verdict... booyah!!

So, it is not the public defenders fault, or any defense attorney, if that attorney is responsible for denying the client the right to a speedy trial? The "wheels of justice" in Hinds County would never turn if a defendant's own lawyer never pushed for a speedy trial with Mr. Smith as the D.A.

If anyone owes anyone an apology, it's not the King Fish, although he did apologize, it is Smith and Purvis for not doing the jobs for which they were either elected or appointed.