Dear Erin Moriarty:

As an attorney, I am not a stranger to controversial or unpopular clients or
cases. In fact, I was responsible for NBC's Dateline winning the 1996 News
Emmy for Best Newsmaker Interview for their program on Subway Gunman Bernie
Goetz.

As Bernie's lawyer, I was instrumental in arranging his first-ever national
television interview for Stone Phillips, in what was an honest, though at
times unflattering, program about him.

In all honesty, I was embarrassed for CBS by the way in which 48 Hours
Investigates sucked up to the Ramseys to do your program. I would have
thought that the storm of controversy surrounding Barbara Walter's "soft
ball" interview with the Ramseys, in which the Governor of Colorado, no less,
criticised Ms. Walter's for her lack of objectivity, would have acted as a
sufficient Cautionary Tale to other networks to avoid "hugging" suspected
child killers in public and on-the-air.

Now, I realize that it is sometimes necessary to "suck-up-to-a-source" in
order to get them to agree to an interview, but a network that has a proud
tradition of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, and 60 Minutes deserved
something better than a Ramsey "Infomercial."

Moreover, I happen to know for a fact that a copy of Gideon Epstein's
deposition was available to you on jameson's website,
provided to her by the Ramseys.

And yet, you seemed to have ignored mentioning Epstein's conclusions to your
viewers, in what, apparently, was an attempt to avoid offending the Ramseys,
who, it appears, exercised considerable editorial control over your program,
if only indirectly.

Obviously, the "intruder/stun gun" theory of Lou Smit's won't fly if Patsy
Ramsey is the author of the ransom note. But that embarassing fact was left
out of 48 Hours Investigates.

Smit, by the way, has refused my offer to show him the handwriting evidence
of Gideon Epstein, despite his claims of being "objective."

Apparently, Smit, like CBS, doesn't want to be confused by the facts.

Sincerely,

Darnay Hoffman

NYL has had problems with his witnesses in the past - - Stratbucker is gone, Wecht resigned rather than face Lin Wood and a day in court. Miller is gone and so is Ziegler. Standing are Epstein and Wong and... I think IF they ever have their day in court on this one they will be humiliated.

Whatever.

CBS did a lot of investigating in this case - - they had material for a half dozen programs and it was difficult to keep cutting this out, that out, because they had only an hour - less since advertisers insisted on THEIR time too. They would have liked to have spoken about several good leads that the BPD didn't follow - - one being Helgoth and the other being a man who had a shrine to JonBenét in his home - - including an article removed from her family's property. But they didn't have the TIME.

NYL wanted mention, wanted HIS story told. But the show wasn't about his story - - it was an attempt to let everyone know that there were good leads not followed. I hoped - and hope - that the showwill somehow push the BPD to do more investigating into some of these suspects.

But I think it will not.

And I think people are giving up on justice for JonBenét.

Sad, but true.

>In fact, I was responsible for NBC's Dateline winning the 1996 News
>Emmy for Best Newsmaker Interview for their program on Subway
>Gunman Bernie Goetz.
I'm sure the show's producers, directors, editors and cameramen will be so happy to hear that your contributions were responsible for an award.
Oh,,and uh.. your client lost the case didn't he? Your client used a firearm when he was attacked by three muggers in the subway and you lost the case??

>I was embarrassed for CBS by the way in which 48 Hours
>Investigates sucked up to the Ramseys
I don't recall the show as revealing any direct contact with the Ramseys at all, only with hours and hours of videotapes some of which they described as 'not at all flattering to the Ramseys' or 'not showing the Ramseys in a good light'.

>in which the Governor of Colorado,
What about that buffoon who is in need of a popularity boost?
(I'm referring to the Governor, not you, Darney).

>something better than a Ramsey "Infomercial."
I keep hearing that phrase despite the fact they had no control over its content and no prior access to the show.
>Obviously, the "intruder/stun gun" theory of Lou Smit's won't fly
>if Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.
Pigs won't fly either, but what does that have to do with the overwhelming evidence of Patsy's non-authorship of the note and the rather under-whelming qualifications of those "experts" on handwriting that you keep dragging out from under rocks.

>Smit, by the way, has refused my offer to show him the handwriting
>evidence of Gideon Epstein, despite his claims of being "objective."
Despite my claims of being objective, I will also refuse to look at such nonsense. You can keep your chicken entrails too. I'm not interested in those either.

>Smit, like CBS, doesn't want to be confused by the facts.
No, its just too confusing to have to deal with the facts of a media-hound lawyer with what would charitably be referred to as an 'unusual' practice and an unimpressive track record who has injected himself into a case in the hopes of changing his luck.

Actually, a poster over at Purgatory said it was Chief Beckner who decided what would be cut from the program.

Jury hands down $43M verdict in lawsuit against Goetz
By The Associated Press
April 24, 1996

Darnay Hoffman, reminded the jury that Cabey was quoted in a 1985 newspaper interview as saying that his friends were about to rob Goetz because he ''looked like easy bait.''

Hoffman admitted that Goetz's own words ''damned him tremendously,'' including his remark that Cabey's mother should have had an abortion and his reference at a community meeting in 1980 to ''spics and niggers.''

''He's a nerd, a geek, a peckerwood, a cracker,'' Hoffman said of his own client. But Goetz was ''not some cool, calculating racist,'' just a frightened man, the lawyer said.

The subway gunman case held national attention for more than a decade, prompting debate about urban vigilantism and race relations in New York City. The National Rifle Association donated $40,000 toward Goetz's legal expenses.

Goetz shot Cabey and three other unarmed young men on Dec. 22, 1984. He later said the four were about to rob him. The young men said they were only panhandling when they asked him for $5.

Goetz has said that before shooting Cabey, he told the 19-year-old, ''You don't look so bad. Here's another.''

Cabey was paralyzed and suffered brain damage. He uses a wheelchair, and his family says he has the mental capacity of an 8-year-old.

Earlier this month, Goetz took the witness stand for the first time and chillingly recounted the shootings. He said ''that shine'' in victim Troy Canty's eyes and ''that smile'' made him snap.

Court papers show Goetz's annual income fell from $100,000 a year to about $20,000 in the years since the shooting, and he went through $60,000 in donations and $250,000 of his own money on legal costs.

But Kuby said last week he believed Goetz had a $100,000 inheritance now held by relatives; under state law, Cabey could collect 10 percent of Goetz's earnings for the next 20 years.

Regardless of his financial status, a verdict against Goetz was needed to ''deter other people from doing the kind of thing Bernie Goetz did to Darrell Cabey,'' Kuby told the jury.

During the trial, Hoffman, trying only his second case, sat statuelike as a smirking Goetz volunteered damaging testimony under harsh questioning from Kuby. Hoffman was so silent that the judge once interjected, ''Sustained,'' even though Hoffman had made no objection on behalf of his client.

Hoffman rested his case after only two hours and two witnesses - a psychiatrist who testified about reactions under stress, and columnist Jimmy Breslin, who related Cabey's ''easy bait'' remark.

For more than a decade, Kuby had worked on the case with his longtime law partner, civil rights attorney William Kunstler, who died in 1995.

Oh LP, I just can't stop laughing...

:-)

Is that legal?

If a defense lawyer has elicited damaging testimony, sometimes a judge will say 'Do the people wish to be heard'...which indicates to the sleeping ADA that its time to make an objection because the judge will then rule favorably on it.

In a civil trial, which this was, the judge was probably just beside himself for a long time and finally blurted out a 'sustained' even though no objection had been made.

Its no big deal.

One judge at a probable cause hearing had the ADA fail to establish 5 out of the required 8 elements that the charge required. Proper thing for the defense attorney to do was say 'move to dismiss', but the darn fool got up and started asking questions and promptly established each and everyone of the missing 5 elements thereby nailing his client's coffin for sure.
Judge was supposed to have bound the defendant over for trial in a situation like that since all 8 elements had been established, but Judge said "motion to dismiss, granted" even though there had been no motion to dismiss and dismissal would not have been proper.
Judge just didn't want to hang a defendant for what the defendant's own lawyer had done to him!
Technically, it is improper.
Its not appealable though.