Here is the transcript of sniper case defendant John Muhammed's opening statement today. The Washington Post has this article on why it's rarely helpful for defendants to represent themselves.

We think Muhammed is making a big mistake. He has excellent court appointed lawyers. He can't know what evidence is objectionable or how to preserve error for appeal.

Tomorrow at 3pm ET, in a Washington Post online chat , we'll be discussing the issue of whether Muhammed's self-representation could make a difference in the death penalty phase of the trial (assuming he's found guilty of the murder).

Self-Representation in a death case....Is Mr. Muhammed crazy or crazy like a fox?

Conventional wisdom tells us that sniper case defendant John Muhammed is crazy to represent himself at trial. The evidence against him reportedly is substantial, and the crime is so horrendous that even the most skilled death penalty lawyers would have a difficult time convincing even one juror to vote for life if he is found guilty.

Is there a flip side to the argument? There are ten women jurors on the case. Women may be more empathetic and compassionate in a death case. A major goal in any death penalty trial is to get the jurors to see your client as a human being, to find something about your client that will touch them in a way that makes them unable to vote to kill him. What better way for this to happen than for the jurors to hear and see Mr. Muhammed every day for weeks? Assuming he keeps his demeanor respectful, and doesn't turn hostile and obstreperous, perhaps one juror will say to themselves and their fellow jurors, "I just can't vote to kill him."

If you're online tomorrow between 3 and 4 ET, please join in.

Not surprisingly, the Judge issued its ruling today finding probable cause to make Kobe Bryant stand trial. Here is the ruling.

The Judge defines the probable cause standard as evidence, that when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, would induce a reasonable belief that the defendant committed the charged crime.

Update: Our view:

Jeralyn Merritt, a Denver defense lawyer and legal commentator, said this "was one of the weakest findings of probable cause I've seen."

"This order sends a clear message to prosecutors - that they better have something substantially more significant than what they presented at the preliminary hearing or the case is going nowhere."

The CIA issued a report today stating that the tape released this past weekend, purportedly by Osama bin Laden, threatening more violence against the U.S. probably is authentic.

"Following a technical analysis of an audio tape aired on al Jazeera on Oct. 18, the CIA assesses that the voice is likely that of Osama bin Laden," the spokesman said.

...Qatar-based Arabic television station Al Jazeera broadcast two audio tapes Saturday purportedly from bin Laden that vowed more suicide attacks inside and outside the United States and warned all countries backing Washington over Iraq were targets. The speaker urged Iraqis to wage a holy war against American "crusaders" in Iraq until an Islamic government was set up.

The tape could have been made six months ago.

Perhaps taking a page from the Zacarias Moussaoui playbook, sniper suspect John Muhammed asked for and was granted permission to represent himself at his trial. Opening arguments were delayed a bit this morning while the Judge considered the request. His lawyers will remain on as standby counsel.

Update: Real time reporting of opening arguments is here, provided by reporter Kerry Sipes of the Virginia Pilot.

We're scheduled to do an online chat for the Washington Post tomorrow at 3pm EST, subject to change of course depending on breaking events in the case.

The Washington Post got some great quotes from capital defense lawyers in this article on opening statements in the Sniper case trial that will be heard today.

Death penalty trials are as grueling as it gets for lawyers. The initial statements are the first public glimpse of months of behind-the-scenes preparation, so intense that attorneys often turn their neighbors and relatives into sounding boards, alter their diets and forgo sleep. In the days before openings, some attorneys cut themselves off from the world as they prepare. Others wake up in the middle of the night, their hearts racing.

As a defense attorney, it's like being the producer, director and conductor for an opera that will run one night, and if the critics don't like the show they are going to kill your leading man," said South Carolina lawyer David Bruck, a veteran of high-profile capital cases.

Translation: First impressions count. Opening arguments are the first chance the lawyers have to present their case, using themes and theories they will raise again and again throughout the trial. They are often presented using a story-telling format.

Opening arguments are very important. Studies show that 75% of the time the final result in a trial is the same as the tentative conclusion held at the end of opening statement. Utilizing theme and theory, the opening statement is like a preview of coming attractions. It frames the issues, focuses the case, and tells the story in a powerful way that will make the rest of the case highly persuasive.

UPI reports that the Pentagon will investigate a report by one of its reporters that returning Iraqi vets are receiving substandard medical care back in the U.S.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- A United Press International report that wounded Iraqi war veterans are getting substandard medical care has sparked a federal investigation. The Pentagon will dispatch a team to investigate claims that hundreds of sick and wounded soldiers at Fort Stewart, Ga., are waiting, sometimes for months, to see doctors, the Drudge Report said Sunday.

A UPI report last week described the horrible conditions imposed on National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers upon their return to the U.S. from Iraq. The report told of deplorable, squalid living quarters for approximately 600 sick and wounded soldiers who are forced to wait weeks to even see a doctor. The soldiers are on "medical hold," while the Army decides how sick or disabled they are and what benefits, if any, they should get as a result. Some soldiers said they have waited weeks or months without getting a diagnosis or proper treatment.

Our original post on this is here.

Here is Senator Patrick Leahy's October 17 statement explaining why he voted against the Iraq-Afghanistan Supplemental Appropriations Bill. [link via Buzzflash.]

I know that I will be among a small minority. But for me, this is a matter of principle, and after a great deal of thought I have concluded that I can not support this proposal. I did not support the policy that got us into war alone. I do not support the tactics the White House has used to get this Supplemental passed. And I do not support appropriating so much money, at one time, for an oil rich nation when the responsible thing would be to approve a portion of the money today and to revisit this again next year.

... If...I thought the Administration was being honest with the American people about its motives and its policy in Iraq and the Middle East; if this Supplemental were designed to implement a credible plan to internationalize our policy rather than to continue a unilateral approach; and if this had not been a one-time only, take-it-or-leave-it, partisan approach in which almost every amendment offered by Democrats was defeated along party lines, my vote today might be different.

Don't miss Sen. Robert Byrd's comments on his opposition to the bill in The Emporer Has No Clothes.

Back in July, we wrote about an article buried in the New York Times concerning Minnesota's new law charging Public Defenders. Today, the Washington Post reports that the Minnesota law, which went into effect July 1, is under attack. And that due to budget deficits, other states, such as Arkansas, Ohio, New Jersey and Maryland, have implemented similar laws.

The danger is that people will not avail themselves of the right to counsel to avoid the charge," said Norman Lefstein, dean emeritus at the Indiana University School of Law at Indianapolis. "It really is an effort to squeeze every last cent [from the poor] without regard to the consequences. It's inconsistent with the fundamental right to counsel."

Here are the details of the Minnesota law. Daniel Homstad, an assistant defender in Hennepin County, writes that under the new law, the state has jumped a $28.00 fee that could be waived by a judge, to mandatory, non-waivable fees in amounts up to $200.00. Homstad says:

The problem with the law lies in its flat-rate schedule and the removal of the judge's discretion to determine whether the copay would work a manifest financial hardship upon the defendant. Absent a fair, means-tested rate schedule, the public defender copays will really become application fees that many will be unable to pay. These copays will lead some truly indigent people to choose to forgo counsel.

Jim Capozzola of Rittenhouse Review is in a tough spot and could use some help. If you're a blogger or a reader of blogs, please hit his paypal button. If you're associated with any reputable publication, take our word for it: you ought to hire this brilliant man and kick-ass writer immediately.

In other blogging news, we're pleased to see that Dwight Meredith, formerly of PLA, will be blogging over at Wampum, courtesy of Mary Beth. Great news. Here's Dwight's announcement.

Say hello and welcome to Joshua Matthew Sherman, son of Mark and Rachel, and grandson of another good pal of our's, lawyer and tv legal eagle Mickey Sherman. This is Josh at less than an hour old:

Our pal Dog the Bounty Hunter, aka Duane Chapman, responsible for the capture of Andrew Luster in Mexico this summer, is hot on his new case. Dog is tracking a Beaverton, Oregon softball coach named Andrew Garver who allegedly kidnapped and ran off with a 15 year old student in September. Police think the girl went willingly, but say she is too young to give legal consent. Dog says the trail leads to Vancouver, B.C. According to Dog (from the first linked article),

The alleged kidnapper's family retained Chapman for the search and the bounty hunter said he is in touch with them every day. Garver has shown suicidal tendencies in the past and Chapman said it is likely the suspect is carrying a weapon and may try to get himself killed by police.

Chapman said the suspect is emotionally unstable and is a "drugstore junkie." Garver takes up to 18 doses of Sudafed per day, drinks copious amounts of Starbucks coffee, and uses chewing tobacco, he said.

Dog is being more careful this time around about grabbing a suspect in another country:

Chapman said he has three or four people in B.C. working for him and looking for the couple. If Garver is spotted, Chapman said he could travel from Hawaii to B.C. in six to eight hours. Chapman said he won't attempt to restrain Garver on his own and has been working with Canadian officials in his search.

The Dog is a man on a mission. We wish him the best.

The LA Times has more on the death of the Iraqui POW that has resulted in two marines being charged with negligent homicide. The U.S. says the marines didn't actually kill the Iraqui POW themselves. But, if true, what they did do is inexcusable:

The prisoner reportedly was left alone with other prisoners after being interrogated by U.S. military and intelligence-agency personnel and was later found dead. Officials say Paulus and Hernandez should have known that the prisoner might be killed by his own countrymen unless he was given special protection.

They will be tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The maximum punishment for negligent homicide is three years and a dishonorable discharge. "It is the least severe charge that can be levied against someone accused of causing the death of another."

Here's our detailed post from yesterday describing the charges and incident.

Of the six other marines charged with beating and mistreating prisoners, one of them, Lance Cpl. William S. Roy, has an excellent defense attorney, Donald Rehkoph, who has done a yeoman's job as co-chair of the Military Law Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) in battling the proposed rules for military tribunals. Rehkoph blames the military for not providing adequate training to reservists on how to handle prisoners: