Defendant Stabs 3 Lawyers With Pencils, Ordered to Trial Pro Se

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 12:38:07 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Joshua Monson, a defendant charged with drug possession in King County, Washington stabbed his lawyer with a pencil. The Court gave him another lawyer. Same thing. And a third lawyer, whom he stabbed in the side of the head with a pen. Monson was out of luck.

The Court ordered Monson to trial pro se (with standby counsel.) Monson was strapped in a restraint chair and surrounded by security officers during trial. He was convicted.

Next up: Monson has a pending second degree murder trial for alleging killing a man while he was talking on a cell phone. He also has pending charges for assaulting his attorneys and corrections guards.

State doctors found Monson competent to stand trial.

< Anonymous Cancels OpCartel: Kidnapped Member Released | 9th Circuit Rules Doctor's Recommendation for Marijuana No Defense >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Defendant Stabs 3 Lawyers With Pencils, Ordered to Trial Pro Se | 14 comments (14 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

His name is (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by me only on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 12:46:54 PM EST

Monson, not Mason.

The court appears to disagree with the state doctors. They made him sit trial...

: LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Zorba on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 01:01:43 PM EST

n/t

: thanks, fixed now (none / 0) (#4)
by Jeralyn on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 01:26:00 PM EST

Imagine being the 3rd lawyer (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by CST on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 02:14:02 PM EST

you want me to represent who???

: The 3rd one? (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by jbindc on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 02:16:38 PM EST

Heck, the second one!

Monson seems to have (none / 0) (#2)
by Zorba on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 01:01:23 PM EST

quite a bit of an anger management problem. I feel sorry for his former lawyers, and I sincerely hope that Jeralyn and all of you defense lawyers who comment here never, ever get a client like this!

Looks like Josh was a state champion HS (none / 0) (#5)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 01:34:35 PM EST

wrestler.

In addition to the murder and stabbings, he's also up on charges for head-butting two corrections officers in the face as they searched his cell.

How does a life change from being cheered by thousands of supporters to shooting some dude in the back of his head as the guy's chillaxing in a chair chatting on his cell phone?

: How? He can be competent (none / 0) (#12)
by Towanda on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 09:19:33 PM EST

to stand for trial, even to be denied the insanity defense, but he still can be nuts.
See: Jeffrey Dahmer.

the judge also gave him wide open (none / 0) (#8)
by cpinva on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 04:13:51 PM EST

doors to appeal, requiring him to represent himself (even with counsel on the side). unless, of course, mr. monson is possessed of a law degree, something not mentioned. stupid decision by the judge. really stupid decision. the verdict will be nearly a slam dunk reversal, for lack of competent counsel. yep, really stupid decision.

Good point (none / 0) (#11)
by NYShooter on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 08:03:27 PM EST

I've seen defendants make a mockery of the system, using every trick in the book. No matter how disruptive, manipulative, and disingenuous the defendant is, forcing a pro se defense by the trial judge is almost never successful.

My problem with that is an appellate court remands for a re-trial, of course, after the first trial is over. So, all the preparations are made, attorneys do all their work, witnesses are called, juries are sworn in and, in the end, the appellate court says, "do it all over again."

There ought to be a panel that decides on a judge's decision to go pro se before so much work, time, and expense is expended on what often turns out to be a moot trial.


: any halfway ept judge (none / 0) (#13)
by cpinva on Sat Nov 05, 2011 at 07:59:55 AM EST

should know better than to force a defendent to go pro se. the constitution doesn't say "you're entitled to competent counsel, unless you're really a jerk, in which case you have to represent yourself." most defendents are, by definition, jerks (most, not all), or they probably wouldn't be defendents in the first place. granted, this approach would make the local prosecutor's job a lot easier, but would result in pretty much every case having to either be re-tried (at great expense), or dropped.
a judge has extremely wide latitude, they are expected to exercise it wisely. based on the facts and circumstances available, this judge made two potentially costly errors:
1. allowing this case to go forward in the first place, given defendent's (very) obvious mental issues.,
and
2. forcing defendent to rely on himself as counsel.
this is a possibly lethal combination for the public, as the end result may well be a decidedly dangerous person being let loose on an unsuspecting public.
just because you have the authority to do something, doesn't mean that you must do it. this was an example of really bad judging.

Hannibal Lecter? (none / 0) (#9)
by Gerald USN Ret on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 04:41:26 PM EST

When I read this, I got a vision of Hannibal Lecter being wheeled in strapped to a moving hand-truck, with a mask over his face so he couldn't bite.

: You should see the pics. (none / 0) (#10)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Nov 04, 2011 at 06:13:58 PM EST

Very Lector-like.

There were other options (none / 0) (#14)
by TomLincoln on Sat Nov 05, 2011 at 05:11:47 PM EST

including shackling him in the courtroom, or removing him from the courtroom for disruptive behavior and letting him watch his own trial through a monitor. At least he would still have had an attorney representing him. What is not at all clear from the post is what exchange took place before the judge allowed him to go pro se. Perhaps (I have no idea) the defendant expressed he wanted to represent himself and waived his right to counsel.