CLIENTS: Losing a Client

My client died the other day while in custody. His name was Donald Wayne Booth. He was charged in the August 2007 murder of a woman on the Southeast side of Austin. He was a caregiver by trade. She had been a former patient. I never thought my representation of this man would end amidst the confusion and indifference I was about to experience.

I met and talked to Mr. Booth periodically since I was first appointed to represent him last fall. His case investigation was ongoing by the Austin Police Department until sometime in December when I first received discovery. His case presented some interesting aspects. Among other things, this was the first case I had been appointed where the investigation relied, in part, of the tracing of Mr. Booth's whereabouts through the location of his cell phone calls on the night of the murder.

Booth was a large man. He stood approximately 5'5", hovering around 300 pounds. The last time I saw him, he was manuevering in a wheelchair at the Travis County Correctional Complex (TCCC). His health appeared to be deteriorating.

Since this last meeting, I had continued the discovery process, reading the various statements by witnesses and his statements to police. It was at this point that I needed some clarification of his story, along with a timeline of his whereabouts on that night. I never had that chance.

I had received word from his family toward the end of February that Mr. Booth had been transferred to the Austin State Hospital (ASH) mental facility. After receiving that information, I embarked on a mission to locate Mr. Booth and find out why I hadn't been notified and how the transfer could take place without an evaluation (that I knew of) or court order.

I contacted the medical staff at TCCC by telephone and email with no luck in finding Mr. Booth. My further inquiries led me to information that he in fact had gone to Brackenridge Hospital (medical facility). Upon contacting Brackenridge, I was told no patient by that name was admitted. I directed my legal assistant to follow up on this and try to find him. After a two hour search in which she called the various facilities associated with Brackenridge, she reported to me that all Brackenridge facilities denied to her Mr. Booth's whereabouts. The jail continued to say Booth was at Brackenridge. However, Booth was shown to be in the TCCC on the online search site of the Travis County Sherrif (TCSO).

I physically went to Brackenridge two weekends ago to find Mr. Booth. Again, I was told that he was not a patient at this facility. In the following days, I contacted admissions office at Brackenridge who directed me to the patient liason. I left a message and received no return call. I then contacted the medical staff at the Travis County Jail, and the personnel informed me that he was at Brackenridge under a fictious name. I was told not to worry because he was coming back that day (last Thursday). Until this moment, I was unaware of the policy to admit inmates under fictitious names.

I went to the Travis County Jail (TCJ) downtown that next day, only to be told he was sent to TCCC that morning. The next day, Saturday, I went to TCCC and was told he had been transferred yet again to the hospital. This time a guard at the complex gave me a telephone number to call and receive his assumed name. I received an email from his family that he died overnight before I could call or see him. He had never been to ASH as the jail had told his family.

For two weeks, my mission to merely locate my client was infected with deception, wrongful invocations of HIPPA, and a blatant disregard of my responsibilties as his counsel by officials charged with his care. A small consolation was that his brother saw him at TCCC the Thursday he came back. He reported to me that he had lost substantial weight and had tubes protruding from his chest.

I do not profess to know whether Mr. Booth was guilty or not of the crime charged. Because of the charge against him, he may not garner much sympathy from strangers. Additionally, I understand the arguments for security and certain restrictions in a public hospital. This is not the point. I don't believe there are ANY valid arguments for the kind of deception perpetrated on his family and attorney. He died alone in a hospital room under another name. For that, there are no excuses or legitimate policy considerations, and nobody should think otherwise.

TRIALS: Acquittals-The Aftermath

Raymond Donovan, who was secretary of Labor in the Reagan administration, famously asked after his 1987 acquittal on 100 counts of racketeering charges: "Which office do I go to, to get my reputation back?" Thus, one of the many continuing battles in the aftermath of an acquittal.

How often do we hear of the tremendous results the defense attorneys achieve after acquittals in our courthouse (see more congrats at the end of this article)? Rarely. The acquittal is somewhat of a phenomenom in our workplace, yet who can guess the continuing effects on our client's reputation even after a successful battle against the accusing forces. Even with exoneration, the system and our clients are often continually perceived with suspicion. The stigma of experiencing this process often goes unrepaired to these clients and members of the public, even with the automatic expunction.

Of course, the state would argue that the system is imperfect and many in fact did commit the crime they were accused of doing. However, are those same advocates willing to also concede the corollary, that is, the innocent are sometimes convicted? Doubtful.

Being acquitted carries the perception by many that they must have got away with something or beat the system. But, odds are they were acquitted precisely because the system worked as designed. There should be no shame associated with this outcome to anyone. The obstacle is simply public relations and perception.

The public seems to thirst for news of the big verdicts, fueled by the news releases of prosecutor "victories", and aided by the never ending television programs of how the bad guys are brought to justice. However, if the public was aware that every year Defendants in our very courthouse are found innocent and false charges are exposed, would they feel the same way? Over time I bet the tide would change.

Publicizing these hard fought victories, like the sample I write of on occasion, are the key to changing the tide. There should be no shame in holding one's head up after a victory. Margie Johnson and Linda Icenhouer-Ramirez should be proud of their representation and acquittal of their client in the 167th District Court last week for Aggravated Assault. We need more warriors like them in our ranks and we need to increase public awareness.

Is it possible for our clients get their reputation back? Of course. But make no mistake, that's not easy. The late Richard Jewell, who was falsely accused of planting the Olympic Park bomb in 1996 and who later received an apology from the FBI once said: ''There will not only always be a shadow, but I think there's going to be a deep hole and river to cross everywhere I go.''