"Top 10 Essential Web Sites for Litigators"

... from The Virtual Chase. These are essential sites for reporters too.

Deliberations: "A Trial Lawyer's Guide To Social Networking Sites"

If the lawyers are paying attention to what jurors are saying on social networking sites, so should you:

We know there are jurors who blog, and jurors who read blogs, and jurors who comment on blogs. By now you're surely convinced that you need to ask potential jurors if they're writing on line. But do you know how? There are nearly countless ways a juror could show up on the Internet. You need some sense of the landscape to ask about them, or you'll get partial answers or answers you don't understand.

If words like "Tweet" and "wiki" pop up often in your vocabulary, you don't need this post. But in case this stuff is new to you, here is Deliberations' short guide to the world of social networking. These are roughly grouped according to the main feature of the site, but most have overlapping features and functions.

Attorney General: Ky State Police violated open records law when it denied CJ sex offender database

The Kentucky Attorney General ruled April 17 that the Kentucky State Police violated the state open records law when it refused to give us an updated version of its sex offender database. Here's a copy of the decision, in Microsoft Word format, which the Attorney General's office just put online. And if you are reading this on the Depth Reporting site itself or have a feed reader that handles embedded objects, below is a Scribd version. Scribd is a much more elegant way to share Word, PDF and other documents than posting links to the originals.

The Attorney General's decision misspelled my name, but hey, you can't have everything. The decision itself was entirely in our favor.

Read this doc on Scribd: Kentucky sex offender database decision

White Collar Crime Prof Blog: How Not to Ask Questions

Asking clear and direct questions is as important for journalists as it is for prosecutors. The White Collar Crime Prof Blog points out the inadequate questioning revealed in the recently unsealed Barry Bonds grand jury testimony. Many a hemming and hawing journalist can relate to the poor prosecutors criticized here:

While the indictment presents Bonds in a bad light by isolating specific instances of allegedly false answers, skimming through the full transcript shows just how disorganized the prosecutors seemed to be, and how at least one of them couldn't ask a simple question. Whether it was nervousness or perhaps being intimidated by Bonds, the questions come across almost like a stream of consciousness approach to the examination. Here's just one example of the kind of questions Bonds faced: "Let me ask the same question about Greg at this point, we'll go into this in a bit more detail, but did you ever get anything else from Greg besides advice or tips on your weight lifting and also the vitamins and the proteins that you already referenced?" (Pg. 23) Huh? Understanding that a transcript does not necessarily convey the full flavor of the actual interchanges, in reading through the questioning I'm struck by how convoluted the questions are, punctuated throughout with "I mean," "you know," and similar distracting phrases.

What makes perjury so difficult to prove is that the allegedly false answer is not necessarily the most important thing. As the Supreme Court noted in Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), "Precise questioning is imperative as a predicate for the offense of perjury." Among the questions recited in the original indictment was this model of obfuscatory inquiry: "So, I guess I got to ask the question again, I mean, did you take steroids? And specifically this test the [sic] is in November 2000. So I'm going to ask you in the weeks and months leading up to November 2000 were you taking steroids . . . or anything like that?"

If the answer is important enough, you should always ask the same question in multiple ways. You don't have to look hard to find examples where prevaricating politicians -- from the non-denial denials of John Mitchell during the Watergate era to Bill Clinton parsing the meaning of is -- stopped short of lying but failed to give fully honest answers. You have to pin those squirming insects to the board.

FelonSpy.com: "You need to know who your neighbors are. Especially if they're dangerous criminals"

Gary Swick sent me the link to "FelonSpy," which allows you to "Search for violent criminals in your neighborhood":

Safety starts with good information, even if it ends with you holding a loaded .44 caliber handgun. While FelonSpy.com can't help you get a gun, we can certainly help you figure out which direction to point it in.

...

Our patented Felon Search technology mines data from across the nation, from the web and otherwise, and combines it into a single, easy to use interface. Whether you're checking up on your own neighbors or trying to find out if that hotel you've been eyeing is in a safe place, we can help.

...

Simply type in the desired address, click enter and let your new knowledge be your peace of mind.

All it gives you is a name, age and conviction -- not even a conviction date. So did the 72-year-old man who lives a few blocks from commit his felony assault in his teens and live a clean life since then? Dunno, from this site.

The methodology is also dubious:

FelonSpy.com uses a broad array of databases, each completely legal when used individually. They are probably also legal when used together, but that answer hasn't yet come to us. Our servers compare city, county, state and federal criminal databases with telephone records to pinpoint the location of the person you need to know is living next door to you.

In many cases the public telephone directory has incomplete or insufficient data, so about once a month we get updated address and number records directly from a number of telephone companies and credit reporting agencies (at tremendous cost to us, I should add). Don't ask how we get most of our information, but we do it, and we get our top shelf info from sources who wish to remain anonymous, and we pay a lot of money to insure that we keep getting it.

Their about us page, above an ad for ammunition that resolves to Insulting.com, says "We are former law enforcement officers, information technologists land developers and community leaders, all of whom have given up our posts in pursuit of this noble, sometimes misunderstood quest to label the underbelly of society by their actions."

And this is who they say they track:

We track virtually everyone with a criminal record including sex offenders, ex-cons (felony and misdemeanor), and those guilty of some of the more serious traffic infractions. You have the right to know who your neighbors are. We hope to track persons accused of crimes but acquitted in the future, but at this time we do not have sufficient funding to expand our database that far.

Ask too many questions and who knows, we might be tracking you next.

Clearly, these are people we should take seriously.

UPDATE 2/20: A reader here at the CJ reports getting different results each time he searches on the same address. So do I, which I hadn't noticed before. Try it yourself and see.

He asks, "Is it legitimate?"

I had hoped the sarcasm in my original post would make my point of view clear, but I can't say definitively because I haven't taken the time -- nor do I want to take the time -- to investigate the people it says are criminals to see if they even exist. I will say definitively that you shouldn't waste your time with this site if you're seriously interested in crime in your neighborhood.

If you want a laugh, it may be worth your time. For example, the "Sponsored Links" on its home page include "Prison Dating" and "Free But Crappy Legal Assistance."

Snopes.com, meanwhile, says it is a hoax.

New U.S. Courts Reference and Directory

This week I received an email promoting the free U.S. Courts Reference and Directory, a Web site that gives "an overview of trial court systems in every state and county in the United States." The Web site offers a handy grid that tells you which courts handle which types of cases -- not just felonies and misdemeanors, but also more specific things like small claims, foreclosures, ordinance violations, traffic violations, divorces, involuntary commitments, wills, name changes, paternity suits and more. It also gives a general overview of each court and has a directory with addresses, telephone numbers and links to information available online, if any. The site's so new, however, that its blog greeted me with the message, "Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here" when I clicked on the link for it. The site is by the same company that provides The Free Public Records Directory, mentioned here last year.

Locating Lawyers

LLRX.com gives a rundown on finding lawyers in all 50 states. For balance, though, we need a rundown on how to lose lawyers who have found you.

Inter alia: "A Great Way to Keep Track of Federal Cases"

Tom Mighell writes that he loves how Justia is making federal court documents more accessible than PACER:

Another thing that makes the Justia page so great, in my opinion, is the ability to bookmark your case and receive updates whenever your search terms come up with new hits. When you find a case you want to keep track of, the site lets you use any of 36 bookmarking sites to bookmark the page for future reference. And when you conduct a search, you are able to save that search to an RSS feed, so that when there are new hits on your keyword, you are automatically notified.

Covering Crime and Justice guide updated

... with three new chapters -- on prosecutors, guns and domestic violence. The guide is written and edited by Criminal Justice Journalists,  non-profit devoted to improving crime coverage.

Are expunged court records destroyed?

The BRB Public Records Blog says no:

With limited exceptions, the general rule is that the government does not destroy records.  In the typical scenario, even if the judge orders a set aside, the consumer’s name can still be found by searching the court indexes and the case can still be viewed as a public record. 

Corporate Fraud Data Base

Law.com has put online a corporate fraud database compiled to look back at the 5-year anniversary of President Bush's Corporate Fraud Task Force. It offers information about 124 corporate fraud investigations that resulted in 440 indicted defendants. The presentation leaves a lot to be desired -- 5 giant, 15-field tables grafted onto Web pages -- and it took me a minute to figure out that the links below the introductory blurb are for subsequent data pages -- but hey, at least the information is there for all to see.

Expert Witness Research

The Virtual Chase now has a page listing sites lawyers can use to research expert witnesses. These happen to be the kind of people journalists want to talk to, too.

Comcast Cable Law Enforcement Handbook

A reader passed along this link (PDF) to a copy of the Comcast Cable Law Enforcement Handbook posted on the Federation of American Scientists' Web site. The reader wrote that it's a good read "If you have ever wondered what type of info a cable tv company retains on you, how long it is kept and who can get it."

Federal Grand Jury Handbook

… is here (PDF):

"This Handbook will acquaint persons who have been selected to serve on a federal grand jury with the general nature and importance of their role as grand jurors. … Grand jurors are encouraged to refer to this Handbook periodically throughout their service to reacquaint themselves with their duties and responsibilities."

Expert witness deposition and trial transcripts for sale

CrossExam.com sells them for $150, no matter the length:

CrossExam.com is a fully text searchable Internet database consisting solely of expert witness deposition and trial transcripts.

Attorneys and other legal professionals preparing for trial can see how particular experts have testified in prior cases by searching our database by expert name, case name, or expert type.

Transcripts of Federal Court Proceedings Nationwide To Be Available Online

As a former federal courts reporter I would be quite pleased about this if they weren't going to charge an unjustifiable 8 cents a page tax for the privilege. Remember these are electronic files, for which the marginal cost of reproduction is zero:

The Judicial Conference of the United States today voted to make transcripts of federal district and bankruptcy court proceedings available online through the Judiciary's Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

Under the new policy, transcripts created by court reporters or transcribers will be available for inspection and copying in a clerk of court’s office and for download from PACER 90 days after they are delivered to the clerk. Individuals will be able to view, download, or print a copy of a transcript from PACER for eight cents per page.

During the initial 90-day period, transcripts will be available at the clerk’s office for inspection only, or may be purchased from the court reporter or transcriber.

Score one for the unaccountable judiciary and its policy of denying the poor equal access to the courts.

Law Library of Congress

The Law Library of Congress has updated its Web site. Its online features include:

GLIN: Global Legal Information Network

International legal database with official full texts of published documents in the original languages.

Guide to Law Online

Annotated guide to online sources of legal information on government and law by U.S. state, country, or region.

Multinational Collections Database

Sources that reprint the laws and regulations of international jurisdictions on specific legal topics.

Global Legal Monitor

Timely news on legal developments from around the world.

Congressional Hearings

Full-text access to historical Congressional committee hearings on a variety of topics.

Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation

Collection of U.S. Congressional documents and debates (1774-1875), including laws, journals, and letters of the Founding Fathers.

Fired U.S. Attorney document search

Alberto Gonzales has a return engagement before Congress today, so you may want to check out the DOJ Documentation Project's document search, where you can query the contents of more than 9,000 emails, memos and other documents released as part of the Congressional investigation into the firing of U.S. Attorneys:

This is a tool to search text files of the documents released by the DOJ. Each page of each released document has been scanned and turned into a text (.txt) file - there are over 9,000 such files. Some effort has also been made to clean up these files with common OCR errors, but not all of them have been found, as you will see. This is a work in progress and it is not even close to perfect. Most of the released documents were scanned files (i.e. pictures) of the documents. They have been put through an OCR process which is never perfect. Some corrections have been made and more will be made in the future and you can help.

The site doesn't explain its origins or its motives, as far as I can see, but it does link to images of the original documents on government Web sites, so at least the search results can be verified.

Readable Laws

… is "a wiki dedicated to translating legislation into plain English."

You too can rank law schools, just like U.S. News & World Report

Two law professors have released detailed data on law schools on their Web site. They say their goal is "to facilitate rigorous, comprehensive, and transparent empirical analysis of law schools and legal education." The data, from the Official Guide to ABA-Approved Law Schools, includes information on law school faculties, curriculum, enrollment, the ethnicity of students, tuition, living expenses, GPA and LSAT scores, attrition, grants, scholarships and student employment after law school. The data has been available on the American Bar Association's Web site, but the professors, Bill Henderson of Indiana University and Andrew Morriss of the University of Illinois, massaged it to make it easier to analyze. The professors recently wrote a column for The American Lawyer defending U.S. News & World Report's law school rankings.The rankings, which attempt to name the nation's best law schools, are despised by many law school faculty and administrators. So much so that one professor created his own rankings, which purport to be better because they place more emphasis on academics, while another developed The Law School Ranking Game, an attempt to prove the rankings are so arbitrary as to be meaningless. The rankings have spawned critical academic papers, including one that discusses the lengths to which some schools may go to boost their rank. Henderson and Morriss, however, argue that law schools have only themselves to blame:

U.S. News is influential among prospective students at least in part because the magazine does what the law schools don't: give law students easy-to-compare information that sheds light on their long-term employment prospects. Law schools could easily supply that information themselves, but they choose not to. In fact, as the collective head shaking about the rankings has increased, the growth of the large law firm sector—which pay salaries that justify the rapidly escalating cost of legal education—has made the rankings more important.

Our research suggests that prospective students care a great deal about their post–law school employment and bar passage prospects—information that law schools could readily compile and supply. We found that rather than work to provide applicants with the kind of information they say they want and need, law schools tend to report information in a manner that undermines the applicants' ability to engage in meaningful comparative assessments on measures that matter. These practices, which range from puffery to borderline deceit, are all aimed at improving their U.S. News rankings. As a result, even as the rankings have become more important, they have become less reliable.