The Goolsby Law Firm, LLC: Meet the Lawyers!

As you may know, we are the Goolsby Law Firm, LLC, which is composed of father and son attorneys who enjoy practicing law together in Augusta, Georgia. But we also enjoy having fun together, as shown in the top photograph of me and my three sons on a recent hiking trip in the Georgia mountains! The second photo shows my second son, Blake, following his recent swearing in at the Augusta courthouse! I feel very blessed to get to practice law with my sons, and to share good, practical tips and information in this blog for you to discuss with your own criminal lawyer!

Churches, Copper Thefts, and Hot Places in Hades

We have discussed before in this blog about the problems of vandalism and thefts from churches, along with the exploding copper theft epidemic. This past week, both problems intersected. As reported by various news agencies, someone stole part of the copper roof and gutters from the Palisades Community Church in Washington, D.C., (not pictured above).

As a former federal prosecutor, (and currently, as an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer), here's hoping that D.C. police catch the crooks responsible for this theft. Here's also hoping that there is a "special" place in Hades for anyone who would steal from a church! 

What do you think?

Legal Question of the Day: Is Use of Drones to Kill American Citizens Okay?

[Drone Photo from telegraph.co.uk]

So, here is the "legal question of the day:" Do you believe that using unmanned drones to kill American citizens, on U.S. soil, who are suspected of terrorist activities would be legal?

The Attorney General, Eric Holder, has stated his opinion that such an action would be legal and justified. On the other hand, yesterday and last night, U.S. Senator Rand Paul, during a thirteen hour-long filibuster of the confirmation of John Brennan as C.I.A. Director, countered that such strikes would violate our Constitution.

Who is right? What do you think?

The Government, Peanut Butter, and Jam

[Peanut Pic from wikipedia]

Did you hear the news? According to various news reports, last week, the government indicted four former employees of the Peanut Corporation of America, including its former president, Stewart Parnell, for allegedly conspiring to sell tainted peanut products. The criminal charges reportedly center around allegations that salmonella-tainted peanut products were sold as a result of poor, unsanitary conditions at the company's Georgia peanut plant.

You will recall that the plant was shut down, and a massive peanut butter recall occurred last year, reportedly after nine people died and hundreds got sick around the country. Now, this federal criminal indictment follows.

What do you think will come of all this? Will the government get convictions? Frankly, as a former federal prosecutor for over 20 years, I don't know. I can't predict. In other words, it is difficult to predict whether the government can prove the requisite mens rea, or criminal intent. While the government may be able to prove negligence by plant operators, that may not be enough. Put another way, I believe the government will be required to show, at trial, that the defendants knowingly, or intentionally, sold tainted products. And that would be a tall order, don't you agree?

Isn't it more likely that, even assuming these folks may have been (grossly) negligent, they never intended to harm anyone? Of course, we don't know all the facts and all the defendants are entitled to their day in court.

But, in short, in my opinion, if the government cannot prove intent, the government's peanut butter indictment may be in a jam!

Droning On About Drones and Privacy Invasion

Drone Picture from telegraph.co.uk]

Much has been discussed and written about lately about the propriety of using armed drones to kill terrorists abroad. But here, in this blog, that will remain a discussion for a later day.

Here, today, I want to rant some more about the growing, unregulated use of drones by law enforcement agencies for surveillance in this country. In my opinion, not enough is being discussed or written about this  potentially dangerous practice.

Look, I am no "bleeding heart." I have always been a strong supporter of law enforcement. Even though, presently, I may be an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer, I am a former career (state and federal) prosecutor. And as a law-abiding citizen, I want the police to be able to do their jobs. 

But no matter who you are, and no matter what your political philosophy, in my opinion, we should all be concerned by the prospect of unregulated police agencies using unmanned aerial vehicles to spy on any and all American citizens. While some may say that only the criminals have anything to worry about, in my opinion, all of us, as free citizens, should question any unregulated government intrusion into our private matters. Moreover, in my opinion, unregulated police surveillance is subject to abuse, including by following  political opponents, or for stifling political dissent.

I am not suggesting that all drone usage should be prohibited; instead, I am simply advocating for further legislative discussion and some carefully considered regulations to prevent police over-reaching and abuse.

I am heartened to read that, just last week, the Charlottesville, Virginia City Council passed a resolution calling for Congress to regulate police use of drones in this country, including by forbidding the introduction of evidence obtained by drones in any criminal case. While this resolution may be merely symbolic, at least it may help encourage further discussion about this important topic around the country.

What do you think? Should the police be able to use drones to watch citizens and gather intelligence without a warrant? Do you agree that at least there should be some discussion and oversight?

Secret Service Nabs Alleged Counterfeiter

[Secret Service Badge Depiction from wikipedia]

Did you know that the U.S. Secret Service has an important law enforcement function besides just protecting the President and other federal officials? In short, Secret Service agents also have jurisdiction over investigations of various federal financial crimes, including counterfeiting of U.S. currency.

Just today, according to various news reports, including one by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, a Woodstock, Georgia man, Heath Kellogg, was indicted in Atlanta, along with five other people, for allegedly counterfeiting $1.1 million in counterfeit fifty dollar bills. One unusual feature of this case, in addition to the huge amount, is the fact that this case involves fifties. Most counterfeiting cases involve printing fake twenties or hundred dollar bills.

As a former federal prosecutor, in Augusta, Georgia, (presently, I am an Augusta, GA criminal defense lawyer), I handled a large number of counterfeiting cases over the years for Secret Service agents. In fact, my first federal trial was a Secret Service case. Thankfully, I won it! Generally, I found Secret Service agents to be very professional and thorough in their investigations.

So, now, we have talked a little bit about the fine investigative work done in counterfeiting cases by the U.S. Secret Service. Now, if only we, as taxpayers, could get them to investigate the printing and wasting of our tax dollars by the federal government!

Michigan Supreme Court Justice Accused of Mortgage Fraud

Lady Justice depiction from wikipedia]

I was a federal prosecutor in Augusta, Georgia for over 20 years. I thought I saw a little bit of everything! But I never saw a criminal charge brought against a judge. But that is exactly what happened on friday in the State of Michigan.

According to various news reports, a criminal information has been filed in federal court against Michigan Supreme Court Justice Diane Hathaway. Justice Hathaway is reportedly accused of mortgage fraud based upon alleged steps she took to conceal property she owned in Florida in connection with the sale of a Detroit home. 

In federal court, an "information" is simply the word which refers to the formal accusation, or the charging document, filed by an Assistant U.S. Attorney, in a criminal case. Generally, the government must obtain a grand jury indictment, in felony cases, unless the defendant is willing to waive it. If he or she waives the grand jury process, then the federal prosecutor is authorized to simply file the information, or accusation, to begin the criminal court process.

I thought that criminal charges being brought against a judge were unheard of. But then, I googled the keywords "criminal charge against judge" and got a long list of such cases.

So, maybe I didn't see "everything" after all, while working as a federal prosecutor!