![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.marshallnews.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (7)
Share link
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
GoogleRahm and his client, Eric A. Thomas, were in court to work out the details of a plea agreement with Saline County Prosecuting Attorney Donald G. Stouffer.
Under the terms of the agreement, Thomas pleaded guilty to one count of class A misdemeanor domestic assault in the third degree and one count of resisting arrest, also a class A misdemeanor.
On the recommendation of the prosecutor, Bellamy sentenced Thomas to two years court-supervised probation on each count, in addition to 10 days shock incarceration at Saline County Justice Facility. Thomas is also required to complete anger management and alcohol abuse counseling within six months.
As Thomas signed the documents, Bellamy read the final condition of probation, normal for assault cases and also a part of the condition of bond, that Thomas have no contact with the assault victim during the probationary period.
When Stouffer then reiterated the need for Thomas to stay away from his victim, citing an instance of contact that had occurred but had gone undiscovered during the bonding period, Rahm broke in and suggested that this particular condition was objectionable.
Bellamy asked Rahm if he had read the plea agreement sent to him earlier by the prosecutor, asking him what was unclear about "no contact."
As Rahm continued to object, Bellamy recited the text of a small sign he had seen on the desk of a Lafayette County judge, which says "What part of 'no' don't you understand?"
He then asked Rahm what "no" means.
Rahm answered, "No means 'maybe,'" adding, "I think they're in love," referring to Thomas and his victim.
Bellamy then admonished Rahm and Thomas further, saying, "I don't care if they're in love. No contact means no contact. No e-mail, no love notes on her car's steering wheel, no phone calls, no letters -- no contact at all."
As Rahm persisted in his objections, Bellamy asked if he wanted to withdraw his client's guilty plea and proceed with a trial.
Rahm answered that he did. Turning to Thomas, Bellamy asked if that was what he wanted, too. Thomas shrugged his shoulders and said, "I guess so."
Addressing Rahm again, Bellamy said, "You have two choices -- a bench trial or a jury trial." Rahm said, "I think we need a jury trial on this."
At that, Bellamy picked up the courtroom phone and placed the case on the docket for June 15 as a jury trial.
Contact Kathy Fairchild at marshallhealth@socket.net
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
Wow...Well even if Mr. Rham was wrong in this case, which I don't understand the argument of "no" meaning "maybe" if he could explain that to me, that would be nice!!! But his client should have enough sense about him to know if his lawyer is screwing things up for him...If Mr. Rham did in fact just make a major mistake and cost his client more time/a more severe punishment, then certainly Mr. Thomas should have realized this and said he just wanted to stick with the plea agreement...Lawyers make mistakes just like anyone else, but their clients should be able to realize something as major as this one... However, it seems at though MAYBE (and I don't mean "no") this guy NEEDS a more severe punishment. If you love someone you don't beat them up..Love letters on her steering wheel?!LOCK YOUR CAR WOMAN!
I can understand a lawyer ensuring his client, no matter what the charges are, is getting a fair-deal, if you will. However pi..ing up a rope with the Judge, in his court room, is verging on disrespectfull and just not to smart, in my opinion ..... "No" means "No". Learned that when i was 5.
Way to go Judge Bellamy, to bad you're not our Circuit Judge. Maybe you will be next term???
I'm sure he has, Kathy. There are two types of people I'm proud to admit to not knowing many of on a first-name basis: Police officers and lawyers. No offense to either; I haven't had any occassion requiring their involvement:)
I always thought the purpose of a plea bargain was to receive less severe punishment. It seems counterproductive for someone to argue their way out of a plea they've already agreed to, in my opinion, and in doing so risk a stiffer sentence.
Also, the provisions of the plea arrangement did not seem extraordinary or misaligned with status quo. In fact, they appeared to me to be commensurate with the crime, as noted above in the article.
If I'm being fair, then I must acknowledge the possibility that the jury may return a verdict of "innocent".
Cheetah: Mr. Rahm has been practicing law in and around the area for many, many years.
"Rahm answered, "No means 'maybe,'" adding, "I think they're in love," referring to Thomas and his victim."
Is this guy a lawyer or a Doctor Phil "wannabe"? Imgagine how his reputation as a defense attorney is going to be affected if a jury decision results in more severe consequences for his client/patient...
Good for you, Judge Bellamy.
What would Judge Judy do? No means NO Stop means STOP and so on. It's okay to hit someone if you love them? Better just lock him up for 2 years and see if she waits.