Pflugrad, O'Day lawyer up after firings at UM - Billings Gazette

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

MISSOULA — Why? Why were University of Montana Grizzlies football coach Robin Pflugrad and athletic director Jim O’Day fired?

One of the most frustrating things about UM President Royce Engstrom’s actions Thursday was that he gave no reason.

No surprise there, said attorney Dylan McFarland of Milodragovich, Dale, Steinbrenner & Nygren.

When any corporation or large organization such as a university fires a prominent person, “the fact is that the corporation or the company doesn’t want to be tried in the court of public opinion,” said McFarland, who was a standout UM offensive lineman and was drafted by the Buffalo Bills in 2004.

“There’s certainly a potential for legal ramifications and they’re just trying to protect themselves,” he said.

Pflugrad and O’Day already have lawyered up. Pflugrad met Thursday, the day he was fired, with Milt Datsopoulos of Datsopoulos, MacDonald and Lind, the firm that has represented several UM football players accused of running afoul of the law in recent years. The two also are longtime personal friends, Datsopoulos said Friday.

“The approach that the university used to dismiss or relieve these two gentlemen of their positions has created great ambiguity and rumors,” he said.

O’Day has hired the Billings law firm of Edwards, Frickle and Culver. Cliff Edwards won a $240,000 settlement for former Montana State University football coach Mike Kramer after MSU fired him. Edwards’ son John, who played quarterback for the Grizzlies, said Friday he couldn’t discuss any matters related to O’Day.

As with Pflugrad and O’Day, Kramer was fired after a highly publicized series of legal woes involving football players. After his firing, then-MSU president Geoff Gamble said: “We have this whole suite of criminal activities, but there are academic issues and compliance issues. They all are in the realm of leadership issues.”

Kramer sued, alleging that statement damaged his career and reputation. And, he maintained that UM’s Bobby Hauck, who preceded Pflugrad as Grizzlies head coach, was treated differently by the university system. Hauck was kept on even though several football players were arrested for violent crimes.

Neither Pflugrad nor O’Day has sued — yet. “As a practical matter, we’ve got to provide advice to Robin Pflugrad in terms of what his legal options are,” Datsopoulos said. “We’ve got to wait to see what the university says now as to what their reasons are to terminate him or for relieving him.”

UM needs to clarify the matter of Pflugrad’s contract, he said. The coach’s present three-year contract has a year left, and he’d been promised another three-year contract, Datsopoulos said.

Pflugrad cited that second contract when recruiting coaches and players, he said. “People relied on the fact that they would have jobs for at least three years, and made decisions to relocate their families and change the directions of their own careers,” Datsopoulos said. “The decision to terminate Robin Pflugrad has impacted the lives of many people and I hope that the university administration realized that before they made this precipitous decision.”

At some point, he said, the university will need to negotiate “some type of package that recognizes their legal obligations.”

The reason for Pflugrad’s firing will be part of those negotiations, he said.

“Why didn’t they just advise these people that they wanted to avoid any further fallout and these guys were going to be the people they were going to throw under the bus to avoid that kind of development? Be straightforward about it,” he said.

Which brings things back to why.

A Facebook site called “Demand Answers” asks that same question, as does a Friday editorial in the Montana Kaimin that termed Engstrom’s silence on the matter “damning.”

It may be a while before any reason is forthcoming,” said Matt Thiel of the Thiel Law Office. Once you make a statement, he said, you own it.

“More likely, they will give you a very generic statement that will give them more room to adjust their strategy,” he said, “and buy them time to work on a buyout.”

View the original article here

Lawyer says US blocks investigation of Afghan massacre - Reuters

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

1 of 2. Attorney John Henry Browne (R), civil legal counsel to Joint Base Lewis McChord (JBLM) based soldier Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, the then-deployed U.S. Army soldier accused of murdering 17 Afghan civilians earlier this month, speaks in a press conference in his Seattle, Washington office March 30, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Anthony Bolante

By Bill Rigby

SEATTLE | Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:45pm EDT

SEATTLE (Reuters) - The lawyer defending the U.S. soldier accused of murdering 17 Afghan civilians claims U.S. authorities are blocking his ability to investigate the incident.

John Henry Browne, the lawyer for Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, said U.S. forces in Afghanistan have prevented his team from interviewing injured civilians at a hospital in Kandahar, and are allowing other potential witnesses to scatter, making it difficult to track them down.

"When prosecutors don't cooperate, it's because they are concerned about the strength of their case," said Browne at a press conference at his downtown Seattle office on Friday.

Bales was formally charged last week with the murders of eight adults and nine children in a pre-dawn shooting rampage in southern Afghanistan on March 11, which further eroded U.S.-Afghan relations already strained by a decade of war.

He could face the death penalty if convicted.

No date has been set for a trial, but U.S. military prosecutors are putting together their case while Browne is preparing his defense.

Browne said he has a team of investigators in Afghanistan now, but they are receiving little cooperation from military prosecutors who filed the charges.

"We are facing an almost complete information blackout from the government, which is having a devastating effect on our ability to investigate the charges preferred against our client," he said in a statement released earlier on Friday.

A reliable account of the events of the night of the massacre has not yet emerged. A recent report indicated Afghan villagers doubt Bales acted alone. Other reports suggest Bales left his base twice during the night.

"I don't believe that's the case, but we don't know for sure at this point," Browne said on Friday.

Browne said his investigators had spoken to U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan but had not managed to contact any witnesses.

DENIED ACCESS

"When we tried to interview the injured civilians being treated at Kandahar Hospital we were denied access and told to coordinate with the prosecution team," Browne said in the earlier statement.

"The next day the prosecution team interviewed the civilians injured. We found out shortly after the prosecution interviews of the injured civilians that the civilians were all released from the hospital and there was no contact information for them." That means potential witnesses will scatter and could prove unreachable, Browne said.

Prosecutors had not shared their investigative findings with his team, and would not share images captured by a surveillance camera on a blimp above the base which the Army says shows Bales returning to the camp after the alleged shooting, he said.

The next step in the case is for Bales - who is being held at a military detention center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas - to undergo a mental assessment by Army doctors independent of both the prosecution and defense, to determine if he is fit to stand trial, known as a "sanity board" in the Army.

That could take several months, Browne said.

After that has occurred, the military justice system requires a preliminary hearing, known as an "Article 32" hearing, to establish whether there is a strong enough case to proceed to a court martial.

Browne said it was too early to say whether post-traumatic stress disorder would feature in his defense against the charges. "I don't know whether it will at all," said Browne.

"First thing we have to find out is whether the government has a case. Until we're convinced the government has a case, we're not going to start speculating on what our defenses are going to be."

(Reporting By Bill Rigby; Editing by Todd Eastham and Paul Simao)

View the original article here

Lawyer says US blocks investigation of Afghan massacre

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
SEATTLE (Reuters) - The lawyer defending the U.S. soldier accused of murdering 17 Afghan civilians claims U.S. authorities are blocking his ability to investigate the incident.

John Henry Browne, the lawyer for Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, said U.S. forces in Afghanistan have prevented his team from interviewing injured civilians at a hospital in Kandahar, and are allowing other potential witnesses to scatter, making it difficult to track them down.

"When prosecutors don't cooperate, it's because they are concerned about the strength of their case," said Browne at a press conference at his downtown Seattle office on Friday.

Bales was formally charged last week with the murders of eight adults and nine children in a pre-dawn shooting rampage in southern Afghanistan on March 11, which further eroded U.S.-Afghan relations already strained by a decade of war.

He could face the death penalty if convicted.

No date has been set for a trial, but U.S. military prosecutors are putting together their case while Browne is preparing his defense.

Browne said he has a team of investigators in Afghanistan now, but they are receiving little cooperation from military prosecutors who filed the charges.

"We are facing an almost complete information blackout from the government, which is having a devastating effect on our ability to investigate the charges preferred against our client," he said in a statement released earlier on Friday.

A reliable account of the events of the night of the massacre has not yet emerged. A recent report indicated Afghan villagers doubt Bales acted alone. Other reports suggest Bales left his base twice during the night.

"I don't believe that's the case, but we don't know for sure at this point," Browne said on Friday.

Browne said his investigators had spoken to U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan but had not managed to contact any witnesses.

DENIED ACCESS

"When we tried to interview the injured civilians being treated at Kandahar Hospital we were denied access and told to coordinate with the prosecution team," Browne said in the earlier statement.

"The next day the prosecution team interviewed the civilians i njured. We found out shortly after the prosecution interviews of the injured civilians that the civilians were all released from the hospital and there was no contact information for them." That means potential witnesses will scatter and could prove unreachable, Browne said.

Prosecutors had not shared their investigative findings with his team, and would not share images captured by a surveillance camera on a blimp above the base which the Army says shows Bales returning to the camp after the alleged shooting, he said.

The next step in the case is for Bales - who is being held at a military detention center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas - to undergo a mental assessment by Army doctors independent of both the prosecution and defense, to determine if he is fit to stand trial, known as a "sanity board" in the Army.

That could take several months, Browne said.

After that has occurred, the military justice system requires a preliminary hearing, known as an "Article 32" hearing, to establish whether there is a strong enough case to proceed to a court martial.

Browne said it was too early to say whether post-traumatic stress disorder would feature in his defense against the charges. "I don't know whether it will at all," said Browne.

"First thing we have to find out is whether the government has a case. Until we're convinced the government has a case, we're not going to start speculating on what our defenses are going to be."

(Reporting By Bill Rigby; Editing by Todd Eastham and Paul Simao)

View the original article here

Bales' lawyer: U.S. is 'hiding evidence' in massacre - Philadelphia Inquirer

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
SEATTLE - The attorney for the U.S. soldier accused of killing 17 Afghan civilians said Friday that the U.S. government was "hiding evidence" from the defense team.

John Henry Browne said members of the defense team in Afghanistan were told they would have access to witnesses at a hospital, but later discovered the people had been released.

He also said the U.S. government has not turned over files to the lawyers defending Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales.

The defense team said in a statement the prosecution was withholding information "while potential witnesses scatter."

"It's outrageous," Browne said. "What they are basically doing is hiding evidence. The only reason to hide evidence is if you don't have evidence."

Maj. Chris Ophardt, an Army spokesman, said in a statement that the prosecution would provide Bales' defense with evidence in accordance with court-martial and military rules of evidence. He said that within these guidelines "the prosecution is and has been communicating with the defense."

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, after speaking to hundreds of Marines and sailors aboard the USS Peleliu off the coast of San Diego, told reporters: "I've made very clear that those procedures will be followed and that he'll be entitled to whatever information he would be entitled to under the military code of justice."

At a news conference Friday, Browne said the military is not under a legal obligation to provide his team with certain information at this point, but they were led to believe they'd have more assistance.

He said being given access to information at a later date would not work, especially in regards to witnesses in Afghanistan.

"Normally, we have cooperation with prosecutors and we get information, and in this case they actually promised us if we sent people to Afghanistan . . . that they would cooperate," he said.

Browne also said the military planned to conduct a comprehensive mental-health evaluation of Bales at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

Browne said the military initiated the evaluation and that it would take place within the next two months.

Bales has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder.

View the original article here

The lawyer beside Lindsay Lohan - Los Angeles Times

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

When Lindsay Lohan showed up for court on Thursday, the crowd was not as large as it has been for the actress — anticipating perhaps a resolution, rather than the sort of dramatic turn that's made her five-year legal saga as compelling as any TV reality show.

The 25-year-old Lohan has been in and out of jail and rehab so many times, her story line seemed to arc toward failure.

She blew off therapy and community service, ticked off counselors and judges. You never knew what to expect from her in the courtroom — a tearful plea, a pout, a fingernail painted with a vulgar taunt.

But one thing never seemed to change: the steady presence of lawyer Shawn Holley, who is as movie-star pretty as her client but has the gravitas to smooth Lohan's rough edges.

I've been pulling for Lohan from the beginning. She's a talented actress whose on-screen portrayals are an angsty mix of innocence and defiance. Her movies "Mean Girls" and "Freaky Friday" are classic favorites of my daughters.

But talk about bad role-modeling. As a fan, I found Lohan's missteps disappointing. As a mother, I found her jaunts exhausting. She became a symbol of the reckless self-absorption that's become routine for some young women — and I don't just mean Hollywood starlets.

As I watched her legal troubles mount — two DUIs and a jewelry theft — I took an odd sort of comfort from Holley's presence. They seemed to me more than client and lawyer.

When Lohan was sentenced to jail in 2010, she sobbed in the courtroom on Holley's shoulder. When Lohan was handcuffed in 2011, Holley looked down as her client was led out of court, as if the lawyer could not bear to watch.

On Thursday, Holley scribbled notes on her legal pad as the judge complimented Lohan's progress. She allowed herself the slightest smile when the judge pronounced Lohan's probation "terminated."

We witnessed the hug between Lohan and Holley. We didn't get to hear Lohan's whispered "I love you."

::

A few hours after Lohan was freed, I headed off to meet her lawyer. In my 30-minute drive, I heard the story of Lohan's court hearing three times on the radio. She was wearing a "tight-fitting blue pantsuit," one announcer intoned.

She wasn't. It was more like teal, and it was tailored and tasteful — conservative, if you're 25.

It seems we can't resist a dig, even on her most triumphant morning. That reflects our investment in her bad-girl persona. And that troubles Holley.

"Lindsay's incredibly strong, but she's also very fragile," Holley said. "I can't imagine what it must be like to be her and feel how much people are kind of waiting for your downfall. That's got to be difficult, hurtful. And she doesn't deserve it."

That's the celebrity lawyer speaking — but it's also the mother of a 9-year-old daughter, an attorney who got her start as a public defender, a woman who still remembers her own youthful misadventures.

"Let's just say I had fun," said Holley, who went to UCLA from Fairfax High, spent a year teaching English at Washington Prep, then enrolled at Southwestern Law School because she didn't know what to do with her life.

She'd spent lots of time around lawyers. Her mother — who was single and 19 when Holley was born — was a legal secretary who earned her MBA in night school and spent years managing law firms.

Holley got her legal start interviewing car thieves and crack addicts. "You walk into this [courtroom] holding tank, and it's hot and it stinks and it's nasty," she said. And no one understands their legal rights. Most were ready to plead guilty, she said, even if they had a legitimate defense.

"You start seeing that you're dealing with the concept of liberty in real life."

View the original article here

Lawyer cites PTSD to defend US soldier in Afghan killings

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
The lawyer for a US soldier charged with killing 17 villagers in southern Afghanistan said Wednesday he will cite Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) to defend the serviceman.

Attorney John Henry Browne added that prosecutors will have trouble proving their case against Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, whose alleged attack further strained already tense ties between Washington and Kabul.

Bales, 38, is said to have walked out of his base in the southern province of Kandahar in the early hours of March 11 and mounted a massacre in two nearby villages, with many of his victims women and children.

"When the experts are done with this case, there'll definitely be PTSD... I know a lot about PTSD and the symptoms and everything, and I'm convinced from my conversations that PTSD will be an issue," he told CNN.

The lawyer, who said he has met his client for 11 hours, downplayed reports that Bales had confessed, or even spoken about the shootings when he returned from the alleged attacks in the early hours.

"I don't know that I trust anything about him saying 'I shot people,' because I have not heard that from any source I trust," Browne told CNN in an interview.

Bales, who is being held at the Fort Leavenworth military base in Kansas, has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder, as well as six counts of assault and attempted murder in connection with the massacre.

Browne claimed there was a lack of evidence from the scene.

"It's not a traditional crime scene. There is no crime scene. The military has not even been back to the villages where this allegation stems from. They haven't been back there," Browne said.

"So there's no crime scene, there's no DNA, there's no fingerprints, there's no confession. It's -- you know, the Afghan people traditionally, I understand, and understandably, bury their dead very quickly.

"So it's going to be a tough case for the prosecutors," he added.

The killings have put further strain on the already difficult relationship between Kabul and Washington, after the burning of Korans by American soldiers in mid-February triggered deadly anti-US protests.

View the original article here

US soldier's lawyer slams Afghan killings 'blackout'

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
The lawyer representing a US soldier accused of killing 17 Afghan villagers condemned what he called an "information blackout" that prevents him from preparing his defense case.

Attorney John Henry Browne on Friday said his team had been blocked from interviewing witnesses and injured civilians in southern Afghanistan following the alleged massacre earlier this month.

"We were expecting a lot more cooperation. The prosecutors in this case promised us a lot of cooperation which we're just not getting," he told reporters in Seattle.

"We are facing an almost complete information blackout from the government, which is having a devastating effect on our ability to investigate the charges preferred against our client," he added in a statement.

His client Sergeant Robert Bales, 38, is said to have walked out of his base in the southern province of Kandahar in the early hours of March 11 and mounted a massacre in two nearby villages, with many of his victims women and children.

Browne met his client earlier this month at the Fort Leavenworth military base in Kansas, where Bales is detained charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder, as well as six counts of assault and attempted murder.

But his team has made little progress on the ground in Afghanistan. "When we tried to interview the injured civilians being treated at Kandahar Hospital, we were denied access and told to coordinate with the prosecution team," it said.

The next day, prosecutors interviewed the injured civilians, but Browne's office found out shortly afterward that "the civilians were all released from the hospital and there was no contact information for them.

"In addition, we are being denied access to the injured civilians medical records that are in the possession of the government which makes it even more impossible for us to try to locate and interview these crucial witnesses," it said.

"The prosecution is withholding the entire investigative file from the defense team while the potential witnesses scatter into unknown and potentially inaccessible areas in Afghanistan."

Browne, who said his team had also not been shown an alleged video of Bales, conceded that under military trial rules, they do not have the right to shared "discovery" information until 30 days before a so-called Article 32 preliminary hearing.

"In this case, they actually promised us that if we sent people to Afghanistan... they would cooperate, and make witnesses available for us. And they've obviously violated that promise," he said.

He also warned that the defense -- which will have access to the results of a "sanity review" of Bales expected in the next two months and not made officially available to prosecutors -- could withhold cooperation.

"If they want cooperation from us they better start cooperating more," he told reporters.

Browne said earlier this week that post-traumatic stress disorder will almost certainly be part of his defense, adding that prosecutors will have trouble proving their case against Bales.

The killings have further strained the already difficult relationship between Kabul and Washington, at an all-time low after the burning of Korans by Americans, a spate of deadly anti-US protests and an earlier video showing US Marines urinating on the corpses of Taliban militants.

US military officials declined to respond directly to Browne's allegations. But army spokesman George Wright told AFP: "The US Army will continue to work with the Bales legal defense team in the months to come."

View the original article here