Comments on: Ada Commishes Approve Probation Contract On 2-1 Vote

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 01:10:38 +0000

Publica

I never told you what words you could use… I will say this never never happens and always doesnt happen either… I am not sure what France has to do with it…France…atleast the parts I have been too have fredom of speech. You must have been in the comunist section.

By: Karma

Karma — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:19:06 +0000

Rick, you are right, the judge does have the final vote regarding granting an unsupervised request. I meant that the PO is under Nancy’s thumb regarding support for an unsupervised request, before it even gets to court. I personally supported several requests for unsupervised, but Nancy denied the requests, and I had to support her view in court, or else. On several occasions, judges granted the requests despite probations opinions to deny them.

By: Rick

Rick — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 22:50:09 +0000

Accessdenied
Listen guys I know the system is broken…the WHOLE judicial system is broken, inefficient, prejudiced, and honestly a farce. Putting emphasis on putting one aspect of the system under govt. control is not going to change the way the system is run, only who is running it. The things that all of you complain about are still going to happen it will just be a county run agency doing it to you. Anyone who thinks that the cost of supervision or the cost of UA’s will go down is sadly mistaken. Put the system under the county pay them your COS and UA fees, as well as your fines and court costs, you will not see one bit of change in the attitude of the individual PO’s you will be no more likely to be granted unsupervised probation (that would take money out of the counties coffers) of and think of this IF you don’t pay the $25 a day the sheriff charges you for room and board now the county will probably grant themselves the authority to PV you (for non payment of fees) and put you right back in the pokey @ $25 a day.
Everyone is up in arms about the way PO’s treat people but I wonder why isn’t there any uprising as to how the Police In General I personally was treated with much more contempt and much less respect by the “boy’s in blue”. This is a different rant though.

One note to Karma…. the Judge has the final vote… not the PO that is not to say the judge will not follow what the PO tells him/her. That part only makes sence, since the judge only sees the probationer for how many minutes every other month or so.

By: Publica

Publica — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 21:12:25 +0000

Rick – Let’s just meet on Main Street with our six-guns. How about that?

Nobody called you a liar. My experience with ACMPS is more than yours and I’m relating my experience. My experience revolves around NEVER having seen a positive rec. And don’t tell us what words we can use or not use. This isn’t France…

EDITOR NOTE– Objection sustained! Now, both of you carry on in a civilized manner. Is that clear?

By: Accessdenied

Accessdenied — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:41:49 +0000

Rick,

I simply stated what “I’ve read” about Nancy, not what I know. My probationer is my spouse and we’ve attended everything together, so I have witnessed a lot of dishonesty the P.O. said and did. I choose not to say too much because careful eyes are watching these blogs. And, yes, we are part of the class-action. I’ve rarely (not never or always, as you don’t care for extremes) read about anything positive Nancy has done for others without ulterior motives. You may be one of those rare “good deeds” Nancy has chosen for no particular reason at all, but only she knows. No harm meant. Good luck to you.

By: Karma

Karma — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:37:44 +0000

Often a PO can personally support unsupervised probation, but Nancy has the final vote. That support would not be in the notes because they would get called out on it by Nancy. Regarding Rick’s unsupervised probation, if Nancy supported it, I would guarantee that she had an unspoken agenda. Whether it be a “token” unsupervised case, or as Gregg suggested, she did Rick a favor if he does one for her…that is consistent with Nancy’s need to look good in front of others, and to manipulate others for her own benefit. If he did indeed speak at a Domestic Violence seminar at her request, she would have gotten positive attention and words of praise because she must be doing a fantastic job….

By: Rick

Rick — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:20:55 +0000

Dave

You seem to have a seriuos bias against ANYONE who has any comment that does not conform to the agenda at hand. Since the mouth piece has not seen this…it must have “Never” happened… my point is as I have said more than once the words Never and Aways have no buisness in these types of conversations. Over rule that!!!!

By: Rick

Rick — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:08:27 +0000

Gregg
I am the same Rick, sorry but I don’t recall you, as there were several people who came and went while I was in those groups. Was my being supported for unsupervised a quid pro quo situation? To an extent yes it was also acknowledgement that I had made some pretty big changes in my life which I am very proud to say that I have built on in the time since I got off of supervised probation.
I would also like to say that simply complying with the terms of probation “In my opinion” should not get a person off supervised early. I think if a person wants to get off supervised early they should have to go above and beyond what has been mandated for them to do, simply complying has not shown any initiative on the probationer’s part.

By: James

James — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:45:08 +0000

Dave, “objection overruled” LOL your killing me this morning 🙂
I can appreciate that Rick said him and another person were granted unsupervised probation. But we are talking about a PUBLIC DEFENDER here. We are talking about possibly HUNDREDS of clients he’s represented. Hundreds compared to you and “one other guy” that Nancy was so kind enough to support. To me the math speaks for itself. It’s a no brainer that she keeps people on probation. No clients=no money and no money means giving up the million dollar home that the clients of this county have funded for her.

By: Rick

Rick — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 16:50:13 +0000

Publica
If…. you are calling me a liar I’m sure I can get the tapes from the court and we can listen to them. Your “clients” have told you the PO supports them being placed on unsupervised but there are no notes to “memorialize” this…all I can say to that is….humm…sounds kinda fishy. As I said before the words always and never have no business in these discussions.

EDITOR NOTE–Rick, time out! The lawyer is trying to help all concerned. He said HE has never seen a vote for unsupervised. Fair enough. Objection overruled.