JLM Charged in 2005 Farifax Rape Case

[MJPeony]

New paper articles don't define anyone when come to everyday person. The guys is a solid Republican not many represent people of color period in court beyond put the in jail. I'm not trying to make it a race matter. But I see a lot are throwing that angle out and I want to be clear. His ethic are good ,he good person. My stance on this "I think he is too close to client"

I have seen worse than him in court in my life time. I have seen paid mob lawyers. The client couldn't pay the bill and was letting sleep with their wives. Camblos is not a bad guy or mob lawyer. I understand the hate, it not something I would do ( taking the case). But a lot will, for fame and fortune. I don't know, maybe the challenge . I just think ,he never lost with JM and wants to continue that. It's called a common client.

I think he is too close to him(jm) and I think the feds and the state will have him removed. I do think, Its that's going open a can of worms of rail road , even though Jm is guilty as sin in my book.

I understand your point about him perhaps being a good person at heart. I don't know him personally, so I have no reason to think one way or the other. Although I naturally tend to have a negative view (yes, biased), of the DA of a potential serial killer... and have to remind myself that our justice system is here for all, and everyone needs a good a defensive att'y... which is difficult sometimes when personal emotions are high. But yes, Camblos does not strike me as someone "corrupt". He strikes me, from what I have read, as someone who finds ways for the letter of the law to work in his/his client's advantage, and this includes getting his clients out of charges no matter what the heinousness of their offense if it is remotely legal. Which.... to be fair... is what lawyers are paid to do in these cases. So. In a case like JM's, it's very frustrating at the end of the day IMO. And Camblos also strikes me as a showman and that is personally annoying to me, but that's just an aside.

But, on a different note- can you clarify what you mean by Camblos being "too close to JM"? To the point where you say you expect Camblos will be removed from the case? You mention it several times that they are too close to one another. Are you also saying that Camblos has represented JM before in something? ("he never lost with JM..."). Would like to hear more about what you mean. TIA.

 

[ksj3]

"Wouldn't you want the best lawyer representing you in a murder case?"

If I ever murder and/or rape someone, I won't deserve anyone defending me. Weird question.

My thought on her asking that question is, if you were the accused - particularly if falsely accused - wouldn't you want the best possible defense? I think, in all cases, the answer is yes.

That's why we have defense lawyers, to protect the constitutional rights of everyone involved. But that shouldn't mean a "win" is having an assault and battery conviction when charged with murder.

“Everybody is entitled to good representation,” said Camblos, who said he enjoys working as a defense lawyer. The nuances of defense work not visible to everyone intrigue him, he said. He said he believes if a client is accused of murder and is convicted of assault and battery, “I’ve won my case.” http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/l...cle_1870ae78-7bd6-11e3-b68b-001a4bcf6878.html

 

[MJPeony]

....

But that shouldn't mean a "win" is having an assault and battery conviction when charged with murder.

“Everybody is entitled to good representation,” said Camblos, who said he enjoys working as a defense lawyer. The nuances of defense work not visible to everyone intrigue him, he said. He said he believes if a client is accused of murder and is convicted of assault and battery, “I’ve won my case.” http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/l...cle_1870ae78-7bd6-11e3-b68b-001a4bcf6878.html

(snipped for focus)

Oh, ugh, yes... this quote made me ill. Yes, I understand that a lawyer has done their job if they can diminish their client's charges, but this comment he made is completely discombobulated IMO.

 

[ksj3]

New paper articles don't define anyone when come to everyday person. The guys is a solid Republican not many represent people of color period in court beyond put the in jail. I'm not trying to make it a race matter. But I see a lot are throwing that angle out and I want to be clear. His ethic are good ,he good person. My stance on this "I think he is too close to client"

I have seen worse than him in court in my life time. I have seen paid mob lawyers. The client couldn't pay the bill and was letting sleep with their wives. Camblos is not a bad guy or mob lawyer. I understand the hate, it not something I would do ( taking the case). But a lot will, for fame and fortune. I don't know, maybe the challenge . I just think ,he never lost with JM and wants to continue that. It's called a common client.

I think he is too close to him(jm) and I think the feds and the state will have him removed. I do think, Its that's going open a can of worms of rail road , even though Jm is guilty as sin in my book.

http://cvillenews.com/2006/12/14/camblos-red-land-club/

A solid Republican who belonged to a group that discriminates against women, making him ineligible to be a judge.

"The Red-Land Club, as is the theme of the article, is a professional organization for attorneys near Court Square that arbitrarily and invidiously excludes women. Thus Camblos, as a past president and presumed current member, is disqualified to hold the judgeship that he’s seeking."

 

[oldwindow]

I understand your point about him perhaps being a good person at heart. I don't know him personally, so I have no reason to think one way or the other. Although I naturally tend to have a negative view (yes, biased), of the DA of a potential serial killer... and have to remind myself that our justice system is here for all, and everyone needs a good a defensive att'y... which is difficult sometimes when personal emotions are high. But yes, Camblos does not strike me as someone "corrupt". He strikes me, from what I have read, as someone who finds ways for the letter of the law to work in his/his client's advantage, and this includes getting his clients out of charges no matter what the heinousness of their offense if it is remotely legal. Which.... to be fair... is what lawyers are paid to do in these cases. So. In a case like JM's, it's very frustrating at the end of the day IMO. And Camblos also strikes me as a showman and that is personally annoying to me, but that's just an aside.

But, on a different note- can you clarify what you mean by Camblos being "too close to JM"? To the point where you say you expect Camblos will be removed from the case? You mention it several times that they are too close to one another. Are you also saying that Camblos has represented JM before in something? ("he never lost with JM..."). Would like to hear more about what you mean. TIA.

From what I have seen Camblos has worked for him before and his family members a few times.

Its called disclosure to prevent crime, fraud, tort.. disclosure ostensibly to support lawyers on interests. Clark vs Usa is case that come to mind in that area. Also the case with John Gotti (the mob boss). The feds/state had his lawyer removed. I think he close to breaking the common interest rules as well. He is smart guy by not saying much, but he is using the law to be near his client,

There is work product doctrine, which I think he going after in fair fax case.

 

[zapped]

http://cvillenews.com/2006/12/14/camblos-red-land-club/

A solid Republican who belonged to a group that discriminates against women, making him ineligible to be a judge.

"The Red-Land Club, as is the theme of the article, is a professional organization for attorneys near Court Square that arbitrarily and invidiously excludes women. Thus Camblos, as a past president and presumed current member, is disqualified to hold the judgeship that he’s seeking."

Evidently hes not very well liked by Republicans either. Not one single comment on that entire page in Camblos defense.

In addition to that is the bizarre bomb case Camblos was involved in a few years back, the following is excerpt from an interview on that case.

"Camblos said that the oldest kid in the case (“the ringleader&#8221 was born on the 100th anniversary of Hitler’s birthday and the anniversary of Columbine. I held my breath during the sentence, thinking where can he possibly be going with this?. And then he did it — Camblos concluded the sentence with: “we took that very, very seriously.”

As a die hard Republican and Conservative myself, I can tell you that comments like the one made above are not endearing Camblos to anyone in my party.

He sounds nuttier than a fruitcake IMO.

The full article can be found here

 

[ksj3]

Not to be rude But he is right in a way. As wrong as it sounds and the case looks out right. To me that's attempted murder and planned attempt to do harm assault, a felony in my book. Wreckless driving is a misdemeanor, minor assault is a misdemeanor, not saying these actions where in the case above. Ok . In small he didn't want that case ,to much work in findng the guys and if did he had to do a lot of work going across the county lines and state lines is hell and differ rules and guidelines.. Maybe it came down to payment and work load.. I don't know.

Sound like he just told them that because, he didn't want the case. Not that I agree with his judgements

BBM above. Still defending that he's so good hearted and always locks criminals up? He refused to protect the commonwealth whose attorney he was, because it was "too much work"?

In the same article, the 19-yo got a speeding ticket two weeks later in the same spot. Even a "failure to maintain control of your vehicle" charge would have been better than nothing.

 

[ksj3]

Do mods need to be the ones to open new threads? I really think we should have one just to discuss Camblos and/or his refusal then demanding to represent JM, so this one doesn't entirely derail (as was suggested even last night).

 

[zapped]

BBM above. Still defending that he's so good hearted and always locks criminals up? He refused to protect the commonwealth whose attorney he was, because it was "too much work"?

In the same article, the 19-yo got a speeding ticket two weeks later in the same spot. Even a "failure to maintain control of your vehicle" charge would have been better than nothing.

I agree, according to those articles it seems Camblos has taken it upon himself to be judge, jury and executioner in a number of cases.

 

[ksj3]

I agree, according to those articles it seems Camblos has taken it upon himself to be judge, jury and executioner in a number of cases.

There's more. Keep reading. He (seemingly intentionally) mishandled cases, resulting in mistrials, etc.

This first one goes back to the fatal car accident with the 19-yo cited above:

"According to an affidavit filed by police officer Karl Mansoor, Camblos developed an antagonistic view towards the widower Deane. Camblos instructed a police officer to shoot Deane. Other officers were instructed to follow Deane and, if he attempted to leave flowers to the site of his family’s death, find a reason to arrest him. Camblos has recently taken to claiming that Deane had threatened his family and was actually arrested for doing so but, in fact, no such threat was ever documented and no such arrest was ever made."

And then
"Getting Away with Manslaughter…Again
In April 2002, McIntire School of Commerce Associate Dean Michael Atchison fell asleep at the wheel, ran a stoplight, and struck the car of 29 year old Yu Ching Yeh at 55 MPH. Unlike in the Deane case, Camblos brought charges against Atchison, charging him with involuntary manslaughter. The trial ended as soon as it began once it emerged that Camblos simply hadn’t gotten around to subpoenaing a key witness. The case had to be dropped, and Atchison could not legally be retried."

http://cvillenews.com/2007/11/05/vote-against-camblos/

 

[SolVol]

New paper articles don't define anyone when come to everyday person. The guys is a solid Republican not many represent people of color period in court beyond put the in jail. I'm not trying to make it a race matter. But I see a lot are throwing that angle out and I want to be clear. His ethic are good ,he good person. My stance on this "I think he is too close to client"

I have seen worse than him in court in my life time. I have seen paid mob lawyers. The client couldn't pay the bill and was letting sleep with their wives. Camblos is not a bad guy or mob lawyer. I understand the hate, it not something I would do ( taking the case). But a lot will, for fame and fortune. I don't know, maybe the challenge . I just think ,he never lost with JM and wants to continue that. It's called a common client.

I think he is too close to him(jm) and I think the feds and the state will have him removed. I do think, Its that's going open a can of worms of rail road , even though Jm is guilty as sin in my book.

If he is allowed to 'hold sway' at all, considering all the chief/indian push-pull amongst the attorneys and that he's not likely to be allowed to pull any fancy tricks in this Judge's courtroom, I will be listening/watching to see what kind of lawyer and human being Camblos reveals himself to be. So far, he does not impress.

I have two children, nephews, cousins, etc. who are attorneys. They would know exactly where to file requests for rulings by a judge. They would not be changing mind about representing the client and expecting to get their way as Camblos has done. Camblos being a former prosecutor should have known how to execute these matters correctly. He seems a bit unstable, to tell the truth.

 

[SolVol]

I followed yesterday's discussion regarding garnishments and debts in warranty and at no time do I recall that it has been established that some of the entries were, in fact, loans from UVA. As I recall, that was merely speculation along with many other possibilities.

Whether he voluntarily sought loans or they were placed upon him in a legal proceeding, he did owe money to UVA hospital and Martha Jefferson. He just didn't have a choice whether he would pay it back or not. These debts could have been overdue loans from an employees credit union or medical/mental health bills that he was 'working off' for himself or a family member.

The lawyer he assaulted said he filed the charges against Jesse in order to be sure the medical bill was paid. With some people, a mandatory payment method is the only way to be sure the loan or debt is paid.

We don't know JLM's financial history, or have access to his tax documents, but we can reasonably assume that he did not have a large legitimate income. He also liked to gamble online (as per friend in news story) smoke, and drink. This takes money. Anyone he owed would need to be sure he was legally obligated to pay.

 

[ILOKAL]

Whether he voluntarily sought loans or they were placed upon him in a legal proceeding, he did owe money to UVA hospital and Martha Jefferson. He just didn't have a choice whether he would pay it back or not. These debts could have been overdue loans from an employees credit union or medical/mental health bills that he was 'working off' for himself or a family member.

The lawyer he assaulted said he filed the charges against Jesse in order to be sure the medical bill was paid. With some people, a mandatory payment method is the only way to be sure the loan or debt is paid.

We don't know JLM's financial history, or have access to his tax documents, but we can reasonably assume that he did not have a large legitimate income. He also liked to gamble online (as per friend in news story) smoke, and drink. This takes money. Anyone he owed would need to be sure he was legally obligated to pay.

Debts? ABSOLUTELY!!

Loans? DOUBTFUL!!

 

[SolVol]

I think you bring up some good points SolVol. Although there are a few I disagree with.

Just b/c you take special classes (i.e. special ed) does not mean you don't- or shouldn't- graduate with a "regular high school diploma". The high school diploma is not only for those in certain level academics. Individual learning differences are taken into account and that's why groups are split up into the remedial, average, and then advanced classes. It attempts to level the playing field and high school diplomas are given to all who pass their own courses. If JM did his work in high school and completed the requirements of his courses then he deserves a h.s. diploma. IMO.

Also, and I think someone else has said this recently, acceptance into LU and/or CNU likely had nothing to do with his academics- not because he was being coddled by some "supporter"- but b/c it's well-established that universities lower their academic expectations if a star athlete is involved. My personal belief is that it was his football status that got him into Liberty and that then got him into CNU. I think that was a function of the collegiate athletic system (good or bad I'm not debating here), and that is highly expected IMO. Now, I do agree that this contributed to him continuing to "pass on through", like he has apparently done so many times in his life. I just don't think it is somehow related to him as a specific individual being singled out and coddled.

It is doubtful that Jesse Matthew, even with tutoring, could have passed a GED equivalency exam. Passing him on and on without his gaining a foundation for graduation was unfair to him and possibly gave him a sense of entitlement and a lack of responsibility for his own education.

In Britain, there are levels that each student earns through their own efforts and abilities. That is a better way to approach education than giving everyone the same diploma without any qualifiers. It's the old 'give every participant a trophy philosophy' rather than let every child achieve at their own best level and award them for actual achievement.

 

[SolVol]

Debts? ABSOLUTELY!!

Loans? DOUBTFUL!!

Loans that became overdue and delinquent, possibly. :8->

 

[MJPeony]

It is doubtful that Jesse Matthew, even with tutoring, could have passed a GED equivalency exam. Passing him on and on without his gaining a foundation for graduation was unfair to him and possibly gave him a sense of entitlement and a lack of responsibility for his own education.

In Britain, there are levels that each student earns through their own efforts and abilities. That is a better way to approach education than giving everyone the same diploma without any qualifiers. It's the old 'give every participant a trophy philosophy' rather than let every child achieve at their own best level and award them for actual achievement.

BBM.

We disagree I guess. I haven't seen anything to show me that JM could not have passed a GED equivalency exam.

When I responded about the "regular h.s diploma" you were referring to, I was taking into consideration what Albemarle County School District calls a "modified standard diploma" or "special diploma" and just lumping them all in as legitimate diplomas. I believe it very possible- likely even- that he graduated with one of these. So I think we may actually be saying the same thing in a way.

But I believe that if he did get a modified standard diploma or special diploma, then he graduated with a h.s. diploma. He did the work he was required to do to earn that degree. It sounds like I'm defending him, and I'm not defending him in any moral way whatsoever (good heavens no), but I am saying that yes, I think he got his diploma legitimately. I don't think he was coddled or given some sort of special pass as it pertains to him graduating high school. His h.s. diploma has no bearings IMO on whether he has a moral compass. Sure, it would be nice if a potential serial killer doesn't get rewarded with a h.s. diploma, but I don't think that's reasonable to expect.

pages 9 and 10 for reference here: http://www2.k12albemarle.org/Documents/High-School-Program-Guide-2009-10.pdf

Of note, he did NOT attend Murray School. So an ISAEP is not something he received according to this document. That is interesting to me. We can rule out I think that he was "at-risk" which is interesting as it may pertain to his defense strategy of competency....

"An ISAEP provides an educational experience for students at-risk of dropping out of school that can prepare them for continued learning, successful employment, and responsible citizenship. A referral to ISAEP may be made by the student’s base school when a student demonstrates substantial need for an alternative program. The ISAEP recognizes standard educational schedules and methods are not successful for all students. An ISAEP offers the opportunity of successful closure to one’s high school experience, and opens the possibility for continuing education...The program is located on the campus of Murray High School."

 

[ksj3]

"I had sent a motion to the prosecutor requesting that several doctors in this area who are very, very good at forensic psychiatry, forensic psychology be appointed to do a full evaluation of Mr. Matthew," Camblos said.

http://www.nbc29.com/story/27169642...l-for-jesse-matthew-sets-motions-hearing-date

Here's something new I hadn't seen.

ETA: Posted in the psychology thread, too, where they're discussing any potential insanity bid.

 

[oldwindow]

BBM above. Still defending that he's so good hearted and always locks criminals up? He refused to protect the commonwealth whose attorney he was, because it was "too much work"?

In the same article, the 19-yo got a speeding ticket two weeks later in the same spot. Even a "failure to maintain control of your vehicle" charge would have been better than nothing.

I'm going to end this at this because your being very rude and petty. If you have problem with my stance that he is good to heart guy and I think he is to close to his client. Then I hope you get the help you need.

I don't care if the 19yr old got a ticket to Arabia it has nothing do with my direct opinion of the guy nor this Hg case.. It has nothing to do with anything its petty and a non provoking matter. You want sue him for it, give me call. I'll come back from my retirement as a lawyer and do the law.

 

[EmmaRose]

"I had sent a motion to the prosecutor requesting that several doctors in this area who are very, very good at forensic psychiatry, forensic psychology be appointed to do a full evaluation of Mr. Matthew," Camblos said.

http://www.nbc29.com/story/27169642...l-for-jesse-matthew-sets-motions-hearing-date

Here's something new I hadn't seen.

ETA: Posted in the psychology thread, too, where they're discussing any potential insanity bid.

Thank you for the link. Interesting comment by Cassie who claims she knows JM

 

[ksj3]

I'm going to end this at this because your being very rude and petty. If you have problem with my stance that he is good to heart guy and I think he is to close to his client. Then I hope you get the help you need.

I don't care if the 19yr old got a ticket to Arabia it has nothing do with my direct opinion of the guy nor this Hg case.. It has nothing to do with anything its petty and a non provoking matter. You want sue him for it, give me call. I'll come back from my retirement as a lawyer and do the law.

I'm sorry if my tone came across rudely. I just don't understand, and it seems others don't either, how you can say the complimentary things you've said about Camblos and his track record as an attorney when it is clearly shown over the years that is not true. You seem to have some "inside" information on him as an individual and his relationship to JM and his family, which could be very important, but it seems as if you might be misinformed about his track record as CA and as prosecutor.

As long as it's your opinion that Camblos has got a good heart, that's fine. I have no quabble with that; everyone's allowed his own opinion. I would like you, though, to make that statement confidently based upon facts. The things you say over and over - that he has a good heart, he's an excellent prosecutor who doesn't let criminals free, that he's too close to his client - without links and without clearly stating WHY you think that makes me question why you say those things and want to show how that might not be true.

I do apologize, though, if I offended.