Branum narrows his market
I know we haven’t mentioned James Branum for a while. It seemed like he was actually working for his clients since last year, so I left him pretty much alone. However, it seems that working for his clients was difficult because he’s begun turning away work. Not all of his clients fit the bill to be sacrificial lambs for the anti-war movement, so he’s narrowed his focus, apparently;
He only wants new cases that could result in a trial so he can blather on the public record about how the Army doesn’t take care of soldiers and make his case for the abolition of the standing military and scare away potential recruits. He needs a stage.
Doing his job turned out to be too hard, I guess the half-assed way he was doing it was a lot easier;
I regret having to do this, but after close to 5 years of incessant travel and stress, I’m feeling the need to make changes that will enable me to keep doing this work over the long haul. — If you are looking for legal counsel on a case I can’t take, please contact the Military Law Task Force (email: nlg.mltf@gmail.com, phone: (619)463-2369, web: www.nlgmltf.org) for assistance.
Poor guy had to move out of his grandparents’ basement and sponge off his clients for a place to live in Killeen, TX. I wonder if he ever paid back some of his clients after borrowing money from them? I know one guy he borrowed money from, got kicked out of his apartment because he couldn’t pay the rent that month. Nice.
Category: Antiwar crowd
…Given his track record of incarcerated clients, shouldn’t he remove the peace sign from his logo & replace it with the Monopoly game “Go to Jail” cartoon??? Just sayin’
This is borderline unethical and I honestly fear for any clients he may represent. A defense attorney simply cannot rely on a case going to trial. This sells the client short when opportunities for a deal arise. And I can tell you that a good attorney will get the client a decent deal in most cases, particularly with the military. But if an attorney is merely gunning for trial, the ramifications during sentencing are heightened. Military juries in my experience are more likely to acquit an accused, but if found guilty, the tradeoff is that the members often are harsher during sentencing.
Another thing that concerns me. He wants to take AWOL cases when the accused surrenders. I’ve handled a good amount of AWOL cases, particularly voluntary surrender. Not one of the surrender cases resulted in a trial. The Manual for Courts-Martial even states that surrender is a mitigating factor, the command knows this, and ultimately the Army client (even an otherwise sh*tbag) gets a Chapter 10 (separation in leiu of court martial). Anyone thinking this type of case will garner a trial is seriously uneducated on how the military legal process works or is unethically tanking potential deals to make money off the client. Either way, it’s a diservice to the military accused.
As I write this, I keep going back to reread his statements to make sure I am understanding him, because it doesn’t make sense. He wants to only do trials, but the cases he will do won’t result in trial? I don’t understand.
Finally, the Military Law Task Force is a horrible resource. They are comprised of activist attorneys who do not have Judge Advocate or even military experience. They hold contempt for JAs and refer people to civilian attorneys who may be good in their own practice, but have no clue about the military.
It would seem that he tanked another case. Could it be for profit and/or activist reasons?
http://couragetoresist.org/2-uncategorised/917-pfc-ryan-reed-jailed-for-putting-family-first.html
At trial PFC Reed plead guilty to one count of AWOL and one count of desertion. He then presented a strong case showing (1) his serious family hardship, (2) his old unit’s failure to help him, (3) his positive service history upon return to military control, (4) his high rehabilitation potential, and (5) the difficulty his family will experience if he is given jail time. PFC Reed asked the judge to give him a BCD (bad conduct discharge) in lieu of jail time, but he was instead given a 10 month sentence (coupled with the BCD, loss of pay and loss of rank).
I see he is still keeping the standard sub-par.
This clown is dangerous to whoever he represents. “JA Yossarian” is right in the points he makes. It’s my understand that Branum also teaches G.I. Rights classes out of Under The Hood Cafe still.
I guess he doesn’t want any more suicidal clients because of that one guy who killed himself when Branum wouldn’t return his calls.
That is news to me, also on a separate note someone on wikpedia claims that Micheal Kern resigned from the IVAW.
Link?
No link, and it is from a unnamed user.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iraq_Veterans_Against_the_War&curid=3566417&diff=440435703&oldid=440434667
These people will never see reason and they need to be shut down. Branum knows what he’s doing is wrong but he is more worried about the cause than people.
JA Yossarian, it is not about the money with this clown, it is about the “cause.” He seems no soldiers = no wars. I guess he has never heard of the Taliban. Also, he wears sports coats and bolo ties to trials. This lack of respect would get him the boot from many civilian courts, but because the military is bending over backwards to seem fair to these idiots, it just gets his clients more time.
He should be disbarred for many of his antics, but so far no joy.
I’m surprised that the Army allows him on base or to rep Soldiers.