A Letter to the Judge

While bias is understood to be an intrinsically human characteristic, that urge to presume on the basis of often erroneous information such as criminal history and passing innuendo, one can only hope that Lady Justice’s eyes remain shrouded as they should and implore that the prosecution and the defense be regarded equally so that no quarter be provided Mr. Gullette which isn’t summarily endowed upon myself as well.  It seems a most humble and reasonable request; a mere reiteration of the most fundamental inherence of any worthwhile legal system.

Which isn’t to suggest that one good foul deserves another or any such twist of illogic, but only that in the totality of this specific circumstance, it is difficult to fathom how one could arrive at the conclusion that my incarceration is the proper remedy for an isolated incident of inconvenient scheduling by arbiters. 

Furthermore, if the respective sides are to be held to an even remotely comparable standard, then it is noteworthy that Mr. Gullette has failed to appear at multiple appointments during the course of the last year without so much as a verbal reprimand or even an apology.  

This most recent mishap, for which I am currently held responsible, is more accurately, a hybrid of both the prosecutor’s failure to appear on November 4^th and a rather perplexing failure to acknowledge my lack of availability on November 8^th. 

If the court will pardon the insistence, I deliberately submitted that I would be out of town in order to avoid the very dilemma in which I presently find myself.  That the point has gone unnoticed and that I came to be regarded as the primary culprit of this mishap contradicts even the most unrefined conception of fairness and alludes to a major point of concern in my mind—

It has been the experience that my extensive involvement with the Lexington Police Department has served to disrepute me among certain members of the local establishment.  Incidentally, the suspicion has been confirmed on several occasions over the years by a myriad of officials, both on and off the record, to include a former member of the judiciary.  And while it would be far from me to insist that such is the case in this particular example, I must admit to regard the question with no small measure of trepidation.

Studies have highlighted the multitude of challenges confronting an indigent defender in the criminal justice system ranging from the typical lack of access to resources and overloaded public advocates to unabashed disparities in rates of detainment pending trial, conviction and even capital punishment.  

In such a flagrantly lopsided system, a temperate arbitrator serves as perhaps the greatest barrier between a less fortunate socio-economic status and injustice.  To condone the denial of that single respite is to sanction the deprivation of justice altogether.  Without it, I am lost before the first word was ever uttered on my behalf.  And if the police have succeeded as the saboteurs of my life, then the judiciary should now play the role of my executioner.

But I remain hopeful that all has not been lost in a swift gust of disparaging conjecture and have faith that my liberty should not be stamped out with calloused indifference and shameless preferentiality.  I maintain my innocence and have no doubt that time will readily disprove my accusers as it unseats all things shoddily founded.  In the interim, I hope to be allowed the benefit of the doubt due a presumably innocent man and respectfully request to remain free until such time as a jury of my peers should decide otherwise. 

Sincerely,

Pleas Lucian Kavanaugh