Jailhouse Musings

My first day of intake and arraignment with the Legal Defense Program has come and gone, and it all went relatively smoothly. I wasn't looking forward to intake at the jail, considering a) it's a jail, b) I generally don't think highly of people in jail, and c) I don't like speaking to people. Plus, I had been warned the locals might start flinging feces at me. Not me personally, I suppose, but at people who come to speak with them. The locals are known for occasionally reeking of alcohol, vomit, urine, or feces, and usually at least from bad breath. Some LDP students have had unfortunate run-ins with people (including one girl whose interviewee decided jail was as good a place as any to masturbate, and did so right in front of her), but mine were all relatively decent. No feces flung at me, I can tell you that. My theory is, they start flinging shit, I start flinging shit.

Arraignments were also pretty solid. This marked my first day appearing in front of Dane County courts, and I looked appropriately fly. Nothing worth mentioning really happened, just standard appearances. The DA was extremely reasonable with all of his arguments and conditions, so I really didn't have to argue anything.

What really struck me about the proceedings was how much I would probably be better off in another field of work. As the court commissioner went through giving his orders and stating the conditions, I found myself thinking about how absurd I could make things. He orders the defendant not possess or consume any illegal substances as a bond condition. As defense counsel, I find myself wanting to argue "Your honor, I would ask that we limit that condition to any illegal substances other than cocaine. My client is an avid cocaine user; let's say we keep it to under a kilo. Deal?" I mean really, it's kind of a formality, since no one is allowed to use or possess those anyway. This just provides another opportunity for a bail jumping count, I suppose. But then the next condition - - no possession of any dangerous weapons. "Your honor, that's outrageous. My client has an extensive shoulder-mounted grenade launcher collection, and I really think it unnecessary to restrict his access to these items. How about we limit that to 'no ground-to-air weaponry' and call it a day?" One of the victims in a case was named "Triumph." I hear "I will order that you have no contact with Triumph..." and I'm finishing that sentence as "the Insult Comic Dog from Conan O'Brian." You don't want those two getting together, cahooting about all sorts of criminality. No siree.

Then I think about the other conditions one could throw down. No playing of the game Monopoly unless you are the thimble, and even then, you may not own more than two hotels on any green property. No possession of any fire-breathing squirrels. Refrain from humming any jaunty tunes. You are not to loiter in any area of the city where the mercury level is less than eight cubits. You are not to consume any McFlurrys, unless they are Oreo McFlurrys, and then you must have written authorization from Margaret Thatcher. No bats, vampire or otherwise.

Even still, I can do this job. So does the fact that I'm competent and approach it with a sense of humor mean I'm in the right field or the wrong one?