Defensive Carry banner

Met my new lawyer today, and he was armed

3K views 35 replies 28 participants last post by  lance22 
#1 ·
I went to see a lawyer today for an initial consultation, both for financial stuff and for representation on any other issues that might arise.

Side note: some parts of downtown St. Louis gave me indication I should have been carrying an AK, and had someone riding shotgun. In some areas, the distance between nice office buildings and Beirut-looking neighborhoods is about, oh, maybe 20 feet.

I was carrying as usual, but well concealed. I had emailed him previously and specified that if his office didn't allow weapons, we would have to meet elsewhere. He replied by email that he carries every day, and understands why I choose to carry also.

After we sat down for the consultation, the first question out of his mouth was, "So what's your every-day carry?"

I told him, and then I guessed he was probably a 1911 man. "Yes, that's my main carry", he says, although he also likes Glocks and AK's.

While we were waiting for his partner to read some documents, he spoke to my wife about how to respond to police questioning if I am involved in a shooting, i.e., say nothing other than she wants to speak to her lawyer, regardless of the pressure from the police to speak to them immediately.

A couple hours into the meeting, he removes his suit jacket, and I get a glimpse of a leather double-mag carrier on his left hip.

It felt good to see someone else who was committed to resisting evil, should it unexpectedly come our way.

It felt good to not be treated like a pariah for carrying and believing in self-defense.

It felt good to hear my wife get solid legal advice from a professional, advice which mirrored my own but has more credibility with her since it came from him.

It felt good to freely talk with someone who actively supports gun rights, and who exercises those rights daily.

It felt good to be around another legally-armed citizen who is one of the good guys.

It felt good for someone to appreciate the fact that I was armed, and fully support that right. That's the way it ought to be, all the time, and everywhere.

Strangely enough, during the entire meeting, no shots were fired, and no one was injured. :rolleyes:

It felt really good being armed as we walked back to the vehicle, and then tried to find our way out of that road-construction cesspool that is sometimes referred to as downtown St. Louis.

Sometimes life is good. :yup:




(Except for the traffic. :thumbsdown:)
 
See less See more
#3 ·
nice, does he pratice in WA also?
 
#4 ·
Wait til you get his bill that will be the deciding factor LOL,I really think more people that never thought of being armed in the past are realising the world isn't the same as it was 20 or 30 years ago.
 
#20 ·
I'm sure there are a lot of lawyers with a judge or two in their back pocket.

Grady, glad you found a lawyer you are comfortable with. At least you know that he practices personal defense himself and not just blowing smoke to make a buck.
 
#7 ·
Actually a Taurus Judge would probably be a pretty good "office gun!" :hand10:
 
#13 ·
Grady:

So, is he competent in the area of self-defense and the use of deadly force?

Does he have a strong track record of defending and winning self-defense cases involving the use of deadly force?

How did you go about vetting this attorney?

How did you ensure his qualifications met your approval?

I would like to hear about some of your thinking and your steps, in these areas.
 
#15 ·
Anyone every notice, when you go to a court house, lawyers don't go through the metal detectors? :confused: at least around here they don't.

My old lawyer use to carry a little 32 auto all the time? weird!!

Glad you found a decent lawyer:congrats:
 
#17 ·
I have a friend who is an assistant DA (prosecuter).

She decided she wanted a carry permit. three days later she had it in her hand. The .gov KNOWS she is a target and the local guys have strongly suggested she carry 24/7. Thankfully, now she does.

The rules are slightly different for them. But considering she averages 3 credible death threats a month...
 
#18 ·
I also visited my "go to" lawyer for the first time last month. We talked for about an hour --- no charge. He led the charge in the state legislature to allow concealed-carry in the state of Kansas a few years ago, and has the first permit issued by the state.

Having a lawyer on hand is a must ... having one who is knowledgeable about criminal law, 2nd Amendment rights, and self-defense issues is paramount.

-Seawolf
 
#21 ·
Grady...I can really appreciate your description of downtown StL. Consider the violent crimes which have occurred there in the past year. Recent examples include drive by at Market and 18th, robbery/murder at Maggie O's, murder at 20th and Olive, etc., etc.

Great news about the attorney...best of luck!
 
#27 ·
Recent examples include drive by at Market and 18th
Oh crap, I forgot about that, and I had even posted a thread about it: http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbull...pulls-up-beside-them-shots-fired-3-3-drt.html
Yes, we were at 18th and Market, several times as we looked for the office, a place to eat, and how to get out of the cesspool once we were done.

Recent examples include drive by at Market and 18th, robbery/murder at Maggie O's
I thought the name sounded familiar, but I figured some radio personality I listen to had been advertising for them. Turns out I posted a thread on that murder also: http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbull...ed-one-robber-shoots-kills-second-robber.html

I called it a bar, but it's an Irish pub (bar) on one side, and a small restaurant on the other, located just a stone's throw from the courthouse and the war memorial.

The wife and I got downtown an hour early, found the lawyer's office, and then looked in the local area for some place to eat. There was only one place nearby: Maggie O'Brien's. I did not make the connection to the months-old new's story.

This is a good example of crime being possible anywhere. Granted, the crime mentioned was late at night, but this pub was right on a major street, close to the court house and downtown post office, lots of well-dressed office workers around and eating inside. It's not a scummy place at all.

Now I don't feel so paranoid about my actions in a "nice" place: I sat with my back close to a wall, had a full view of the door, had the side exit door located, .45 in my SmartCarry, .357 in a pocket holster, and my Spitfire on my keychain on the table as we ate, and in my hand as we walked to and from the vehicle.

Note: the Irish taters were really good!

Recent examples include drive by at Market and 18th, robbery/murder at Maggie O's, murder at 20th and Olive
Same area, we were on 20th and Olive. I don't recall that murder.

MJK, sounds like you know that area pretty well.




Grady, thanks for the reminder:hand10:...I've got to get in to see a local lawyer.
Certainly sounds like you found a sensible one.
What else did he have to say...I'm curious, and why does he want an office in the middle of a 'fight zone'?
Actually, he's at the edge. As I mentioned, sometimes the demarcation point from "great city area with new buildings" to "crappy area" is almost immediate.

This is the reason for the location: the office is about 3 minutes from the downtown courthouse, so they have good access. As was noted in the crimes above, even if his office was next to the courthouse, it couldn't be considered safe since the criminals can and do travel. Certainly the danger is heightened, but that applies to all of downtown St. Louis IMO. (All 3 of the crimes mentioned above were between his office and the downtown courthouse, in what appeared to be a reasonably good area.)

What else did he have to say...I'm curious
Ah, the meat of the matter...

While most of the meeting was about financial and asset protection (of which representation in any shooting can certainly be considered as part of asset protection), the limited discussions related to a possible shooting were:

Make no statements to the police other than you wish to speak to your lawyer. I did question him about making a minimal statement of what happened first, but this was his reply:
  1. The police will be speaking to any other witnesses, if any, so they may get the general story anyway. If the witnesses are lying, you can address that in court.
  2. Anything you say will be used against you. He told of one client who made a brief statement and then requested a lawyer. The police either misinterpreted it, misunderstood it, or wrote it down wrong, but the brief statement as read in court was opposite as to what she said at the time. That added great complications.
  3. There may be a presumption of guilt by keeping quiet. Doesn't matter. Keeping quiet at the time is best. If you have to say anything, you can say "I feared for my life." That's the most you should say, but saying nothing is better. Oh yeh, he also said it would be reasonable to say you are traumatized (because you would be), so you would rather speak to your lawyer before making any statements.
  4. You may spend some time in jail until your lawyer gets there. Expect it.
  5. The job of the police is to use your words against you. Don't give them the opportunity.
  6. He told my wife to not speak also, and warned her the police will likely try to pressure her to talk. He said they may threaten her. He offered to role-play with her to give her an example of what pressure the police would use. He said the police can and will lie to get her to talk, or stretch the truth. He told her a spouse cannot be compelled to testify against a spouse (this is true in MO, not sure about other states).
  7. During the discussion I was speaking and mentioned "once I stop the threat". He interrupted and said, "That's right. You try to stop the threat, not to kill."
  8. He mentioned in the aftermath that being a responsible gun owner would separate me from a rambo. A couple examples he used were to have taught my family the basic gun safety rules, and have all my weapons locked up at home (or on me), rather than laying around accessible to anyone in the home.
After the meeting, I thought of a few more questions to ask. My fault for not having them written down, but I'll be seeing them again.



Grady:

So, is he competent in the area of self-defense and the use of deadly force?

Does he have a strong track record of defending and winning self-defense cases involving the use of deadly force?

How did you go about vetting this attorney?

How did you ensure his qualifications met your approval?

I would like to hear about some of your thinking and your steps, in these areas.
Ah, you ask good questions, but hard ones. Not all my answers will be good, but here goes...

Originally, I read many self-defense/court articles written by Kevin L. Jamison, a pre-eminent self-defense lawyer from KC who has written extensively on such matters. He also writes periodically for USCCA magazine. He was also listed on DC's lawyer reference list, at the time the only MO lawyer on the list.

So I emailed him, explained my situation, and asked if he would represent me or could recommend a lawyer closer (he's 200 miles away). He emailed me the contact info of a lawyer in St. Louis he recommended. So I emailed her and waited. And waited. And waited.

Meanwhile, I was voraciously reading magazines, books, forums, etc., sometimes 50+ hours a week. So here's where my story takes a questionable turn. I ran across some writings of a lawyer from St. Louis, and he sounded reasonable. I contacted him and asked if he knew a self-defense lawyer. He stated his firm represents people in such situations, and he would be willing to meet with me.

Now, I know what some are thinking, that you can't trust what people say on the internet, and that is no way to vet someone. Absolutely true. I couldn't disagree one bit. But since I couldn't even get the other lawyer to return my email, I thought I'd listen to what he had to say.

So we've corresponded on email, and finally met yesterday for about 3 hours. I do not know his record of wins/losses, etc., in other court cases. Nor do I know how to vet him. That is certainly a negative.

I can only base my judgment on what I have observed from meeting with him and the firm's senior partner. Here are the favorable points:
  • The senior lawyer has been a lawyer for 40 years. He seemed very knowledgable on the law and its nuances.
  • The younger lawyer is the one who specializes in representation for self-defense issues, and he also seems knowledgable on the issues.
  • They work in the very heart of the St. Louis legal system, and they are not fly-by-night lawyers.
  • While I was talking to the younger lawyer, he produces some business cards and writes his personal cell phone number down, with instructions to call any time if needed. Emergencies only, of course, not if I get drunk and want to ask a dumb legal question at 3 a.m. :smile:

Will that be enough? Can they do the job? Are they competent in a courtroom? I don't know.

But what I do know is I now have a legal point of contact who will get out of bed, if necessary, and come represent me if I am involved in and/or arrested for any major issues.

I believe they are a reputable law firm who will stand behind me if needed.

Their prices for all other asset protection issues are not cheap, but are not exorbitant, not that price would matter much if I need self-defense representation.

So to answer your questions, no I have not vetted them. I'm not even sure how I would do that. In some sense, I am flying blind in giving my trust to them, but I am certainly much less blind than I was a week ago. I believe calling this firm is surely better than looking through the yellow pages while sitting in jail, or calling my wife or a friend in the middle of the night, from jail, and requesting they find me a lawyer.

I have no other connection to the legal system, no old friends who are well-established lawyers, no friend of a friend who knows a lawyer, no past representation that I could depend upon. I'm just an average joe, trying to get through life, not guided by convenient family connections or favored by fate. Just doing what I can.

Based on my initial impressions of the law firm, their conduct, their guidance and answers, I am moderately confident with their representation. Not fully confident, but moderately confident. At this point, I think, that is all I can hope for.

My actions are not what I would recommend for others, that is, finding a lawyer from the internet. If I were to advise someone in my shoes, I would advise them to recontact Mr. Jamison and ask for another reference. I would have done that had I not encountered the other lawyer at about the same time.

Getting a reference from a known good lawyer is probably the best. Time will tell whether I made a good choice or not, maybe so, maybe not.

But that's my story. Hopefully someone can learn from my mistakes and make a better stab in the dark, for that is what it feels like searching for a lawyer when I don't know anyone.

Time may tell whether they can do the job or not, but I believe I am in better shape now than without representation.

I would not advise doing what I did, but I had to do something other than sit on my lazy, procrastinating ass and do nothing.

You ask tough questions, ccw9mm, good questions but tough ones. Some of my answers suck, but there they are.
 
#23 ·
Grady, thanks for the reminder:hand10:...I've got to get in to see a local lawyer.
Certainly sounds like you found a sensible one.
What else did he have to say...I'm curious, and why does he want an office in the middle of a 'fight zone'?
 
#33 ·
Thanks, grady, for the great thread. I believe the NRA offers self-defense criminal case legal fee insurance. The hardest part is choosing your attorney and not putting it off anymore.

Donna Tella Nawbodie-Nuttin
of Dewey Cheatham & Howe
 
#34 ·
Very good thread. St Louis native here.
 
#35 ·
I practice law in a suburb of Nashville. I carry every day, openly in my office. I've had a number of experiences similar to Grady's, just on the other side of the desk. Lots of clients laugh about it, saying things like, "I want a bulldog, now I've got a bulldog with a gun!" I have a self-defense jury trial this week. I'll be looking for "true believers" to put on the jury. Any volunteers?
 
#36 ·
It's a real treat to see others engaged in the same struggle to preserve liberty. It's like being on the outside and looking in ... seeing yourself ... of maybe seeing what the country is supposed to be like. There are few left but not many. +1 for your attorney.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top