Sneak Preview of Most Highly Anticipated True Crime Novel of 2007

Everyone who had the pleasure of watching him in the courtroom knew that Kevin Flynn was an outstanding trial lawyer. In fact, he quickly rose to be chief of the homicide section in the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office and had an amazing string of convictions that led to him being named that office's top trial lawyer. I knew that Kevin was also an outstanding writer but he will now have something other than Editor-in-Chief of the Bishop Ireton High School "BI Word" at the top of his writing resume! The entire world is about to see Kevin's amazing debut which has already become the most highly anticipated true crime novel of the year.

My good friend, Kevin Flynn has written a true crime novel to be released March 1, 2007,by the major publishing company G.P.Putnam's Sons. His book is already getting rave reviews from the big shots of this genre Jonathan Harr (author of “A Civil Action” -movie starred John Travolta and Robert Duvall) , George Pelecanos (best-selling crime novelist and writer/producer of HBO’s “The Wire”) and Ronald Kessler (prolific writer with books about the FBI, CIA, Joseph Kennedy, the Bush administration, etc.), to name a few.

Book Description

If One L is the book to read before law school, Relentless Pursuit is the book to read after- a real-life legal thriller that shows, from the inside, a prosecutor's quest to deliver justice to a family devastated by murder.

What happened to Diane Hawkins and her daughter Katrina- a brutal double murder in which the girl's heart was cut from her body- devastated a Washington, D.C., community and left its mark on everyone involved in the subsequent investigation. Especially moved was federal homicide prosecutor Kevin Flynn. He had handled any number of grisly murders, and was no stranger to the depravity of the human soul. Yet the way Hawkins's family and friends rallied together to help each other through the tragedy- and the generosity they extended to Flynn, whose own father was dying of cancer at the time- turned this case into a personal mission. He was determined to use his position to effect real closure, to right a wrong- to bring justice on behalf of the victims and their families.

Relentless Pursuit is the story of that journey to justice, an intensely gripping beat-by-beat reconstruction of the events as they unfold-the murder, the arrest, the trial, the verdict-told with astonishing candor, and providing a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the life of a dedicated prosecutor. Above all, it's about healing and community, a story in which, in the end, the system works and justice prevails.

About the Author
Kevin Flynn has been a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office since 1987 and recently served as chief homicide prosecutor. More importantly, he is godfather to Conor Battle and father of Bob Battle's godson, Connor Flynn.

Because of my obvious inside connections, I was able to obtain a pre-release copy of this riveting thriller (feel free to use that quote, Kev!) and was able to work out a deal to offer the book for sale at a discount for all pre-release purchases at Amazon.com.

Pre-Order Today (Release Date 3/1/07)

Former University of Virginia Football Coach George Welsh Charged with DUI in Virgina

Former University of Virginia football coach George Welsh faces a charge of driving under the influence (DUI) in Albemarle County Virginia.

Welsh's first appearance in Albemarle County General District Court is scheduled for tomorrow morning.

The news reports stated that Welsh, age 73, failed a field sobriety test and that he also was charged with Refusal to take a breath test. Expect the prosecution to have a very difficult time proving their case if Welsh was only given one field test. For example, if the test Welsh failed, was the field alcosensor, this result is not admissible at trial. If he failed the walk-and-turn or the one-leg stand, the instructions for these tests say that they should not be given if the accused is 50 or more pounds overweight, suffers from a disablility, or is over age 60. Thus, an experienced defense attorney who is aware of the insructions, will be able to keep the results of these tests out of evidence.

Just today, Bob Battle obtained an acquittal on a DUI in Arlington, Virginia, for a client who was more than 50 pounds overweight and was still asked by the officer to try the one-leg stand and heel-to-toe tests. This is another great example of 1 of the 8 secrets Bob Battle Reveals in his article, "Ex-Prosecutor Bob Battle Reveals: 8 Secrets Your Prosecutor Doesn’t Want You To Know About Your Virginia DUI"- The police officer did not follow proper procedures for the field sobriety tests.

Perhaps Welsh will offer a novel defense at trial- he has to drink heavily to try to forget that the coach who replaced him, Al Groh, is making millions to field a team that is not even bowl eligible!


For more about George Welsh's case, click here.

Media Coverage of Richmond New Year's Eve Drunken Driving Tragedy

On New Year's Eve in Richmond Virginia, a 16-year-old girl, who had been drinking, was involved in an accident and killed another motorist; the cruel irony is that the deceased was a popular bartender known to be vigilant about not letting his customers drive home drunk.
Richmond Times-Dispatch columnist Ray McAllister has written two columns on the deadly incident.
"Deaths from drunken driving preventable"
and "Snapshot: Underage Drinking in Virginia"

Kansas City Chiefs Defensive End Sentenced to Jail for DUI

Kansas City Chiefs defensive end, Jared Allen, will spend 48 hours in jail after a municipal judge revoked an agreement for Allen to participate in a DUI diversion program and found him guilty of DUI. Allen was stopped for DUI in Overland Park Kansas in May 2006. He was granted diversion in July, but was arrested for DUI, again, in September. Because he violated the terms of the program, the judge revoked his diversion agreement. Allen pled to DUI and the judge sentenced him to 48 hours in jail, a $500 fine, and a 90 day suspended sentence.

Allen must still face a judge in February for the September DUI arrest.

The Chiefs' season ended yesterday with a playoff loss to the Indianapolis Colts.

Erosion of Rights for DUI Defendants is Dangerous Precedent for American Judicial System

In his outstanding DUI Blog, California DUI lawyer Lawrence Taylor describes the danger of the continued erosion of rights for DUI defendants with respect to the overall American criminal justice system.

"A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has been consistent in depriving the accused in DUI cases their constitutional rights.

So...we have seen a steady flow of appellate decisions at all levels taking away the constitutional rights of those accused of DUI. Again, so what?

Again, precedent: What happens today to a citizen accused of DUI can happen tommorrow to a person accused of any other offense. If police can set up roadblocks to check everyone for intoxication, they can set them up to search for drugs (which, incidentally, has already happened). If a citizen accused of DUI has no right to a jury of his peers, then the precedent exists to deny the right to citizens accused of any other crime."

To read Taylor's entire post, click here.

"Merry Christmas! You're Under Arrest!" A History Of Sobriety Checkpoints

The holiday season brings with it times with friends and family, beautiful decorations, well cooked meals with loved ones, and the joy of giving gifts to those that you love.

It’s also the season of quasi-constitutional things like roadblocks.

You’ve seen the commercials and heard the warnings on the radio, and perhaps you have even been stopped and been made to blow into a breathalyzer, or made to do that strange ballet where you have to close your eyes, stand on one leg, and throw your head back, which is practically impossible to do even if you haven’t been drinking.

As you are being made to breathe into a tube or play hopscotch on the side of the road, a few questions might occur to you, the first one being “Is this even legal? Isn’t there something in the Constitution about probable cause or search and seizure or something?”

The answer is yes.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

That is from the Fourth Amendment, and this is the sort of thing that keeps the police from entering your house for no apparent reason and rooting through your belongings. The police CAN in fact enter your house and root through your belongings, but they have to go to a judge and present a lot of good and solid legal reasons as to why they want to.

You would assume that the Fourth Amendment would apply to people’s cars, and you would be right. The police cannot legally search a car for no reason in a parking lot, unless there is something called “probable cause.” For instance, if the police see a car in a parking lot with a marijuana leaf painted on the hood, and the license plate reads “DRUGDEALR,” and there is funny smelling smoke coming out of the windows, that is a fine example of probable cause. But if the car is a minivan with nothing strange about it, the police cannot search it just because they feel like it.

So how on earth are DUI checkpoints legal, where they can stop every car that comes down the road? Or every second or third car? How did they manage to hang an asterisk on the fourth amendment? Why are you freezing on the side of the road, or, even worse, why is your life being ruined because of the two glasses of wine that you had with your Christmas Dinner?

Michigan Checkpoints

In 1986, the Michigan State Police announced that they were going to start placing well publicized and well staffed sobriety checkpoints on some roads that had experienced high levels of drunk driving accidents. Before the checkpoints were even put into action, a Michigan citizen named Rick Sitz filed suit to stop it. It should be mentioned that Rick Sitz did not do this because he enjoyed drinking and driving, but because he quite rightly thought that stopping everyone at random to see who had been naughty or nice was a gross violation of privacy and fourth amendment rights.

The lower courts of Michigan agreed with Mr. Sitz, but the case was appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz was heard in 1990. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the roadblocks did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court noted that "no one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or the States' interest in eradicating it." The Court then found that "the weight bearing on the other scale--the measure of the intrusion on motorists stopped briefly at sobriety checkpoints--is slight." Perhaps the justices had been chauffered around DC for so long that they forgot what it was like to be arbitrarily pulled over and told to blow in a tube. The Court also found that empirical evidence supported the effectiveness of the program.

What was the empirical evidence that supported it? According to the brief:

The first - and to date the only - sobriety checkpoint operated under the program was conducted in Saginaw County with the assistance of the Saginaw County Sheriff's Department. During the 75-minute duration of the checkpoint's operation, 126 vehicles passed through the checkpoint. The average delay for each vehicle was approximately 25 seconds. Two drivers were detained for field sobriety testing, and one of the two was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. A third driver who drove through without stopping was pulled over by an officer in an observation vehicle and arrested for driving under the influence.

Out of 126 vehicles, they got two guys. One made it obvious by trying to run the stop, and the other was given the field sobriety test, which is, as mentioned before, difficult to complete even when you are sober. While groups like MADD make it seem like you can’t go out to get the newspaper without coming across a highway full of drunken drivers, the numbers simply don’t back up this supposed need for draconian measures like roadblocks.

The dissenting opinions, led by Justice Brennan, stated that "the findings of the trial court, based on an extensive record and affirmed by the Michigan Court of Appeals, indicate that the net effect of sobriety checkpoints on traffic safety is infinitesimal and possibly negative." So aside from not really working, they also violate our fourth amendment rights. As stated by Justice Brennan: "That stopping every car might make it easier to prevent drunken driving ... is an insufficient justification for abandoning the requirement of individualized suspicion.”

As constitutionally correct as Justice Brennan was, he was still in the dissenting opinion, so on a federal level, sobriety checkpoints are okay. But there are still states that view sobriety checkpoints as unconstitutional. Unfortunately, Virginia isn’t one of them.

I’m at a checkpoint. Now what?

As with any routine stop, you are required to provide identifying information such as your name, address, driver's license, and registration. By law, you do not have to say anything. But what you should do is say as little as possible. Anything you say could potentially be used against you. Admitting to drinking or consuming drugs (even in small amounts: “I just had one!”) can be construed as admitting guilt.

And always remember, don’t give up. A DUI conviction can absolutely ruin your life.
It costs you time, money, and freedom. A skilled attorney could get the charges reduced, or even get the charges thrown out.

If you or a loved one is facing a DUI charge, contact Bob Battle for a free legal consultation today.