Doing The Right Thing

Last week I had the opportunity to try the case in Lafayette County, Missouri. Lexington is the county seat.

I had not been to Lexington, Missouri for quite a few years. The last time I was there I was representing the brother of my current client.

My client’s family is a family that is not held in the highest repute by the Lafayette County’s prosecuting attorney’s office. Frequently in rural counties there are families who just draw negative attention from law enforcement. This is one of those families.

My client was charged with two counts of Financial Exploitation of the Elderly and one count of Financial Exploitation of the Disabled. Of course, that sounds just horrible. How could anybody do that? Well, the jury decided that he didn’t. He was found not guilty on all three counts.

I don’t think the prosecuting attorney ever understood what her case was about. My client was part of a work crew. The man who ran the work crew was the salesman. They would take their equipment and travel the rural roads offering to do a chip and seal finish on driveways.

On these three occasions they went to the “alleged victims” homes. The man running the workgroup would talk to the homeowner. He would offer to chip and seal the driveway. They would negotiate a price. Before one penny was paid they would complete the work. After the work was completed the home owner was allowed to review and inspect the work. Only if he or she was satisfied with the job would the money be paid. In each case that is what happened.

In each of these cases the homeowners then got buyer’s remorse. Within a few days of paying the money the homeowners decided they did not like the job. What did they do? Well the first thing they did was call the man who sold him the job. He had given the homeowners his actual name, business card and telephone number. He had told them that if they did not like the job or had any complaints he would come back and make it right.

Apparently he did not get back to these particular homeowners as quickly as they would like. In one case a full 24 hours had not passed before the homeowners called the police. The police came out and started an investigation. Because my client works on driveway paving projects they were led to him.

Not one of the homeowners claimed that my client had any conversations with them about price or quality of the job. There is no question he was there. One of the “alleged victims” even if said that he was a hard worker. He ran a bobcat, spread oil on the driveway, help lay and tamp the chat that went on top of the oil seemed to know what he was doing. One of the homeowners did say that she had a direct conversation with him. When the work was done, he came to the door and asked if he could have a soda. She gave him a soda and he replied, “Thank you.” That was the extent of the conversation.

Because of his family’s reputation in the community he was charged. You should understand that the statutory definition of “elderly” is a person over the age of 60. That’s it! If you are over the age of 60 the state legislature feels that you are so incompetent that you are entitled to special treatment. A disabled person is defined as follows: "Disabled person", a person with a mental, physical, or developmental disability that substantially impairs the person's ability to provide adequately for the person's care or protection. You can read the entire statute at http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5700000145.HTM

The particular person that they were claiming is disabled was a 57-year-old lady with a mild form of muscular dystrophy. She had a drivers license, bank account, was able to drive, able to cook, able to take care of herself and able to take care of her husband. The State would have preferred that she was over 60 because they looked absolutely ridiculous trying to show that her condition “substantially” impaired her ability to provide adequately for her care or protection.

I can’t close this article without commenting favorably upon the judge in the case. It was refreshing to have a judge who actually listens to the arguments made by defense counsel. I thought we were treated very fairly during the trial. I did not agree with every ruling made by the judge. However, I don’t expect that to ever happen.

The trial lasted about a day and a half. The jury was out about 2 1/2 hours. They found my client not guilty on all three counts. Interestingly enough, there is another almost identical charge pending against my client that the prosecutor filed before this case went to trial.

Depositions in that case are scheduled this week. I can’t wait to attend!