You tell em, Sparky! You keep telling em.

And we wonder why liberal has become a dirty word in this country.

I think not. I do not say this because I have been at the bad end of a gun. Rather, I am thinking of another bank robber, a gambling addict who was trying to pay gambling debts. He was the son of a minister, a cellist, and president of his college class. I recall reading an article about the trial in which a teller whom he robbed testified as to her ordeal. The experience had affected her very much.

Most criminals are not able to compensate their victims after they get out; they do not have the money. But you can do so–if not now, certainly at some point in the future. Yet you seem to think that you acted in a vacuum. That is my problem with your story.

What you should know is that I carry an incredible amount of remorse. And one day I am sure God will hold me accountable. But my accountability for my crimes ended with my jail sentence. As the saying goes…”I did my time.”

Also, I plan to assist other prisoners and the needy through the appellate process if I one day become an attorney. I both want to do that and consider it part of my responsibility.

I hope that people would be positive and inspired by my story, not hateful. But as one commenter stated…”life is not fair.” I don’t expect unanimous approval.

Thank you to those who posted with reason and logic. You are all wise beyond your years.

It is simply called accountability for one’s actions and not putting someone on a pedestal who doesn’t deserve to be there.

Being held accountable… you mean like being put in prison? I don’t see why you keep failing to grasp this concept. Maybe you’re saying that Hopwood should be socially stigmatized for the rest of his life. Okay, then. You can condemn and judge all you want then but I would hardly call that holding someone accountable.

As for putting people on a pedestal, I can see why some people don’t like the idea of this article being written at all, but I think that says more about society sentimentalizing criminals like Jesse James and Bonnie and Clyde rather than saying anything about Hopwood.

He also educated himself on the taxpayer’s dollar to get the knowledge he has.

Yes, he did. Would you rather he got out and was put on welfare at taxpayer expense instead?

Everyone deserves a second chance in life, but I see Hopwood as a loser who is selfish and takes advantage of others to get what it is he wants at their expense.

I agree that he was a selfish loser when he was robbing banks. Where is your evidence that he is one now? The second part of your sentence doesn’t really match up with the first part about giving people second chances.

Look, I’m not defending Hopwood because I think he’s a saint but because I find the attitude that rehabilitation is an insult to the victims and is something to be condemned instead of praised to be a puzzling one. I can admire someone for reforming and trying to help others while also thinking he was an utter jackass 10 years ago. But he has paid his debt to society and ragging on him now is unseemly.

You’re just mad because you think he’s scum who had the audacity to not remain scum. Why should he prosper when good, better people suffer? I get all that. I just don’t think that’s a healthy attitude to have.

VincentN: Nobody was hurt in the bank robberies according to the article. I’m sure some people were really scared but it’d be sad if after 10 years they read this article and their first reaction is to be upset that Hopwood didn’t get lethal injection or isn’t living in a cardboard box somewhere.

It is nice, of course, that he seems to have reformed and become a productive member of society, but you should not understate the harm that he did. Perhaps nobody was hurt physically, but if you have ever had a gun pointed at you, as I have, it has an impact on how you lead your life that just does not go away. I think that Shon owes his victims compensation for the mental damage that he caused.

When you ignore his victims, you sentimentalize his story.

Commit a crime and be rewarded.

Who exactly has ‘rewarded’ him? Sounds like he gained his legal knowledge through his wits and effort. Or are you just against the idea of criminals making something of themselves once they get out of jail? Maybe you think that because he was a ‘bad’ person he should be living a miserable life for the rest of his life. Maybe you think it sucks that law-abiding citizens don’t get such nice outcomes.

One, life isn’t fair. Take it up with God if you have a complaint. Two, I’d rather have a former felon become a productive member of society and be an example to other felons instead of having him fall back into criminal ways.

How do the victims feel about this “compelling story”?

Nobody was hurt in the bank robberies according to the article. I’m sure some people were really scared but it’d be sad if after 10 years they read this article and their first reaction is to be upset that Hopwood didn’t get lethal injection or isn’t living in a cardboard box somewhere.

He’s a felon. Does that matter?
How do the victims feel about this “compelling story”?

Cajun Girl 61: I am in disbelief after reading this article.Here I am, an attractive, well-educated, law-abiding citizen, never get in trouble, and I work hard every day barely making ends meet.Here’s Shon Hopwood — robs banks, gets in prison for ten years, finds someone to marry not long after getting out and has a baby, and his buddy Fellers who he helped in prison gives him a Mercedes when he gets out.WHAT?Am I missing something, folks?How the hell did his buddy Fellers get the money to buy a car dealership to begin with?He just came out of prison.People like me who haven’t been in prison can’t even buy a car dealership much less get a Mercedes.What’s wrong with this picture?Seems like maybe the moral to this story is “Crime Pays.”

The article didnt give many details but so what. No one is asking why you are so jealous. Hopwood did his time and made a better track in life. He made a good impression on people who want to return the favor. This guy is making a difference for more people than a good deal of lawyers do. Thats got be worth something.

I don’t see Hopwood as sacrificing anything.

Uh… you do realize what a 10 year prison sentence means, right?

The people who sacrificed were the banks he and others robbed who took huge losses.

The banks were most likely covered by their insurance. It was definitely wrong for them to be robbed but the idea that they suffered some horrible loss is absurd.

The world doesn’t owe anybody anything

We agree on that. What are you whining about again then?

There’s more to Fellers as to how he acquired that than meets the eye.

Maybe. Maybe not. Since we don’t know any of the circumstances, it sounds like you’re the one engaging in speculation. Is it really so shocking that criminals who serve their sentences and get out of jail can get better paying jobs than janitors or busboys?

I have a related problem with this allegedly heart-warming story. What do the people whom Shon threatened think of all this? Did he ever compensate them for his crimes against them? It is nice that he may have turned his life around, but what about them?

Instead, I was simply trying to make the point that there are all sorts of people in desperate need of legal assistance who cannot afford a lawyer, and it seems odd to me to allow prisoners access to non-licensed legal help but not those other people. Also tacit (but apparently too tacit) in my post was a general sense of outrage towards a system that turns a blind eye to the very real likelihood that the interests primarily served by lawyer-licensing laws are those of licensed lawyers.

Personally, I’m thrilled that Mr. Hopwood’s fellow inmates had access to such a wonderful resource, but I am somewhat dismayed by the idea that one must be incarcerated in order to enjoy an unfettered right of access to counsel.

Are you as outraged by people who committed crimes but were not caught, or were caught yet were released by law enforcement officials because of connections?

Are you as outraged by people who inherit their lives, and never earn an honest cent yet enjoy luxury, direct assets and influence society?

I see little cause to begrudge people who reform, who sacrifice for others and for the cause of American justice, who find a mate and mate.

I also suspect you are seeing more reason for outrage than exists. It was a twenty-year-old Mercedes, likely worth less than a three-year-old Hyundai. Developing a used car dealership over a period of several years does not strike me as remarkable. I am confident that if you are an attractive, well-educated, law-abiding citizen, you could own and operate a used car lot within two or three years by devoting your attention to that goal.

Finally, many people are imprisoned for drug offenses. Which means they did little or nothing different from those who drank beer or sold wine (including most sacramental wine) during Prohibition, or had anal or oral sex in defiance of Bowers v. Hardwick, or possessed contraceptives before Griswold. I don’t know what Fellers did, but if it was a drug offense, I’m not surprised he has been more successful than many of his “law-abiding” fellow citizens, because in my view a drug conviction says more about the nanny-state prudes who like those laws than it does about anyone who violated them.

Good luck finding whatever you are looking for, Cajun Girl.

neurodoc: I might have thought that Liptak would have devoted a little space to tell us what Hopwood was up to before he undertook to rob banks. For example, how far did he go in school and how well had he done? How did he get into bank robbing? What books in the law library did he use to educate himself? And who’s working on the movie script?

Shon, can you address these matters?

This would certainly explain the high regard in which the legal profession is held in this country.

Shon, congratulations. Good luck, although keep in mind your former partners in crime may have had a clearer moral compass than some of your current ones.

debauched_sloth: licensing lawyers probably provides few if any social benefits while imposing massive costs

I’m not so sure about that. I’ve seen some huge messes made by self-represented parties. A minimum level of competency probably reduces those sorts of messes. Whether it’s a net benefit is a trickier question for another day.

When asked why he studied law, Ben used to say: “They threw the book at me. I picked it up and read it.”

Here is more about Ben:
http://www.fdsdi.com/ben_rayborn.html

The law library changed Mr. Hopwood’s life.

AALL really should invite Mr. Hopwood to speak at Denver for its annual meeting in July.

Maybe the federal prisons are different, but from what I know, it’s very unlikely that there are much hand-on helps after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lewis v. Casey. Far too often, we are not humble enough to accept it’s library users’ intelligence, diligence and access to our collections that makes the difference, not our hand-on assistance.

My assisting other inmates in prison does not fall under the unauthorized practice of law for a couple of reasons. First, the Supreme Court has said that prisons must allow prisoners the assistance of their fellow prisoners, unless they provide an alternative (i.e., paralegal or attorney to write their habeas motions). Second, I received no payment for my assistance. The Mercedes was a gift, received almost 7 years after I wrote the cert petition. Third, the federal prisons have somewhat condoned jailhouse lawyers and so have federal courts. I once filed a motion to act as counsel for a friend of mine filing a civil rights complaint over the lack of medical care he was receiving. While the district court would not allow it as a matter of discretion, he did recognize that other courts have allowed other prisoners to act as something close to standby counsel. And finally, very few attorneys will accept representation for a cert petition. Usually, after the direct appeal is finished, the appointed attorney drops the case, even when there are cert worthy issues. I have filed around 15 cert petitions where the appointed counsel basically abandoned the client.

Love everyone’s responses here. Much more intelligent than say “Above the Law.” Thank you.

The real problem is that some courts don’t take “pro se” criminal cases seriously enough. I once jumped in on an appeal of a case a defendant had filed pro se. He had initially filed the wrong action, and the state supreme court denied relief solely on that basis. In denying relief, the state supreme court also shot down two of the State’s arguments.

The defendant then filed the precise type of action the state supreme court said he should file. His complaint was a little inartful, but it said absolutely everything it needed to say, and it was absolutely correct. The state’s lawyer filed a motion to dismiss making precisely the two arguments that the supreme court said were wrong. The trial judge granted the motion to dismiss citing those two arguments. On appeal, it was an easy win for me, but it should never have gotten that far. The trial court just wouldn’t take a valid argument seriously when it came from a pro se criminal defendant.

As a physician I do have a general interest in keeping the professions closed, but it seems that the concern here is more about the letter of the law and not the spirit. If you had to hire this guy or Orly Taitz (who did go to law school and passed the CA bar) who would you hire?

debauched_sloth: I wonder whether he will he get a free pass despite having pretty clearly engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by preparing cert petitions for fellow prisoners.

As George stated above I think they’ll just be asking for a 1st amendment challenge if they go after him. It would be tough to go after the entire system of requiring lawyers to be licensed since the state definitely has an interest in making sure certain professions, such as doctors, meet certain standards and are recognized as meeting those standards but I think he can argue that the law is clearly too restrictive in this case.