"No Attorney For Thomas Endicott," that's the title of this Corning Observer article.
Let's see if I got this straight. First, the EDCA court detained Endicott without bail, a 71-year old man with no criminal record who had been out on bail for two years without incident, see my earlier post Can't Convict in State Court, Give Federal Court A Try. Now, Endicott has been denied an attorney in federal court, the first time I can remember that a court here has denied the Federal Defender's request that they be appointed subject to the defendant being ordered to reimburse the CJA fund for attorney fees because the defendant has resources but can't retain counsel.
What's really up here? Sure, Endicott reportedly has some property, but it's not that easy to retain counsel when the property's encumbered by liens and many defense attorneys insist on receiving funds up front. Next, throw in the fact that many defense attorneys are reluctant to take a case which involves the types of sex crimes charged against Endicott or don't have experience in federal court. Then, toss in the mix that an attorney would probably need to work almost full time on Endicott's case alone to get up to speed to prepare for his multi-count, sex offense trial in early October. And it's not surprising there aren't many attorneys that wouldbe willing, able, and available to accept representation of Endicott in federal court. So now 71-year-old Endicott is forced to go it alone while in custody at the Sacramento jail--even though the charges he faces are apparently practically the same as those that resulted in a state court jury finding him not guilty on 14 counts and hanging on the rest--with the assistance of counsel. Something's wrong with this picture.