This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
  • piene2 Dec 6, 9:20 a.m.

    "If you read the post you will learn that he "charged extra" for special services. He did it for the money. John Edwards should be back at work and take over the lucrative practice.
    superman"

    So you are saying that he was in practice to make money right? Well guess what, that is why everyone works. I for one worked hard, very hard because I knew I did not want to retire when I was too old to do everything I wanted to do. I left my engineering firm at forty and since than have spent my time tinkering with businesses that interested me and having major good times. Had i waited till I was sixty two, who could have known what my health or general conditions would be like.

  • ashe323 Dec 5, 7:12 p.m.

    @reddherring07 and just what qualifications do you have to be such an authority on this?

  • superman Dec 5, 5:08 p.m.

    If you read the post you will learn that he "charged extra" for special services. He did it for the money. John Edwards should be back at work and take over the lucrative practice.

  • jackcdneh1017 Dec 5, 2:22 p.m.

    @sinenomine. I do apologize if I offended your sensibilities by stating that a belief in the legal system in the USA of the state having to " prove your guilt" is naive. I certainly don't question your experience and knowledge of the system you are so proud of. But your faith in it is what troubles me. Calling it a "justice" system is the first mistake. The system as it stands is horribly broken where over 300 exonerations of factual innocence have been proven to date. Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Texas after being "proven" to have killed his family in a Texas fire. Bottom line is that police and prosecutors are immune from criminal prosecution no matter the degree of their misconduct in hiding exculpatory evidence, manufacturing incriminating evidence, suborning perjury with bribes known as plea deals for witness testimony, failures in adequate investigation of crimes that may show their "choice" of perpetrator may be wrong-headed. There is no truth or justice here.

  • Bartmeister Dec 5, 2:13 p.m.

    I agree, and the same goes for politicians...especially presidents. lessismore

    ===========================

    ooooooooo! Cyber slap.

  • In Decisive Dec 5, 12:33 p.m.

    Crouch played the system for all he could. That's what defense attorneys do and if you are in need of a defense attorney you expect they will do everything they can to protect your interests. Defense attorneys don't care if their client is guilty or not guilty and they don't worry about a moral code. They fight to get their client out of the charges or at least minimize the legal impact on the client to the extent they can. That's what they do. Period. Crouch crossed way over the line on many occasions and got caught. He's not the first defense attorney to cross lines and he won't be the last. Like most criminals, he's not sorry he did it, he's just sorry he got caught.

  • lessismore Dec 5, 10:25 a.m.

    cynda-ur-way says, "Im going to have to agree with piene 2 on this one. people dont hire defense lawyers for their moral code."

    I agree, and the same goes for politicians...especially presidents.

  • cynda-ur-way Dec 5, 10:13 a.m.

    Im going to have to agree with piene 2 on this one. people dont hire defense lawyers for their moral code.

  • Bartmeister Dec 5, 9:23 a.m.

    "Anyone that would want James Crouch "on their side" needs to seriously re-evaluate their lives. Crouch is a lying, corrupt theif with NO MORAL COMPASS at all!

    ==========================================

    Why would you take a knife to a gun fight? You hire a lawyer to get you the best deal possible, Couch did that. He got caught and will pay a price for it. But the guy was money in court.........

  • piene2 Dec 5, 9:01 a.m.

    "Anyone that would want James Crouch "on their side" needs to seriously re-evaluate their lives. Crouch is a lying, corrupt theif with NO MORAL COMPASS at all!
    kodac31"

    I beg to differ. Mister Crouch is exactly the sort of lawyer I would hire. I want a winner, not some mealy mouthed Milquetoast lawyer that shrugs off a loss. I do not care what he does as long as we win and truthfully I do not want to know what he did to win. To me the only thing that counts is winning.

  • clintoflannagan Dec 5, 8:55 a.m.

    "Ok smitty and the crowd of his followers. Last time I checked, speech was a protected right, and so long as I am within those lines, the SBI that you threaten me with is powerless. So, bully someone else, I am not afraid of you or your empty threats. I know your kind...nuff said!"

    This is a common misperception. The First Amendment doesn't offer you any sort of protection for what you say on a public blog. The First Amendment prevents the government from suppressing your speech. It doesn't just give you the right to say whatever you want whenever you want. There are always potential civil and criminal consequences to what you say. For example, if you slander someone on the internet, you can be held civilly liable. Or, if you threaten the President on the internet, you can be charged with a crime. Or, if you say something on the internet that your employer doesn't like, you can be fired.

  • Bartmeister Dec 5, 8:33 a.m.

    Of course if he can not, there are forty nine other states. piene2

    ===================================================

    He'll probably need an entourage with him. Have at it...............................See ya! Safe travels, and Have a Great Day!!

  • bubbba Dec 5, 8:31 a.m.

    He violated a well-respected District Court's trust, and he violated this court's trust, and in doing so, has violated the public's trust in the system, and that's truly what this case is about."
    -------------

    The same thing can be said about his accomplice, Ex-Judge Christine Ruth.

  • sinenomine Dec 5, 8:24 a.m.

    jackcdneh1017, I see from your comment Tuesday @ 6:36 PM that you think I am naive and believe in fairy tales regarding the justice system.

    I've worked in the justice system regarding which you accuse me of being naive for almost forty years and I'll put my knowledge of it and experience with it up against yours any day in the week.

    It is possible, my friend, to disagree with someone without being gratuitously insulting, a lesson for which you were apparently absent.

  • retiredindependentpopo Dec 4, 7:49 p.m.

    I hate to say it but, if you want to get out of a charge and have the funds to do so, he's your man!!!

  • jjsmith1973 Dec 4, 7:27 p.m.

    Sorry, if you claim to be a representative of the state, and a professional I'm positive there are conflict rules and regulations. Just as there are is for military members. Yes freedom of speech, the first amendment, always love that comment, although there is a reality too. There are professional codes in a profession that doesn't prevent you from your freedom. It just means you are no longer employed. By the way it isn't smitty and I don't have follower. You already want to spin things that aren't even there to spin. Must be that honest lawyer in you that you references.

  • piknowles2 Dec 4, 7:26 p.m.

    The prison time is secondary. He's ruined his career and his reputation. Never again to be a lawyer but hopefully to become a productive part of society.

  • dollibug Dec 4, 7:25 p.m.

    Perhaps, after serving his time in prison, this man will be released with a better outlook on the Judicial System and his previous profession as well....perhaps he will have a change of attitude and a change of heart as well....hopefully this will be a LLL (LIFE LEARNED LESSON)....he can always move to another state and practice law again....as he was *disbarred in NC*....the Judicial System is just a *GAME*....and people have to figure themselves that it is all *corrupt*....I think that the past couple of murder trials have really opened some people's eyes to just how the *system* works/OR NOT....

  • kodac31 Dec 4, 7:03 p.m.

    Anyone that would want James Crouch "on their side" needs to seriously re-evaluate their lives. Crouch is a lying, corrupt theif with NO MORAL COMPASS at all!

  • reddherring07 Dec 4, 7:01 p.m.

    Ok smitty and the crowd of his followers. Last time I checked, speech was a protected right, and so long as I am within those lines, the SBI that you threaten me with is powerless. So, bully someone else, I am not afraid of you or your empty threats. I know your kind...nuff said!

  • salesman Dec 4, 6:49 p.m.

    I hired Crouch twice to representative my teenage son, none of which involved a DWI, but traffic violations. I will say he worked hard for his clients which in IMO was battling against a corrupt system. LEO's don't always tell the truth, Prosecutors may know your innocence, but going for a conviction. I'm not saying what he did was right, but if you ever got into a situation with the law and you where targeted, he is the lawyer you would want on your side.

  • jackcdneh1017 Dec 4, 6:47 p.m.

    @redherring07. Not to defend a drunk driver but if the breathalyzer reads 0.05and then half an hour later reads 0.06and then one hour later reads 0.07 then all the alcohol that is getting into his system is already there unless he has a very abnormal digestive tract. In all these readings he is legally under the limit and therefore should not have been held. There is demarcation line for a reason and also any instrument that measures can be wrong unless it is calibrated regularly and correctly. It is improper to bring in secondary instruments that may or may not have valid calibration. The first instrument deemed usable by the officer making the stop is the instrument of record. Legally, this man was not drunk. Period.

  • jjsmith1973 Dec 4, 6:42 p.m.

    Redhering also to shove politics of the white house in this is ridiculous. There has been a new DWI law every year. Which stats prove do nothing to curb DWI. Two North Carolina has been controlled by a republican state legislation for years. They are the ones that effect the law, laws, and judicial system in this state. Sorry you lost an election

  • jjsmith1973 Dec 4, 6:37 p.m.

    Redhairing do you think it is professional as an attorney for the county and state to be commenting? Apparently lack of judgment has even been bestowed on you. Unless you think it would be a good idea for the sbi to review your post history on this site. Just remember you don't know who is on the other side of the looking glass

  • jackcdneh1017 Dec 4, 6:36 p.m.

    @sinenomine. Sadly, the system does not protect everyone as you valiantly proclaim. Ask those who have been held without counsel or due process at Gitmo.

    Secondly, it is no longer "not guilty until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". That standard is one that is only marginally paid by lip service only. Any LEO or prosecutor will tell you that in today's courts, you must actually prove your innocence. Please.be aware that anyone can be accused of any crime and if the police want to find you guilty they. Prosecutors control the investigation and discovery in criminal matters, they control the grand jury, they have enormous powers to hide exculpatory evidence, suborn perjury with plea deals for witnesses and informants and they control the grand jury system. Your naïveté is truly astounding. Your belief in the fairy tale of American style justice would be laughable we're it not so tragic for so many.

  • jjsmith1973 Dec 4, 6:30 p.m.

    @justplaincommonsense have you ever sped or drove tired, or on medicine?

  • reddherring07 Dec 4, 6:23 p.m.

    Gregg.... Seriously? Do you know why the reading kept climbing? It's because all the alcohol you drank, in those "2 glasses of wine" (Yeah right, never heard that before) was getting into your system. I'm sorry that I cannot say it like it is here because people like you voted for the simpleton in the white house and firmly believe that you are victims of the system not symptoms of it and the censorship here is out of control (can't let anyone's feelings get hurt)
    Again, I want to say congratulations to crouch and ruth on their ruined lives and careers. I would also like them to know that I will gladly hire them to polish my boots and wash my car (closely supervised though)...

  • jackcdneh1017 Dec 4, 6:23 p.m.

    @SLR. Well I find it embarrassing that I have to correct something so obvious, but CONSECUTIVE sentencing means he will serve both sentences one after the other. The second six months may be shortened with good behaviour or work credits, but consecutive means he must serve the first six months completely before even being considered for less time on the second. I assume you were referencing "concurrent" sentencing which means both terms are served at the same time, which is explicitly what Crouch did not get.

  • Just Plain Common Sense Dec 4, 6:07 p.m.

    Well, the Court imposed sentence. Now, the justice system will follow through. A sad ending to this part of his life, and his family's. A message to all who think they are doing favors for people: don't. At the end of the day, YOU have to go home with your conscience, your family's livelihood is at stake, and your reputation.

    ONE MORE THING: For those who were helped and for those who were not, in fact, FOR ALL OF YOU DWI'rs: SHAME ON YOU for putting the community at risk, shaming your family and for being weak and selfish.

  • reddherring07 Dec 4, 5:59 p.m.

    Hello Kodac! I see that you have been vindicated and I Sir, am very pleased to see that Justice was done. To the rest of the "kool-aid" drinkers who would believe ruth innocent and crouch a good man...I say BAAAH! It is my personal wish that they both suffer tremendously and grieviosly for their disgraceful behaviour. That I will never again, step into the court of wake county and see either of these two is joyous beyond words. I watched time and time again, as I lost cases where the evidence was overwhelmingly that the "defendant" was the perpetrator, yet lost them because crouch was the attorney and his "bed fellow" was ruth. I remember a case where in his closing, crouch insinuated that I, the officer was lying...I never forgot that...Of course ruth was the judge and the case was found not guilty. Now it's my turn. crouch, ruth? Who still has a career. and I wasn't lying, she really did drive drunk and by the way... Blew a 0.18 which was supressed by the crouch and ruth team.

  • gregg45 Dec 4, 5:50 p.m.

    glad, i paid him. i blew a 0.05 first. held for 30 minutes. 0.06 second. one hour later , still in the police car, they sent for a new breath moniter, because the old one was cold, i blew a 0.07 , new got me a 0.08,, and hel followed, at all these rightous pompous people, at this fake holiday, i hope you get what you think others should, 7x7x7 over,, 2 glasses of wine. and an overy correct police officer,, oh well. let those with no sin , blah blah blah,, hope you all have the most wonderful minute you will ever have again

  • kodac31 Dec 4, 5:43 p.m.

    Disgraced Former judge Kristen Ruth came out of this smelling like a rose. See, she played the system she knew all to well. She quickly jumped State's Witness against Crouch (who was already on the Titanic) & then quickly plead guilty to a misdemeanor in this case, therby, preventing the prosecution from being able to charge her with more serious charges as more & more information came to light. Ruth is not fooling anyone. She is NOT a victim here, nor was she even CLOSE to being a good Judge. Does anyone really believe that her plea of "ignorance" holds water? Does anyone believe that the SAME LAWYER coming to her 100's of times OUTSIDE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS with the SAME PAPERWORK (mind you they were "law school friends")and Ruth somehow NEVER said...something is not right here? Never looked at what she was signing? YEA RIGHT! She is a corrupt public official, period. She knew EXACTLY what was going on. Thats why in her sentencing the judge forbid her from EVER being a judge again!!!

  • jjsmith1973 Dec 4, 5:41 p.m.

    Yes I ment MADD not made, phone auto corrected

  • bigbob987 Dec 4, 5:39 p.m.

    All I can say is that God save his sorry soul if a family member of mine had been hurt or killed by one of his repeat offenders that he helped get out of a DWI. He would wish he had never been born.

  • sinenomine Dec 4, 5:38 p.m.

    "12-34 months??? Oh please, this guy will be home for 2013 Christmas." -
    Lamborghini Mercy

    I hate to be the one to tell you Lambie, but if he's out in twelve months that WOULD be the Christmas of 2013.

  • sinenomine Dec 4, 5:34 p.m.

    NCHighlander, the only way in our legal system that you can be stripped of the presumption of innocence is to either plead guilty or be found guilty after a trial. In order to be found guilty the state has to prove that you are guilty to a judge or jury (depending, in North Carolina, whether it's District or Superior Court); furthermore that proof must be beyond a reasonable doubt.

    People aren't found innocent in our courts; they are found not guilty. Maybe they really did the crime, maybe not, it doesn't matter. What DOES matter is making the state prove that they did the crime before locking them up or taking their life, if it's a capital case. If it were otherwise you could be locked away for months, years, or even the rest of your life on the mere suspicion that you had committed a crime. Perhaps you would prefer that, but I wouldn't and fortunately the system as presently constituted favors those who agree with me.

  • SingleLensReflex.SLR Dec 4, 5:28 p.m.

    after reading other posts also want to say, 1) of course he will practise law again. The system that didn't charge him with all his crimes and only gave him the minimum sentence and let him get consecutive sentencing, which means he actually only serves one of the sentences for the two convictions, that system will welcome him back as one of their own. and 2) the entire legal profession suffers and our whole society suffers when we prove we tolerate dishonor in our court system by giving this SLIME ball such a light sentence.

  • piene2 Dec 4, 5:25 p.m.

    "It IS true that Crouch can eventually petition to get his law license back. That said, in my personal experience in the court system as well as criminal defense because he was convicted for obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy and altering court documents I seriously doubt that he'll ever be able to practice law....now that's just my opinion but as an officer of the court you must adhere to the letter of the law. It is doubtful that anyone in the legal system would ever trust him enough in the future to allow him to get his law license back.
    workinghuman33"

    He will most likely have his license reinstated and, truthfully, if I ever found myself in a tight situation he is exactly the sort of lawyer I would seek out.

  • Bob3425 Dec 4, 5:18 p.m.

    He'll be out in a year and retired, did not see anything about a fine or court cost.

  • SingleLensReflex.SLR Dec 4, 5:18 p.m.

    He only got 12 months. I think that is outrageous. A violation of the ethics of our legal system of this magnitude demands a serious sentence and this is a slap on the wrist. Who wouldn't risk this sentence to make hundreds of thousands of dollars? It says to me that the whole judicial system in Raleigh is ROTTEN.

  • NCHighlander Dec 4, 5:12 p.m.

    Lawyers are in the business to get people off on crimes. Notice the absence of the technical word innocent. They don't care. Do a national survey and ask if O.J. Simpson actually murdered Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson. Does anyone doubt that the juice killed em? It's a game. This poor guy just crossed the line a little.

  • gswalker51 Dec 4, 5:08 p.m.

    Just glad to see he lost the bow tie.

  • In Decisive Dec 4, 5:07 p.m.

    The issue isn't whether a nunc pro tunc was used. It's not illegal to use it and it's not illegal for a judge to use it as well. It is, however, illegal for an attorney or judge to pull a fast one and secretly get these agreements signed by a judge and without following the procedures, which means the DA has to agree as well and everything is done on the record.

  • sophiesdad Dec 4, 5:04 p.m.

    We thought this judge would be a little more harsh...oh well, guess it's the system in Raleigh.

  • In Decisive Dec 4, 5:03 p.m.

    It's MADD - Mother's Against Drunk Drivers. That's who JJSmith73 is referring to.

  • msncdso Dec 4, 4:52 p.m.

    You mean they don't all do these things?

  • dollibug Dec 4, 4:52 p.m.

    ****80 Cases, this was done..... for ANYONE to think Kristen Ruth wasn't 'in' on this, is preposterous...... once, or twice... maybe... but 80??

    And one has to wonder just HOW MANY MORE??????????? There are a lot of *cases which should be reviewed*.....I bet someone would be quite *SHOCKED* at what has been done in WAKE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM....

  • dollibug Dec 4, 4:47 p.m.

    ****C'mon you people are smarter than that

    The court system is a farce


    And then some....prosecutors are allowed to present cases for indictments WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE TOO....actually a lawyer actually told me this....and then it actually happened, not ONCE, but TWICE on the same person...and this was only after I heard the prosecutor say in court that if the accused did not take a plea deal, she would get him on a felony....which is exactly what she *TRIED to do*....after over 2 years though....all criminals charges were DISMISSED....(I guess it was a good thing, since there was NO EVIDENCE to begin with)....interesting this is just how the *wheels of the so call justice keep spinning*....slap out of control.

  • macy Dec 4, 4:47 p.m.

    "And once again I will point out had any of the people he had done that for got in trouble again MADE would have it all over the news. Statically, repeat offenders are rare. Get over the sensationalized, emotion of DWI all that does is give us laws that don't protect or prevent."
    jjsmith1973

    Who is MADE???

  • workinghuman33 Dec 4, 4:46 p.m.

    He's going to walk in less than a year -- and not because someone changes the date of his conviction.
    OpenM1nd"

    Sadly, most likely true...and thanks because you made me laugh!

Oldest First