Historic Small Claims Case Is Continued

HISTORIC SMALL CLAIMS CASE TO BE CONTINUED
by Local Yocal for the IMC Newsroom
July 31, 2008

URBANA- Defense attorney, Harvey Welch, took the stand again in his small claims battle with Patrick Thompson, founder of VEYA. Thompson is demanding the monies paid to Welch, who had represented Thompson against criminal charges of criminal sexual abuse and home invasion in 2005-2006, be returned to Thompson for breach of a business contract made between the two.

"He [Welch] just didn't do the job, Your Honor," argued Thompson in closing arguments yesterday.

Trial judge Harry Clem, who heard the criminal case all three times from 2005-2008, had ruled in April of 2007 that Welch had provided ineffective assistance of counsel in Clem's order to grant Thompson a new criminal trial.

Thompson represented himself in the first trial in July of 2005 and received a mistrial due to a split, 6-6, hung jury. During Welch's representation of Thompson during a re-trial before a second jury in July 2006, Thompson was found guilty of the criminal charges. Attorney Bob Kirchner stepped in shortly after the guilty verdict and argued successfully before the court that Thompson deserved a new trial. Thompson was found not guilty in the third trial this past May of 2008.

Under direct examination from Thompson yesterday, Welch admitted Sgt. Tarr, a correctional officer at the county jail, and the jail nurse could have been called as witnesses for the second trial. Welch could not recall why they would have been called, only to describe their testimony would have been, "...some collateral impeachment testimony of some kind,...." Welch, said. During the third trial, Attorney Bob Kirchner had subpoenaed those jail house employees who knew what the accuser had not known: Patrick Thompson was wearing a fingersplint the day of the alleged attack.

After Welch testified he felt he had done a complete investigation into the case, Small Claims Judge, Holly Clemons, allowed for final arguments from both sides to be heard again.

Thompson argued that Welch could have called witnesses, and it's not the defendant's job to supply the attorney with the information about the case. Thompson further alleged that Welch didn't file sufficient post-trial motions after the verdict, and Welch did not file pre-trial motions for the third trial that the court would have accepted and did when filed by the Kirchner Law Office. Thompson also mentioned that Welch abandoned Thompson at the sentencing hearing in August of 2006 while still the attorney of record for Thompson.

Attorney, Mr. David Rumley, on behalf of Harvey Welch, argued that the plaintiff's claims in the small claims complaint are not supported by any of the evidence that Thompson presented. There has been no violation of any contractual agreements. Mr. Welch did investigate the case, and did exactly what the defendant wanted done at trial.

Judge Clemons said she would continue the case until August 25th to announce her verdict.

Long-time courthouse observers have noted they have never heard of a defense attorney in Champaign County having to return the money paid to them for doing a poor job. It would be very unusual if Thompson were to prevail in this case.