Blog
WIKILEAKS-JULIAN ASSANGE-AND POSSIBLE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Keeping the government in Check, the Uncomfortable Reality of Freedom of the Press
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange surrendered to British authorities on December 7, 2010 in connection with sexual assault allegations leveled against the Australian native by Swedish authorities. News media reports said Assange was engaged in consensual sexual encounters with two women (WikiLeak volunteers) in Sweden this past August when the encounters turned non-consensual because Assange would not use a condom. The controversial Assange has gained international acclaim and criticism for his website’s disclosure of thousands of classified U.S. diplomatic cables and documents. The sexual assault charges became prominent after the disclosures occurred.
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed satisfaction to the news media about Assange’ arrest by British authorities. The defense secretary called the latest turn of events in this international furor “good news.”
It is not clear what steps will be taken by Swedish authorities to have Assange returned to Sweden to face the sexual assault charges. A British judge ordered the WikiLeaks founder held without bail pending a December 14 hearing. The judge refused Assange’s request for bail, saying the international fugitive posed a significant “flight risk.” That’s a rather strange finding inasmuch as Assange “surrendered” to British authorities.
In the meantime, a criminal investigation into the WikiLeaks disclosures is underway in this country. CNN’s legal analyst Jeffery Toobin recently observed on the cable news network that Assange would not be allowed to “rub the United States’ nose in committing illegal acts and get away with it.” Toobin speculated that the U.S. Justice Department already has a sealed indictment against the WikiLeaks’ founder.
An Assange indictment would certainly please conservative political leaders in this country. In aFacebook posting, former Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin, the controversial presidential hopeful, took time out from her caribou killing and fish clubbing to say Assange should be hunted down like an al Qaeda terrorist and indicted under the Espionage Act of 1917.
The former vice-presidential candidate may get her wish. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder recently told the Washington Post that the Justice Department and the Pentagon are conducting “an active, ongoing criminal investigation” into the WikiLeaks disclosure case. The newspaper reported that the FBI is looking at everyone who had possession of the WikiLeaks documents, including those who gave them to the website. That would most certainly include U.S. Army private and intelligence analyst Bradley Manning who has been identified in the media as the prime suspect responsible for downloading the classified material and somehow making it available to WikiLeaks.
Federal prosecutors also indicated to the Post that their investigation is indeed proceeding under the Espionage Act but is moving carefully because that Act was created long before the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the “free speech” rights under the First Amendment.
“Let me be very clear,” Holder was quoted by the Post. “[Our investigation] is not saber rattling. To the extent there are gaps in our laws, we will move to close those gaps which is not to say … that anybody at this point, because of their citizenship or their residence, is not a target or subject of an investigation that’s ongoing.”
The investigation gained both momentum and legitimacy after Assange reportedly ignored a letter sent by State Department general counsel Harold H. Koch urging him not to release the classified material, to return the material to the U.S. government, and to destroy any information in his databases about the material.
“That language is not only the right thing to do policy-wise but puts the government in a position to prosecute him,” former CIA general counsel Jeffery H. Smith told the Post.
Smith added that anyone who has “unauthorized possession of information relating to national defense” can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act if that person believes the information can harm the United States if published and “willfully” keeps it after the government has demanded its return.
Although some legal experts have expressed doubt about whether Assange actions would fit the “willful” section of the Espionage Act, a 1944 Supreme Court decision in Hartzell v. United Stateswhich defined “willfully” as someone who “deliberately and with specific purpose to do acts prohibited by Congress” would seem to pave the way for a criminal prosecution of Assange.
Writing for The Daily Beast, Stephen L. Carter made the following observation in light of theHartzell decision: “This approach easily sweeps Assange and WikiLeaks into its ambit. Assange can hardly pretend to lack the intention of disseminating secrets to people not entitled to possess them. Nor, given the responses to his earlier publications, can he seriously argue that he was unaware of any potential harm.”
Having concluded that Assange could definitely be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, Carter then asked the rhetorical question: Should we prosecute Assange?
“We might well be able to convict Assange,” Carter wrote. “But it’s a bad idea. Let us concede that the various documents he has released have done a lot of damage. He cannot plausibly claim that his actions were necessary expose some major government conspiracy or cover-up; this is not the Pentagon Papers or Watergate. In this sense he is a nihilist, driven by no serious theory of governance or intentional relations, other than the creation of controversy. What Assange has done is little different from a person who illegally obtains the tax returns of leading journalists and posts them online showing how much money each earns, and from whom, and where each gives it away, all in order, he might say, to demonstrate their biases. Such an individual is worthy of condemnation, not celebration.
“But acting callously, or self-interestedly, or narcissistically ought not be criminal, particularly when what is involved is, undeniably, speech. We should be deeply troubled by the notion that our government might be devising schemes to prosecute people for what they have said or written. The old cases had it right. Shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater. Publishing the movements of troop ships in a time of war. Other than speech of that level, the only people who should be punished for disclosing secrets are those who have promised—in exchange, say, for government employment—not to do so.”
We agree, and would offer more concrete reasons Assange’s activities should be protected in any country, especially America, that treasures the values of robust free speech and press. Assuming Assange was not involved in the illegal procurement of the documents, the intentional deception, lies and criminal conduct by the U.S. Government and its agents over the past decades in the conduct of its wars and foreign policy argue for the publication of this material, which seems to generally support allegations made by government skeptics on both sides of the political isle on many different issues. It is just this sort of transparency that is needed to shine light on the dark workings of our government, which, after all, does still belong to the people. Contrary to most of the opponents of WikiLeaks, who point to the potential dangers of the release of this information, the reality is that these documents do more to embarrass our government and the hypocrisy in which we conduct the most serious of our affairs. This is the real reason the government’s reaction is so bellicose.
In reality, Assange, who is not a U.S. citizen and owes the U.S. Government no statutory or contractual obligation not to publish the information he received, has a legitimate interest in publishing these documents which clearly illustrate that the U.S. Government has often lied to its citizens and to the world community, a news worthy topic that any credible reporter would feel compelled to publish.
In the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks in New York, former President George W. Bush, with the avid support of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, and with the overwhelming blessing of the American people, declared a “war on terror.” What Bush—nor any of his underlings, like Vice President Dick Cheney or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld or CIA Director George Tenet or Attorney General John Ashcroft or FBI Director Robert Mueller—told the American people was that the war would include secret prisons, torture, kidnappings of citizens of other countries, murder, and assassinations.
Within a year of the “terror war” declaration, the CIA and its army of specialized contractors had effectively transformed America into a “rogue state” violating virtually very recognized tenet of warfare, international treaties, and national and international laws governing a country’s treatment of prisoner’s captured during wartime. The President of our United States of America declared water boarding—an inquisition technique which had been recognized by this country and all civilized nations for centuries as a brutal torture method to extract confessions—as nothing more than “an enhanced interrogation technique.”
Then our intelligence and law enforcement agencies joined forces to spy on everyday law-abiding Americans as though they had committed acts of terror against our country. People of the Islamic faith and anyone with a Middle Eastern accent or descent, who were living law-abiding lives, were subjected to racial profiling, employment harassment, deportation for non-legitimate reasons, and social ostracism by our own government and most of the nation’s Christian evangelicals. Innocent “terror suspects” were locked away in severe military detention for years (without counsel or any constitutional/civil rights) based on no more evidence than their names had been disclosed during torture sessions against other “terror suspects.”
The arrogance and lawlessness with which our nation waged the “war on terror” during the Bush-era provided people like Julian Assange with a motive to expose our country’s hypocrisy, including disclosing our “secrets,” to show the world that the “emperor has no clothes.” Whatever damage Assange may have done to our “national security interests” with his classified disclosures, it was trivial compared to the damage done by the way the Bush administration waged its “war on terror.” We lost thousands of lives, suffered incomprehensible casualties, watched our economy titter on the verge of collapse, spent billions to improve security only to see luck and terrorist stupidity prevent terror attacks against this country rather than our own security systems, and not only exhausted all the international goodwill we enjoyed in the wake of 9/11 but created so much contempt and hatred for America that our enemies are now as many and as strong as Roman legions.
The WikiLeaks disclosures are the price this nation is paying because of its international policies which were too often driven by official lawlessness, contempt for other peoples and cultures, and an arrogant abuse of power rather than respect and honest discourse. This was evidenced in a November 8th primetime interview in which former President Bush told NBC’s Matt Lauer that he authorized the use of “water boarding” on several terrorist suspects after he was informed by intelligence agencies that the suspects possessed credible information about possible terror attacks against the United States. In fact, the former president, who is promoting his memoirDecision Points (Random House 2010), is being widely quoted in the media as having said “damn right” when the intelligence agencies sought “water boarding” authorization.
But the former president was not as cocky and cavalier about the subject during the interview with Lauer. He told the Today Show host that he in fact approved what he had always referred to during his presidency as an “enhanced interrogation technique” only after U.S. Justice Department attorneys advised him that it was “legal” to do so. Although Bush still maintained in the Lauer interview, as he did throughout his presidency, that he does not consider water boarding a form of torture, he would not directly answer Lauer questions about whether other countries should enjoy the same authority to water board captured Americans.
The simple, undeniable fact is that we tortured people. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told the Senate Intelligence Committee in February 2008 that this nation’s intelligence agencies (namely, the CIA) water boarded only three individuals: 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and two other senior al Qaeda leaders, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. Bush seem to suggest in the Lauer interview that Zubaydah, who was reportedly water boarded approximately 80 times, wanted to cooperate with American authorities but felt that he had an religious obligation to endure a certain level of torture before actually providing information against his al-Qaeda colleagues. In effect, Bush surmised, Zubaydah actually encouraged his own water boarding so he could honor the obligations to his religion not to “give up the ship” without first enduring some pain and suffering.
United States law, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2340, prohibits torture which is defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” In order for the Government to make a case of torture under Sec. 2340, it must prove 1) that the torture occurred outside of the United States; 2) that the person who carried out the torture is a United States national; and 3) that the person who carried out the torture is in the United States, regardless of the nationality of either the torturer or the victim of the torture. These same elements apply to those who conspire to carry out torture.
U.S, Justice Department attorneys authorized the CIA to use ten interrogation techniques on terror suspects, including water boarding. Water boarding was defined by these attorneys as a suspect being bound tightly to a declining board four to seven feet in length with his feet elevated, and a cloth place over his forehead and eyes. Water is then poured over the cloth as the cloth is lowered to cover the nose and mouth restricting the suspect’s air flow and increasing the level of carbon dioxide in his blood. The increased level of carbon dioxide produces a suffocation-drowning effect forcing the suspect not to breathe any water into his lungs. The water pouring continues for 20 to 40 seconds before the cloth is removed and the suspect allowed to take three or four full breaths. The process is repeated, and repeated, and repeated during 20 minute sessions.
Now if that is not “torture” within the meaning of Sec. 2340, then it would be difficult to fathom exactly what physical “pain and suffering” would qualify. In his excellent book The Perfect Storm(W.W. Norton & Company 1997), Sebastian Junger described in incredible detail the experience of drowning: “The instinct not to breathe underwater is so strong that it overcomes the agony of running out of air. No matter how desperate the drowning person is, he doesn’t inhale until he’s on the verge of losing consciousness. At that point there’s so much carbon dioxide in the blood, and so little oxygen, that chemical sensors in the brain trigger an involuntary breath whether he’s underwater or not. This is called the ‘break point’; laboratory experiments have shown the break point to come after 87 seconds. It’s a sort of neurological optimism, as if the body is saying, Holding our breath is killing us, and breathing in might not kill us, so we might as well breathe in. If the person hyperventilates first—as free divers do, and as a frantic person might—the break point comes as later as 140 seconds. Hyperventilation initially flushes carbon dioxide out of the system, so it takes that much longer to climb back up to critical levels.
“Until the break point, a drowning person is said to be undergoing ‘voluntary apnea,’ choosing not to breathe. Lack of oxygen to the brain causes a sensation of darkness closing in from all sides, as in a camera aperture stopping down. The panic of a drowning person is mixed with the odd incredulity that this is actually happening. Having never done it before, the body—and the mind—do not know how to die gracefully. The process is filled with desperation and awkwardness. ‘So this is drowning,’ a drowning person might think. ‘So this is how my own life finally ends…’
“These thoughts shriek through the mind during the minute or so that it takes a panicked person to run out of air. When the first involuntary breath occurs most people are still conscious, which is unfortunate, because the only thing more unpleasant than running out of air is breathing in water. At that point the person goes from voluntary to involuntary apnea, and the drowning begins in earnest. A spasmodic breath drags water into the mouth and windpipe, and then one of two things happen. In about ten percent of people, water—anything—touching the vocal cords triggers immediate contraction in the muscles around the larynx. In effect, the central nervous system judges something in the voice box to be more of a threat than low oxygen levels in the blood, and acts accordingly. This is called a laryngospasm. A person with laryngospasm drowns without any water in his lungs.
“In the other ninety percent of people, water floods the lungs and ends any waning transfer of oxygen to the blood. The clock is running down now; half-conscious and enfeebled by oxygen depletion, the person is in no position to fight his way back up to the surface. They very process of drowning makes it harder and harder not to drown, an exponential disaster curve similar to that of a sinking boat.”
Water boarding interrogators take a tortured suspect almost to the “break point” in each dunk into the water only to bring him back to the surface for a few seconds to inhale just three or four precious breaths of oxygen before forcing him back under the water. While Justice Department attorneys said these interrogation sessions could last no more than 20 minutes, there is no way to know exactly how long they really lasted. Videos of the sessions were destroyed along the way. The point is that each suspect was led to believe that each dunk into the water would be his last, and even though the suspect was snatched back from the “break point” each time, he never knew when a particular dunk would be his last, when the “drowning process” would actually be carried to its final end.
That’s torture—and we don’t care how the former president defines it or that his Justice Department attorneys authorized it. Subjecting someone to the repeated “drowning process” is torture.
In 1994 this country ratified a treaty titled “Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.” Torture was defined by that treaty as “ … any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession” … when it is “inflicted by or at the instigation or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”
In other words, America joined the international community in saying that presidents, dictators, military leaders, and other government officials do not have the authority to either carry out torture or authorize it, regardless of who may say they have the legal power to do it. While former President Bush may not consider water boarding as torture, University of Pennsylvania historian Ed Peters in 2007 told National Public Radio that the interrogation technique known as the “water cure” or tormenta de toca has been a “normal incident of law [enforcement]” in the effort to extract confession from suspects before the period of Enlightenment.
NPR reported that Americans first used the water boarding torture technique during the Spanish-American War. At least one American soldier was tried and convicted for using what an Army judge called “torture.” Again 1947 the United States convicted a Japanese officer named Yukio Asano for using water boarding on American civilians during World War II. And, finally, in 1968 the Washington Post published a photograph of a U.S. soldier supervising the water boarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption under the photo said the water boarding produced “a flooding sense of suffocation, drowning, meant to make him talk. The Army conducted an investigation and two months later court martialed the American soldier shown in the photo.
Torture is a subject matter we have devoted considerable space to because we believe that the rule of law must prevail even in the face of a threat of terrorism. For those who do not share this point of view, or who believe as the former president that water boarding is not torture, we would pose this hypothec. Let’s say a right-wing group of evangelical Christians based in the densely wooded areas of Michigan decided to declare a “holy war” against Muslim nations and orchestrated terror attacks against one of these nations—let’s say Saudi Arabia. The Saudi intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, sent a team of agents to Michigan, kidnapped an American citizen suspected of being involved in the attacks, flew him to a secret prison, and water boarded the suspect to get information out of him about possible future attacks by his Christian brethren.
Would most Americans be outraged? Would they consider the water boarding of an American citizen kidnapped from this country as an act of torture? You bet they would! And most of the people lined up in the outrage line, demanding immediate retaliation against the Saudi government, would be the very supporters of the Bush policy to use water boarding as an “enhanced interrogation technique” against Muslim terror suspects.
Now as to the question of whether there is a legitimate case against former President Bush, and his legal advisers, that remains a hotly debated topic. While we are not prepared to draw a firm legal conclusion about whether the former president could be held liable for acting on advice given to him by Justice Department attorneys, we do firmly believe Bush understood pragmatically, historically, and morally that water boarding is a form of torture. The fact that he had to seek and secure legal advice to authorize its use is prima facie evidence that he understood it was torture and was looking for a way to circumvent its legal prohibitions.
The Obama administration has made it clear that it will not investigate or prosecute anyone for torture committed under the Bush administration. That’s why we see the criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Julian Assange by the Obama administration as hypocritical. By failing to investigate the issue of torture committed during the Bush-era “war on terror,” the Obama administration effectively gave the torturers legal immunity. The same legal immunity should be extended to Assange. He did not steal (or download) the classified material. He simply published it, and while we believe those actions are contrary to American interests, they do not warrant prosecution under the Espionage Act. Assange’s WikiLeaks disclosures are in no way comparable to the illegal acts committed by officials at the highest levels of government during the Bush-era “war on terror.”
We could care less what happens to Assange in Sweden. That’s between him and the legal system of that nation. What we find difficult to understand is that our Government, which had admittedly engaged in torture, is now gearing up to prosecute someone whose only indiscretion is publishing classified material—conduct that is arguably protected by the First Amendment as many prominent constitutional scholars suggest. That’s like sending Barry Bonds in as a pinch hitter in a “pee-wee” baseball game. It smacks of arrogance, unfairness, and an abuse of power. The fruit in the Julian Assange prosecution market is rotten. And we want no part of it.
Better yet, if the U.S. Government would act with honor and discretion in its actions at home and abroad, giving reverence to the words expressed in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, there would be nothing for those like WikiLeaks to report. The struggle for American Empire forces corruption and, eventually, downfall.
By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Take the first step toward protecting your freedom by contacting us now
Testimonials
John T. Floyd Law Firm
3730 Kirby Drive # 750, Houston
-
If you have hired attorneys that meet the Webster dictionary definition, ie: "Attorney " is a person that has a law degree, will not be totally honest, can take your money … More and not earn it, will put you off until he is ready to talk to you, and/or never study your case to be able to defend you. Mr. Floyd is the only attorney that doesn't fit that definition!! You will be delighted to have Mr. John Floyd in your corner! Not one attorney that I have ever met that would ever return a check that I sent to him, because he said I paid him too much! Wow! That right there should tell you something about his integrity!!!!! He has a very calm demeanor and doesn't stretch the truth even if you don't want to hear it, he will tell you the truth. Call and set up an appointment with him and judge for yourself. You are wasting time and money on any other attorney, just hire the best, Mr. Floyd.
-
John T. Floyd and his team are some of the best people! I was able to get a second opinion from them on legal advice. His team has been honest, kind, and very informative which has … More been a huge blesssing.
-
I highly recommend John T. Floyd Lawfirm. They are truly knowledgeable and willing to go the extra mile to defend your innocence. Psalms 35
-
Outstanding!Professional knowledge. Rich experiences. Good outcome.
-
-
The best lawyer I ever encounter with a very good personality. He’s very professional and he will go far and beyond for his clients best interest. He’s definitely a 5 star attorney … More when it comes to delivering. I couldn’t be more happier that I hired him !! 👏👏👏👏
-
-
I can honestly say from what I have seen so far, Floyd is a compassionate soul who cares for his client's. Floyd is by far very knowledgeable in this area. He's currently … More assisting my [Father] on a sex assault. We are all suffering so much as my father is an elder man, but we have faith in God, and Mr. Floyd he can dismissed this outrageous allegation soon. Thank you, yoli
-
I had wonderful experience with this law firm. They were so helpful and knowledgeable of the process.my case was dismissed because of Mr John T Floyd,thank you for everything .
-
I am very happy today my case dismissed God bless Mr John T Floyd very good lawyer thanks you so mush sir
-
I had a great experience with this Law Firm, the kind staff helped me locate a Lawyer even though they were unable to take my case.
They were very helpful, kind and returned my call … More in a timely manner. I would definitely recommend them and use them in the future. -
I can tell that Jone is an excellent attorney in Houston. Personally, he is a great man. In addition to great service and amazing results. Recommended
-
Mr. Floyd is an incredible attorney and human being. He cares about your case, the facts, the law, and your life! I am sorry for whatever situation you are going through, but choosing … More Mr. Floyd, his firm, and their professional experience to help you, will be the best decision you ever make!
-
John T Floyd is a straight shooter! He was very direct and responsive to my phone calls and questions. I was in awe of his knowledge, and professional decorum! The best decision that … More you could make is to schedule a consultation with him before considering anyone else!
-
I asked the Law Office of John T. Floyd a very important question regarding the legal aspects of purchasing a firearm with a deferred adjudication charge. They answered the question … More very professionally and accurately and I was quite pleased with the information that was shared. I recommend this law firm because they are very honest and will work for you and with you.
-
I’ve never been one to write reviews but this time I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to say something. I had some serious legal questions I needed answers to concerning Texas laws. … More Being I’m from another state, I found and reached out to Attorney John Floyd for the answers. Mr Floyd listened to to my requests and told me what he need from me and went out of his way to get me the answers. Very polite, straightforward and professional, I can’t thank him enough for all he’s done. Whatever your legal case may be, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend Mr Floyd.
-
John & Chris helped my family member get a reduced charge and acceptable plea agreement in place. Their compassion, attention to every detail was what helped carry the day.Truly … More the best of the best.P
-
Mr. Floyd is both ethical and loyal to his clients; two qualities that are hard to find specially in lawyers. I'd definitely recommend him to anyone.Positive
Professionalism …More … More -
Mr. John was very helpful and truly was the reason why my case was dismissed. Thank you so much Mr. John I truly recommend everyone in need to work with him.
-
His service to the community and diligence to helping his clients speaks for its self! Not to mention the many articles, papers and TV appearances that speak to his intellect
-
John has given Excellent service and have been very friendly and extremely helpful to us. I highly recommend this law firm
-
This law firm is diligent, responsive and succeeded in getting my case dismissed. 10/10 would recommend.
-
super knowledgeable, good attitude, would definitely recommend him
-
Very helpful, knowledgeable and honest.
-
John is an amazing person and lawyer who is actually very understanding of how anxious I got and although it was hard to reach him sometimes because of his schedule, but never worry … More he is on top of things. He is very organized, very smart. I had the experience to go through a trial with him, and he always plans ahead well and is actually open and receptive to any ideas and comments I had and he was quick to decide which is right to use at the moment. I really appreciated working with him and Chris. Great lawyers and great people. As I was reminded by John, I am adding that the Jury reached a not guilty decision on the original charge and on a lesser charge in just 25 minutes. It took more time to write the charge and instructions for the jury than it took them to reach a decision.
-
Highly recommend John T Floyd law firm, great response time and demeanor.I was researching an on-going criminal case, when I found an informative article written by John Floyd (about … More the perils of expert testimony). I called his office, and was very pleased to receive a timely call back. Not only was Mr. Floyd candid and helpful, but he had the kindest demeanor of any attorney that I've dealt with. I am so glad to have found this firm.
-
Although I am not a client, John Floyd contacted me the same day I sent an email requesting advice, answered my questions and even when further to assist with my issue and communicated … More with me the next day. A true credit to his profession and I can only imagine how well he provides services to his actual clients!
-
I give Mr. Floyd 10 Stars if they were available so I'm giving him five that's all that's available. The first time I left a message for him it was on a Friday after … More 5 p.m. and within 15 minutes he called me back I told him I needed to buy a lotto ticket because that has never happened. I knew from our chat and him calling me back that he was different from any attorney I've tried to talk to left messages never got called back they didn't even know what I needed and neither did Mr. Floyd but he did call me back. I was very interested in meeting with mr. Floyd about my case because I felt he was very transparent honest and genuine. If you've ever dealt with attorneys they don't have those traits but Mr. Floyd does. He was very honest with me told me what I could and could not do with my case. He is not egotistical he's very compassionate and he actually reads the documents you sent him unbelievable that's never happened. He will be the only lawyer I refer to anyone that needs his expertise. If you're in need of a criminal defense attorney please give John T Floyd a call you will not be disappointed.
-
Mr John is a great human being and a very knowledgeable attorney. He has always called me back promptly,advised me very clearly and never rushed our conversation. i was wrongfully accused … More and Mr John had my case DISMISSED!! on the day of trial after fighting for me for two years. I am very thankful to the John T. Floyd Law Firm. You will not go wrong with John. Mr John you deserve way more then 5 stars.Thank youShaikh.
-
John Floyd Law Firm is highly recommended for your legal needs. He and his staff are highly professional in every aspect. Easy and comfortable feeling talking with him, and he understands … More your needs and explains your legal advice in a way you can understand. Enough just cant be said. Thank You Sir.Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
John was kind enough to assist me with legal advise on my firearm gun rights restoration. I highly recommend him and his firm. Very professional and knowledgeable. If I need assistance … More in the future I will definitely go back to him.
-
What I liked the most was that he actually returned my phone after leaving a message unlike pretty much everyone else I called prior. He listened and answered my question with the best … More advice that would benefit me the most. I was actually lost from moving to Texas from a different state we’re laws vary and he pointed me toward the right direction to get a understanding of if I need to do business with him now or after I contact a lawyer in my home state.
-
John T Floyd handled my sons case & got a dismissal for us! He is great to work with, gets back to you promptly & knows what he’s doing. Definitely one of the best we have had … More to deal with!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
John is honestly the best! The whole team is. He answered me in a timely manner and helped me when my friend was going through a situation in Houston, Texas as an inmate. He was so … More thorough, honest, and without charging me sent me so much information because I was out of the loop. He never once tried to take you for your money, he did all that he could to. help me and I can't thank him enough.
-
I have used John on two occasions and found him to have full knowledge of Texas law, diligent, creative in plan, and aggressive in defense. He is the best criminal defense attorney … More in the State of Texas. No reason to look elsewhere.
-
I have been calling to get some legal advice pertaining to gun rights. A few legal offices would not even take my call because quote " your not a client and Im losing money. … More I I called John T. Floyd Law Firm and they were not only able to answer my question, but gave great detail information, and further elaborated on their answer. I hope I do not have to use them in the future, but if I do need to, they will be my first call.
-
Great lawyer! Needed some advice and gave me a Consultation, and advice for steps to take, without any hassle l, Was a honest guy and actually wanted to help me and not just take my … More money! Highly recommend!!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
Attorney Floyd replied very timely to my inquiry and he provided practical advice. I will not hesitate to contact him in the future if I need additional legal counsel.
-
Highly recommend, down to earth lawyer. Talked to me about my legal issues without being super money hungry and genuinely wanted to help me with my legal problems. 5 stars ⭐️.
-
Very knowledgeable and professional. I called and left a message Friday morning and before end of business that day I received a call back.Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism … More …More -
Very helpful highly recommended for any Question / case will definitely keep he's name and number for any other legal advice
-
Excellent service and a lawyer that doesn't lie. He does what he says. JW recommends him.
-
One of the best services Ive used in awhile. Thank you for all the help and answers. You got my life back. Thank youPositive
Quality …More -
Im impressed. This guy was polite and professional and most important...he listened.
-
Good experience and very good lawyer
-
-
-
Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, ValueMore -
It was a pleasure speaking with John. He is knowledgeable and has a true desire to help the people of society. I turned to him for some guidance of a long-standing issue. He never … More rushed our conversation and went out of his way to look into the details to provide the right answer as well as assist me anyway he could. Thank you for our conversations and I wish your and your firm the best. If you need a lawyer, John Floyd is your guy!
-
John represented me in court for roughly 2 years. I won't (and shouldn't) get into any serious details, but let me tell you that I couldn't have chosen anyone better. … More Seriously.Every appearance in court I felt very comfortable. The judge and DA's had a high regard for his reputation. There is a time I recall where simply his presence greatly impacted the court's interpretation of my case and persons. We were in front of the stand and the judge could not stop talking about John's prestige and past accomplishments and how that took in relation to my case. I kept silent in front of the judge, but I observed then that John's popularity and reputation within the court had already given me a better looking rapport with the judge. Let me tell you, I never had more confidence then, knowing that the judge held him in such high regard.This is not to mention how personable John is. I'll be honest that during the stress of court, sharing a laugh with your lawyer helps a lot. This may sound a lot, but I really appreciated the relationship we had then. This is also not to mention that he was able to deal very well with any DA that rotated over the years. Seriously, John was great, prompt with information and very hands on with my case. I had great peace those 2 years until everything wrapped up.If you're looking for a lawyer, I highly, HIGHLY recommend the John T. Floyd Law Firm. He IS nationally renowned, you know. He'll get the job done to the utmost confidence. He's very experienced and has a great record to boot. I am glad to have had him represent me in court and trust me that I never thought I'd ever say that (and whoever does?). We explored every avenue of victory together and I personally enjoyed the experience, despite the seriousness of the accusation.If you have a case that needs to be represented at the highest levels, choose John T. Floyd. He's a good man and very good at what he does. Him and his team has the experience you need to make the best decisions and options to get the best outcome for your case. We got the best result I could possibly ask for, thank God.Seriously. Hire John. He knows what he's doing.Seriously.
-
One of the few honest lawyers I have ever talked to. His complimentary consultation was knowledgeable and thorough. He knew exactly what the issue was and how to handle it. His candid … More appraisal of the situation and how to proceed saved me thousands of dollars in legal fees. If you have a case requiring expertise in John's area of practice, look no further. Hire this man!
-
I had the opportunity to read an article that Mr. Floyd wrote and it was very interesting. I called him about the article and advice concerning a similar situation. He not only gave … More me excellent advice, he pointed out not just what I wanted to hear but what I needed to hear concerning my situation. The Good, The Bad and The ugly in a manner or speaking. He spoke with an open and honest heart with information to help me and not just to get a client.
-
If you are in trouble and need a lawyer, contact the John T. Floyd law firm. Some of the best lawyers in Texas work there! Understanding and helpful lawyers and staff that will do all … More they can to help you 😊
-
He gave me one of the most honest answers I have received in a very long time about any issue I was having with anything. Legal or not legal. I highly recommend giving him a call and … More will be referring him to friends and family if they have any issues in the future.Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
He took time out of his day to answer my legal questions and didn’t even charge me. I would definitely recommend him to you.
-
Gave free consultation on getting gun rights back. He truly cares about gun rights and getting you the help you deserve. 100% worth a callPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, … More Value …More -
Very professional, great quality work, and very friendly and helpful. Overall, their service is phenomenal. I recommend Mr. Floyd to anyone.
-
Mr. Floyd took the time to explain his experience with the law to me in layman's terms. Definitely give him a call.Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
He was honest , knowledgeable , and professional about what we talked about. Most lawyers are just about the money , but not john.Positive
Professionalism …More -
He was very truthful and honest with us very great man I would recommend him and we would use him again
-
Very professional honest and works hard currently working my husband’s appeal I pray he does his best workPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I contacted John T. Floyd Law firm and I was very satisfied with service extremely helpful and friendly thank you Mr. FloydPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More … More -
This law frim was informative,great response time ,and the attorney called back not some secretary or legal assistant thank u guys for all your help wish it was more like youPositive … More
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I would highly recommend Mr Floyd. He was very helpful and knowledge with a legal question I had.Positive
Professionalism …More -
He explained my case better then any other lawyerPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
Very informative
-
-
-
-
Had the pleasure speaking with John Floyd on a personal matter, he was very responsive, nothing but exceptional, and he really cares about you with sincerity and most importantly knows … More what is he talking about! No games or bs, his approach to my situation even though I knew it was probably way smaller then what he normally takes on, he was extremely helpful and didn't care about the size of the matter like other attorneys do. He really looked out for my best interests. You can tell he has decades of experience doing what he does just by chatting with him. I would highly recommend him.
-
Words can’t describe how grateful I am for working with John, he went above and beyond my expectation. I was wrongly accused and hired many lawyers before hiring John Floyd but they … More all disappointed me, I had lost hope until a friend of mine referred me to John. From the start he had my best interest in mind and gave helpful advice, he explained the process and guided me. He put more work and time than all my previous lawyers that cost me thousands of dollars. He was constantly communicating with court and defended me more than all lawyer i had hired before him. Don’t waste your time and money like I did, believe me when I say I hired countless lawyers before him and no one came close to John. I’m forever thankful for him for fighting for my innocence and getting my case dismissed. Thank you so much🙏🏼🙏🏼
-
I called Mr Floyd and left a message, with in the hour I received a call back with much more information then I could have ever expected. Mr Floyd was very informative on every question … More I had for him. He seemed like he cared, instead of like most attorneys that you talk to that are just out for a quick buck. If you want someone that is going to shoot strait with you, and has your best interest in hand, this is you guy. This was the best experience that I have ever had with an lawyer.
-
I can state with confidence that Mr. Floyd and his team are the most competent and professional lawyers one can hope for. My case was quite complex and I admit that as a law student … More I was not the most patient client. Mr. Floyd did a phenomenal job of managing the bench, prosecution and myself! The result was above expectation, and I will never hesitate to recommend this firm regardless of the caliber of the case at issue.
-
It was a pleasure working with Mr. Floyd. I contacted him regarding a legal matter and he was extremely knowledgeable about the law, and responded in a timely manner. I appreciated … More the fact I did not feel rushed, and he made sure he thoroughly answered all questions I had. I would highly recommend him!Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
Spoke with John Floyd about a 45 year old criminal case I was involved in. I had very little information about the case and John helped me search what records were available and gave … More me guidance to find more information. He was very professional and took his time helping me. I may need to hire a lawyer on this case and Mr. Floyd will be the man.Thanks John.
-
Very professional and straight forward. He's not going to waste your time or money. Very knowledgeable in a large range of possible matters one could face living in these days … More and times. If ever you need legal assistance, this is who I would suggest. Awesome!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I called about some legal questions I needed to get clarified and John was able to give me clarification and sound advice. I will definitely contact John for all future legal questions … More and issues.Thank you John!Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism, Value …More -
Knows his stuff and well respected with DA and judges. I have referred him a couple times and every client has been satisfied
-
John is beyond knowledgeable! If I decide to pursue my case any further I would only have him represent me.
-
What a great attorney, this guy really took time out of his day to answer my questions and explain my case to me. Very grateful, thank you so muchPositive
Professionalism …More -
Absolutely a very professional lawyer. Very well read in the current law and more than willing to help if needed.
-
Mr. John he’s a professional he knows what he’s doing and he’s patient they recommend Him stronglyPositive
Professionalism …More -
Great service, very knowledgable and happy to help with any questions I had
-
Quick to action and helpful and knowledgeable with entertainment industry based issues!
-
Responded on a holiday week. Very knowledgeable and reassuring.
-
Very professional
-
-
-
-
I want to thank John T. Floyd and all of his team. He is the best lawyer who cares aboutHis clients and fights really hard to get the best outcome. He is a fighter and he is awesome!!!I … More recommend if any one needs criminal defense , he is the BEST. We had a really serious caseAnd we are very thankful for the outcome. Thank you John!!!!! God bless you!!!!!!
-
The attorneys at John T. Floyd Law Firm work diligently to achieve the best possible results for their clients. They are caring and knowledgeable professionals. Their expertise in the … More law and their experience as trial attorneys makes them the right choice as a defense attorney. I recommend this law firm highly.
-
From beginning to end this firm handled my case like the top tier professionals they are. I would not trust ANYONE else with my legal needs after having less than stellar experiences … More with other teams. Thank you Floyd!!!
-
I really felt like the team cared about my case and am super satisfied with the outcome. Would not recommend anyone else!
-
These guys do amazing work and have phenomenal service! Hands down best in the Houston area!!
-
John and Chris are true professionals! Love those guys like family!
-
Mr. Floyd and his team are very knowledgeable, informative, and helpful.
-
A team you can depend on to stand up and fight for you to prove the truth the whole truth!
-
-
Mr. John T. Floyd represented me.I couldn't be happier with the outcome he managed to achieve on an VERY Important case that was dismissed the day of Trial. He is patient & … More very knowledgeable of the legal system. I HIGHLY recommend him to anyone in need of a lawyer!John, I am forever grateful & satisfied with the effort you put forth & all you did for me. Thank you isn't enough!God bless you & your family!
-
The John T. Floyd Law Firm assisted me, and I can tell you that the attorney took the time to answer my questions, and I didn't feel rushed or dismissed as I have experienced in … More the past with attorneys. The attorney was very nice and extremely knowledgeable. Initial impressions and continued excellent customer service are big factors for me and as such I would highly recommend this firm.
-
I thank you for your efforts to help Felons regain their Civil rights, and for the information on possession , I am A convicted Felon, no violent history. I am an expert shot, I am … More 76 yoa, and very concerned about the present lake of Security in our State and Country. God Bless and Prosper you in your efforts, Your friend, Sonny Bivens
-
I really appreciated both Chris and John helping with my legal questions and concerns. Both are good guys and I would not hesitate to recommend them.
-
Extremely helpful!!! Helping me understand the law.
John T. Floyd is Board Certified in Criminal Law By the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Request A Confidential Consultation
Fields marked with an * are required
"*" indicates required fields
Copyright © 2024 John T. Floyd Law Firm • All rights reserved.
Designed & Developed by
