Charles B. Bailey of Hagerstown has a tale to tell, and I agree it's a tale worth telling.
He teased it in an e-mail as "A (feel) good fish story," and a good fish story usually says more about the person doing the telling than the story being told.
Bailey's story has a hero (himself), described as a dedicated public defender who used a magnet tied to a string to retrieve a revolver that his client had thrown into Antietam Creek after committing an armed robbery.
Bailey said he went to extraordinary lengths to get his client a lighter sentence than was given his accomplice, a deal that he said involved getting the weapon off the street.
His client - rewarded for telling the truth about the gun but nevertheless guilty of holding up the assistant manager of a Dollar Tree store at gunpoint - got his wish. He was sent to the local jail for 18 months instead of what Bailey said would have been a four-year stint in state prison for armed robbery.
The story is no doubt entertaining, and Bailey sprinkled his e-mail with enticing tidbits that included borrowing a kayak from a deputy prosecutor, and of police officers and prosecutors laughing at him from the riverbank and taking bets with the accused man's father on whether the gun could be fished out.
Trouble is, Bailey stopped short of full disclosure when talking with me (he refused to name his client, even though the young man had pleaded guilty in open court), and he disclosed too much in his e-mail to the newspaper (details of secret plea negotiations with the prosecutor).
Washington County Assistant State's Attorney Viki Pauler did not take kindly to Bailey's recounting their conversation that led to the guilty pleas for the two men. She declined to discuss the case and called Bailey's conduct "grossly unethical."
Washington County State's Attorney Charles Strong said he found Bailey's e-mail nothing more than "self-serving, personal aggrandizement."
I grew suspicious when Bailey refused (and finally hung up the telephone in mid-conversation) to give me the name of his client, which would enable me to review the court file, find more people to talk to and add layers and texture to this seemingly entertaining fish tale.
This might very well be a good story for Bailey and his client, but good news for some people isn't necessarily good news for others. Does the man who had a revolver shoved in his face think it's fair that the gunman got only 18 months in jail? How about the accomplice who was supposedly going to get the tougher end of the deal even though he didn't touch the gun?
