The passion for defense

A few days ago, I wrote what I thought was a time-killing post about how I am a conservative Republican criminal defense attorney. I lamented about how I have no ideological problems with aspects of the criminal justice system many of my colleagues deplore, such as the concept of mandatory minimums and the death penalty. Apparently I have struck a nerve.

This morning as I rolled into the office to prepare for another day of battle, I was greeted by two interesting posts by two blogging attorneys for whom I have a great deal of respect, despite having never actually met. Mark Bennett and Scott Greenfield are trying to light me up for my beliefs, here and here. Good for them. Bring it on.

Both believe a criminal defense attorney must be an anti-government, flag-burning, hippie liberal to be truly successful. Ok, as Scott Greenfield says, maybe I am over-simplifying a little bit. I truly enjoyed their posts. But I think their point is based on credibility. They believe a criminal defense attorney, in his zeal to protect his client, must believe every defendant should be rehabilitated and not punished. That each person accused of a crime has a mitigating story, and the law should recognize that story. The problem becomes what if the law is changed. What if instead of a 10 year mandatory minimum it was 2? Would they still be unhappy. I think they would.

This issue is probably bigger than I can deal with in one post (despite my apparent simplistic reasoning pointed out by Greenfield). When I say I have no problem with these concepts, I am talking in general terms of fairness. Do I think, in general, Bennett’s person convicted of trafficking 400 grams of cocaine should be punished with a mandatory minimum. Yes. Are there situations when that might not be appropriate? Of course there are. But fundamentally, I think the concept is fair. Do I think a person convicted of sexually assaulting a 6 year old boy should have to register as a sex offender and let everyone know wherever he lives for as long as he lives? Yes. Does it suck to be that guy? Probably more than any of us that haven’t gone to prison as a child molester will ever know. But do I think the person should have to register? Absolutely. Why? Because I want to know that someone like that lives near me, so that I don’t let my two year old son play unsupervised around him. There was a time when I could play in my neighborhood from morning to night without a care in the world. Those times are gone.

The bottom line is that I don’t think you have to be completely anti-establishment to be a successful criminal defense attorney. There is a burned-up, charred American flag hanging in a frame in my office. It was given to me by a former client who I represented pro bono because I thought he was getting a raw deal. He was an Army Ranger, and he stopped two guys that were antagonizing a woman at a bar. A fight ensued and he hurt one of the other men. Surprisingly, he was indicted for Aggravated Assault. We were able to convince the jury of my client’s innocence, and we walked out of the courtroom together. About a year later, he sent this flag to me that he had recovered from demonstrators in Saudi Arabia. The simple note inside said “This is what you and I are fighting for.”

I would bleed on the flag to ensure the stripes stay red and that my client is zealously defended to the absolute bitter end. That I do so from the Republican side of the aisle may puzzle many, and apparently “jeopardize my intellectual integrity.” But I have a passion for this that I don't see in all defense attorneys. I see it in Bennett and Greenfield. I believe it is the passion for defense that provides the client with the best chance in court, not how his attorney votes. But hey, what do I know?

Comments

[Scott Greenfield]

Oversimplifying? You? Nah.

[Matlock]

Oh the irony of Greenfield's three word comment mocking simplicity. I love it.

[Scott Greenfield]

Mocking? You? Nah.