There is nothing in the world like hearing the judge read "we, the jury, find the defendant, John Doe, guilty...." Non-competitive people do not become trial lawyers. I love to win. Everyone I work with loves to win. And the defense attorneys love to win. But there's a big difference in how we act when we win.
During trial, all day or all week or all month (depending on the trial) I am fighting. Constantly. Objecting, arguing, telling the story, persuading, working my butt off to win. I come home at the end of the day cramped up from forgetting to drink water and utterly exhausted from the 8-10 hour performance I just gave. And yes, it is largely performance. Always sit up straight (the jury is looking). Craft every word perfectly but react on your feet to the unexpected things that happen during trial. It's a rush and you have to love it to do it.
And when I win, I want to dance. I want to shout. But I do the slight upward "justice was served" smile and nothing more. Because the jury needs to know it's not a game. Despite the fact that I "won" and that feels great, it is ultimately about the service of justice.
Defense attorneys don't serve justice like prosecutors do. That's not to say their job isn't important. They serve the individual. They protect individual rights. Prosecutors have the task of making sure trials are fair, due process is given, and truth is served.
Many defense attorneys are "win at all costs" (some prosecutors too).
Here's the truth: defense attorneys want uneducated, stupid gullible jurors. It's a fact. They want people they can mislead, confuse, distract, and create doubt in easily. Prosecutors are always looking for the more educated, intelligent, discerning jurors. Every trial I have had it's the same. Defense strikes the people with Master's degrees, the Doctorates, and those who generally come off as not easily confused. Often they can't get rid of all the good jurors, but from their perspective all they need is one. One person they can confuse/mislead/deceive enough to get at least a hung jury. It's very frustrating from the prosecution perspective because frankly we just want smart jurors who will think it through. We have a duty not to go to trial unless we believe in our case - so we always believe smart jurors will see through the BS and see the facts as convincing. Defense attorneys have no such obligation to believe the crap they're saying.
This may be a little harsh on the defense bar. There are good defense attorneys and frankly spinning the fact to try to get their clients off is part of their job. Some do it better than others. Some do it more ethically than others. I don't mean to disparage them. I have friends who I greatly respect who practice criminal defense. We both pick jurors based on who we think will see the case from the perspective we want them to - prosecutors just think the smarter people will see it our way.
No comments:
Post a Comment