The Press – Friend and Foe
I woke up this morning to get ready to go to court – just have one matter and I will be done in court for the day. I was going through my morning routine, which includes reading the news, getting my breakfast ready, picking out the clothes I am going to wear, when I came across this LA Times Article “Judge Halts Execution of Rapist and Murder”. I am an opponent of the death penalty so this article piqued my interest, and especially the way the article was titled.
That title is meant to get you incensed – how on earth could a judge do such a thing? Save a rapist? Save a murderer? Halt this monsters’ execution?
But if you read the article, it’s about the legality of the method in which a person is put to death in California. It reveals that recent inmates who have been executed in California may have not been completely anesthetized and may have suffered extreme pain from the cocktail of injections they received. The way I read it, it suggest that the method in California may be cruel and unusual punishment, which is unconstitutional in our great nation.
It’s not about a judge “saving” a murderer or rapist. The title is the first thing you read – it’s the theme that you carry with you while you read the article. Will the average reader be able to read that article objectively? Is the title just meant to grab the readers’ attention? Or is it meant to create fear that our justice system is getting soft and we need to toughen up on crime? Because I can tell you, from working the front lines, a criminal defense attorneys’ job just gets harder and harder.
In my mind, I’ve always framed the death penalty issue as a human rights issue, and an issue for humanity. I am sure that there are philosophers out there who can put it more eloquently than I will ever be able to express, so I will simply say that I oppose the death penalty.
The Press can be a friend to a cause as well – take for example, Jose Antonio Vargas and his series on the AIDS epidemic in Washington DC. His work has inspired the documentary “The Other City”, a powerful film chronicling the real life experiences of those suffering from HIV/AIDS in our nations’ capital.
I don’t think the LA Times article does anything helpful for the anti-death penalty cause, and I have no idea if that was even the point. I saw the title, was interested, and then immediately annoyed. That title was there to get me to click on it. Thoughts?
Related Articles
- Executions in the U.S. delayed by shortage of lethal drug (calgaryherald.com)
- Shortage of lethal injection drug halts US executions (telegraph.co.uk)
- Honor homicide victims – oppose death penalty (sfgate.com)
Juvenile Criminal Defense – 2 very different stories
I had a juvenile criminal case today which I was able to settle favorably. The minor was a very nice kid, 14 years old, who came from a stable 2 parent, middle class household. He made a silly mistake and his parents stepped in right away to correct the behavior. The criminal courts stepped in as well, which cued my entry into the whole thing. I have hopes that I was able to settle the case in a way that would allow my client to lead a happy and productive life, but also learn from his experience and not repeat the behavior.
Today I spoke with a fellow criminal defense attorney friend of mine who had a 14 year old client – only he was not a juvenile court client, his case was being adjudicated in adult court. Even though he was not an adult, he was being treated as one. I didn’t get a chance to ask my friend what he was charged with, but for a 14 year old to be in adult court, it was probably a very serious crime, perhaps murder, attempted murder, or something of the sort.
I started to wonder if there were any similarities between her client and mine. Was it possible that her client came from a middle class background? From a stable 2 parent household? Did he go to school? Did his parents step in with a firm hand the first time he had a brush with the law?
I don’t know, but I am guessing that my client and hers came from very different backgrounds. That while the above questions could possibly be answered in the affirmative, it was likely that they would not be. Representing juvenile clients has been some of my most rewarding work as a criminal defense attorney, but it is not without its moments of unbelievable sadness. It’s sometimes difficult to get out of bed in the morning and make your way to the office or to court.
The best you can do is remember who you are fighting for – the underdog, the under represented, the often misunderstood, and sometimes, the under cared for. Remembering that makes it easier to keep fighting.
Less is More
Sometimes being a good criminal defense lawyer means saying less is more. That’s probably the best lesson I ever learned when I first started out, and it has carried me to many victories. I think the pressure to speak and ask questions is high, especially when 1) you don’t think your client trusts you, and/or 2) Your client is paying you a lot of money and you feel like you have to sing for your supper.
Yesterday I won a juvenile court adjudication/trial for a marijuana possession charge. The police department had put up a fight when I requested the police report (as I documented on my private Facebook page a couple of days ago), so I just sent out a subpoena and they faxed the report over. I can honestly say I have NEVER had to subpoena an initial report. EVER. I guess there’s a first time for everything.
Anyway, when I got the report I was pleasantly surprised. I don’t know if this is just the cynical criminal defense attorney in me, but maybe they didn’t want to send me the report because they realized how weak it is. Anyway, I ended up doing the trial, even though my client was offered a diversion. He felt very strongly about standing up for his principle and having his day in court. I can’t agree more. But sometimes you have to do a risk analysis, no matter how strong your principle is. Even though I felt the case to be weak the diversion was tempting.
I have to say that the judge/referee in this case was extremely fair. One thing you learn is how to size up your bench officer, but this is the first time I’d been in front of him and I didn’t know anyone else who had. Even though I had a solid defense I proceeded with caution. Although it was prudent, it wasn’t needed. He could tell right away where the big hole was in the case, I asked 2 questions to clarify, and he dismissed it upon my 1118.1 motion.
So again, less is more.
Related Articles
- Judge: State pot law no defense in federal case (marijuanaevaluations.wordpress.com)