Chapter 13

Lawyers and the Adversary Process

 

Intro

            Define "adversary process"

            Duty of loyalty to client

                        Rule 1.6  Duty of confidentiality

                        Rule 1.7.  Avoid conflict of interests

            Role of judge

            Advantages and disadvantages

 

13.1  Ethics of Advocacy, Curtis

            Compare role of lawyer to priest, doctor, or banker

            Duty of loyalty to client

                        Government as client

                        Corporation as client

                        Private clients

            Duty of loyalty to court?

                        Court enforces duty to the client

            Examples

                        Client is fugitive from the law

                                    What if client won't turn himself in

                                    What if police ask if

                                    What if family asks

                                    Rule 1.6

                                    Question 3, Lake Pleasant murder case

                                    What does society get from this?

                        Judge gets the facts wrong

                                    Lawyer had docs, other side did not ask for them

                                    Judge makes incorrect factual finding

                                    What should lawyer do?

                                    Contrast if judge makes factual finding

                                    Rule 3.3.  Duty of candor to the court

                        Purposes beyond seeking truth

                                    Loser needs to believe got best shot

                                    Justice vs. truth

            Lawyers' job

                        Something to prove

                        Colors the review of documents, witness interviews, legal research

                        Role of settlements

                        Persuading yourself

                        Do you know if case is bad until the ruling?

                        Ethics of taking a bad case

                        Difference between morality for self and ethics of advocacy

            Stoics vs. Christianity

                                    Stoic:  Service to brethren, not concern

                                                Willing to endure any hardship, but for duty, not love

                        Is it all a game?

 

13.2  Fight Theory v. Truth Theory, Frank                

            To make rational decisions, court must have all the relevant evidence

            Does court get all the relevant evidence?

            One view, when both sides fight for their side, all important facts come out

            Lawyers hide evidence

            Lawyers have techniques to minimize damage, maximize advantage

                        Witnesses intimidated by situation

                        Different attitudes on direct exam and cross exam

                        Techniques, like rapid cross, to discredit witness

                        Playing on personalities, egotistical, control freaks

                        Witness preparation

                                    How to answer

                                    Demeanor

                        Use of surprise tactics

                        Trial practice guides are full of tips on how to do this

            Court is not private, it has the government's and society's backing

 

13.3  The Criminal Lawyer's Different Mission, Right to Prevent a False Case, Subin

            Facts, from victim

                        V was returning home from work in early morning hours

                        D took her at gunpoint, took a watch from her wrist

                        He took her to vacant lot, told her to take off clothes

                        Ground hurt her, so she asked to go to his place

                        He raped her in the apartment

                        D said they had to leave to avoid being seen by D's girlfriend

                        V waited around to try to get watch back, but never got it back

 

            Facts, from defendant

                        He said he had nothing to do with it

                        He had never seen woman before

                        He visited his aunt earlier, then went to a bar in New Jersey

                        Could not have sex due to gunshot wound

 

            Lawyer's investigation

                        Some of V's story does not make sense, but how would she know so much about D and D's apartment if she had not been there

                        Thought D was lying

                                    Why?  No advantage, or might hurt cause in court

                                    What if consent?  Problem with girlfriend?

                        Asked D again, what happened?  Even suggested "right" answers

                        Alibis did not check out

                        D says aunt will change story to correct time

                        D later admitted his guilt  (note he says it does not matter)

            Lawyer's Tactics

                        Disrupt state's case  (Rule 3.1)

                        Preliminary hearing

                                    V stuck to her story, and it looked credible

                        Case then goes on hold, NYC's system very slow

                        New tactics, after D said he did it

                                    Mistaken identity

                                    Consent  (looks like the better defense, based on facts in V's story)

                        Should D testify?  No way

                        Attack V's character?  He decided not to, but maybe he should have

                                    Rape shield laws, (Mich 750.520j)  cf. Kobe Bryant case

            Resolution

                        Court system was overwhelmed

                        State agreed to a weapons charge only

 

13.4  Nothing to do with justice

            Martin Erdmann, Legal Aid defense attorney, early 70's

            25 years, 100,000 criminals

            Nothing about justice, just get best deal possible for client

 

            Discuss the robbery case

                        2 guys accused of robbery

                        Guy was in jail for 10 months

                        If deal was one year, with good behavior, he walks

                        Has to admit he was guilty of something

 

            Henderson, charged with attempted murder

                        Does not seem rational, went to mental hospital but they sent him back

                        Wants a trial to find out if he is guilty or not

                        By the time of trial, he would be out if he takes the deal

                        If goes to trial, faces 5-10 years in jail

 

            Cynicism

                        Defendants are always "just finding" all kinds of things

                        Don't lower bail, you'll never see the defendants again

                        Guy has plea deal in place before lawyer knows what he looks like

                        One year for attempted rape of 4 year old girl

                        The client may lie as much as he wants

 

13.5  Rambo Litigation

            You have to be a jerk

            Gamesmanship and the adversarial model

                        NITA

                        Acting

            Intimidation

                        Sometimes, you have to be mean to a hostile witness

            Strategic friendliness

                        Sometimes being mean will get you in trouble

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1