I've done my share of criticizing the criminal defense bar, but I understand that it's indispensable to justice.
Most of the time, in my experience, when the defense chooses to go to trial, what you're going to see is a dust storm designed to obscure the defendant's, shall we say, unfortunate behavior. But make no mistake, there are times when defense counsel does heroic work in exposing gutter-level tactics by the prosecution. I posted about one
recently, and of course I noted (who didn't?) defense counsel's spectacular work dismantling the government's fake and, frankly,
racist case against several members of the Duke lacrosse team.
Still, I had to laugh when I saw the
story of one defense lawyer up to the old tricks. The case was about Martha Shoffner, one time Arkansas State Treasurer, who had her hand out for bribes from those who wanted a piece of the state's bond business. She made off with a paltry $36,000 for her trouble.
At sentencing:
[Defense attorney Chuck] Banks asked the court to show mercy on Shoffner, saying she "made a terrible, terrible error in judgment" and characterizing her as "gullible" and "clueless." He said that she was inclined to accept the bribes from Stephens in large part because she was in a bad financial situation, having underestimated the cost of commuting on a regular basis between Newport and Little Rock.
Banks asked Holmes to consider Shoffner's "good deeds," including her work for the Humane Society. He presented the court with a picture of her dog, Fred, and said he was moved by the fact that after Shoffner was first arrested, she asked Banks to call her sister to check on Fred.
I practiced in federal court for many years, and it never occurred to me that I could advance the ball by citing anyone's dog. For that matter, it still hasn't.
Leave a comment