Watching the News

My friend Russell Clanton finds himself on the front pages of the newspapers these days while he defends former Blue Lake police chief Gunderson against an array of charges. I'm not going to express opinions on the likely outcome of the trial, other than to note that Russ has so far done as good a job as a lawyer can do in defending Mr. Gunderson, including the dismissal of some charges. It's not out of the question for a complete acquittal, mostly due to Russell's excellent work.

But I admit I feel just a twinge of awe and jealousy in watching how Russell has handled the media. He has been able to counteract the District Attorney's considerable advantage in the press (the media loves prosecutors and eats up every lurid detail of a case that the prosecutor releases) by bringing the disgruntled girlfriend to the fore. This poor woman has told the press that the prosecutors have been badgering her and pressuring her to say things she's not comfortable with.

Who knows what the truth is? I can tell you, in my 20 years practicing law, that often the police get over-enthusiastic in their pursuit of a conviction. Sometimes the pursuit of truth takes a back seat. Sometimes, as in this case, no tactic is too dirty, no trick too low, in their zeal to bring down a well known defendant. Usually they believe that they're doing the work of the Angels--they have this idea that, to catch a bad guy, sometimes you gotta "walk on the dark side," as our beloved vice-president puts it.

Problem is, of course, walking on the dark side begins to have its allure even when you're going after some nobody. It becomes a habit.

So Russell Clanton, in defending Gunderson, has been able to shine a light on that dark side, and in doing so is at least battling the DA to a draw in the media. Good for him.

In a perfect world, of course, we would try our cases in the courtroom, not the media. But we haven't had a perfect world since Eden. And I have it on good authority that they didn't need courtrooms or newspapers in that locale.

The Bully

Helped out a lady recently who was in court with a bully. This lawyer kept trying to force her to reveal personal information on the witness stand. Medical stuff, where her children went to school, that kind of thing. And what was she there on? A debtor's exam!

Some lawyers think their profession gives them the right to be bullies. To make life as difficult and tedious and frustrating and aggrivating for the other side as they can. These lawyers do have success, to a point. Often, however, they miss the point.

These kind of lawyers especially love beating up on poor people who can't afford their own lawyers, like my friend in the debtor's exam. The law is used as a bludgeon to beat them into submission, damn the consequences for real life.

Usually a good judge will step in and whack a lawyer on the head when he gets too belligerant. But some judges won't, saying that it's the in pro per person's fault for not hiring a lawyer.

I don't believe in the bully approach. I think that what we deal with in the law is too important for the playing of schoolyard games. I have three times now been up against an in pro per in court since launching my solo practice last year, and each time I've tried to treat the person on the other side with respect and courtesy.

The problem, of course, is that the reputation of lawyers precedes me. So when I say in a quiet voice, "we should try to talk about this before we have the hearing," the person on the other side hears me scream "you'll never win because I'm a lawyer and you're not."

Getting back to my friend...I gave her some objections to use when the lawyer got off track. She did and the judge sustained them--and cut off the exam. As they were leaving court the frustrated lawyer called her the "b" word. She gleefully said back, "hey, you got beat by a girl!"