portrayal of defense lawyers on law and order
David W. Costello, ESQ.
defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
hired to kill the alleged rapist). the program makes defense lawyers out to
be arrogant, condescending and egotistical. now don't get me wrong, there
many, many defense lawyers who not only fit the mold but enhance the image.
however, there are some of us who genuinely feel that we help make the
system work, and do our job in a professional, courteous manner. besides,
you can find just as many DA's who have the same qualities i described.
ssnare
over.....
David W. Costello, ESQ. wrote in message ...
William December Starr
"ssnare" <ssn...@neo.rr.com> said:
> Cry me a river, and don't forget to collect 33 percent of it when
> it's over.....
And exactly 33 percent of *what* do you think criminal defense
attorneys collect, jackass?
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>, who must have been
dreaming when he thought that maybe, just _maybe_, this newsgroup
could be free of mindless lawyer-bashing.
Jeanna H
wrote:
>Cry me a river, and don't forget to collect 33 percent of it when it's
>over.....
>
>
>David W. Costello, ESQ. wrote in message ...
>>i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
>>defense lawyers.
Now, that wasn't nice...
I am sure that while some defense attorneys are poorly displayed in
L&O, others are right on.
I am not in the law profession (but have met some who are), I know
that not everyone enters law to get rich. Some actually want to uphold
the law and believe in the adage: "innocent until proven guilty"
---
visit my website at http://members.home.net./j-j
Chelsea Christenson
> i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
> defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
> was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
> the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
> hired to kill the alleged rapist). the program makes defense lawyers out to
> be arrogant, condescending and egotistical.
You haven't seen any episodes with Shambala Green as the defense attorney, have
you? I think Lainie Stieglitz has also had some good moments.
Barry Gaudet
: On Thu, 10 Jun 1999 11:52:00 -0400, "ssnare" <ssn...@neo.rr.com>
: wrote:
: >Cry me a river, and don't forget to collect 33 percent of it when it's
: >over.....
: >>i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
: >>defense lawyers.
: Now, that wasn't nice...
: I am sure that while some defense attorneys are poorly displayed in
: L&O, others are right on.
: I am not in the law profession (but have met some who are), I know
: that not everyone enters law to get rich. Some actually want to uphold
: the law and believe in the adage: "innocent until proven guilty"
Take the Shambala Green character as an example. A great portrayal AND a
great character. I think there is a fair representation of a wide variety
of defence lawyers, from mob lawyers to crusaders.
The perspective of the show demands that the defence lawyers are 'the
other side'.
--
'I can't lead and I won't follow.'
Doxdogy
attorneys are right down there with pond scum. Now I am not insulting defense
attorneys, so PLEASE don't think that. But, defense attorneys are attempting
to get the people that the cops but in jail, back on the streets. I interned
at the PD's office back in my criminal justice class days and they were a group
of nice people (the attorneys). But, the excuses the defendants came up with
were a riot and unbelieveable. So, take it with a grain of salt that this is
just TV. If it was No Laws and Total Disorder as the theme of the show, I am
sure that they would paint DA's in the same light as the defense attorneys.
Theresa
Samuel Bethune
>
> > > i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
> > > was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
> > > the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
> > > hired to kill the alleged rapist). the program makes defense lawyers out to
> > > be arrogant, condescending and egotistical.
> >
> > You haven't seen any episodes with Shambala Green as the defense attorney, have
> > you?
>
> egotistical described Shambala Green to a T. :)
Having once been a defense attorney, I feel qualified to comment on this
subject. First of all, I agree with your take on Shambala Green. While
defense attorneys are bound to zealously represent their clients within
the bounds of the law, Green's actions would just about guarantee a
complaint to the bar association or a contempt citation. The actions of
the defense attorney who represented the Russian mafia member in the
season finale are even worse and would merit disbarment in many states.
One of the best defense attorney portrayals I've seen on L&O was the
defense attorney from Texas who Shambala Green called to take the case
of a black defendant. He gave Ben Stone fits, yet he was by far the
best defense attorney I've seen on that show. If I'm not mistaken, he's
been back a time or two since then.
Sam
Chelsea Christenson
> > > i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
> > > defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
> > > was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
> > > the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
> > > hired to kill the alleged rapist). the program makes defense lawyers out to
> > > be arrogant, condescending and egotistical.
> >
> > You haven't seen any episodes with Shambala Green as the defense attorney, have
> > you?
>
> I always thought that words like arrogant, condescending and
> egotistical described Shambala Green to a T. :)
Well, she had to deal with all these lame-brains pursuing unjustified charges against
people of whom the system had obviously taken advantage.... At least she wasn't in
it for the money.
Chris Crandall
: One of the best defense attorney portrayals I've seen on L&O was the
: defense attorney from Texas who Shambala Green called to take the case
: of a black defendant. He gave Ben Stone fits, yet he was by far the
: best defense attorney I've seen on that show. If I'm not mistaken, he's
: been back a time or two since then.
I believe you're mistaken. This was the guy who played McCloud's boss,
right? A clever joke, making *him* be the rube from the Southwest come to
New York, rather than Dennis Weaver. The character appeared only once,
IIRC.
J. Lee Weems
situation a little. I know that the show's format
must make a hero ou tof the DA, but I am just sickened sometimes by the
"creative prosectution" strategies that
the DA's sometime use on the show. Sure, most people want the bad guys put
away, but they don't realize that
every creative prosectution that real life DA's use are just one more chink
in the armor of liberty.
-**** Posted from RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com/?a ****-
Search and Read Usenet Discussions in your Browser - FREE -
ssnare
attorneys who defended big tobacco what they're driving nowadays.
Jeff, who thought this posting board would be free of mindless name-calling
William December Starr wrote in message <7jot8o$m...@crl4.crl.com>...
Mosey
there
> many, many defense lawyers who not only fit the mold but enhance the
image.
No offense, but are you a murder DL, or do you know a lot of them? The
show deals with a lot of murder trials, where a guy is accused (and
usually with a pretty good motive) of flat out killing someone.
This isn't a defense lawyer trying to get a kid off of a cruising
violation to make a point. Or a flag burner or some other "right"
related thing. Who are you going to find outside the suicide camps that
murder is even a gray issue?
The defense lawyer I would think HAVE to be sleezy, they certainly can't
argue on principle and generally have a lot of evidence against their
client.
Does anyone know what percentage of people brought up on murder get
convicted compared to other crimes?
--
John Mosey FIRE BANDO!
http://www.kevinmitnick.com FREE KEVIN!
http://www.mosey.com Mosey's Fantasy Baseball
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Jeanna H
Crandall) wrote:
WHO is Sam referring to? In what episode?
Jimmy Mack
characters in the show. Often times they are limited by the script (the defense
attonrey is usually just a minor character or a secondary character), but there
have been a few that have been kind of fun to watch.
Ed Herrman was a great defense attorney. He had style and seemed to be pretty
gleeful during cross. A&E just ran the episode where Ruthi cross examines the
kid who poisons his baby brother--she was great. Her character was interesting
inside and outside of court.
Out of curioisty ... have any defense attorneys have been reoccuring
characters?
Jimmy
Jeanna H
Check out this site.
It's about recurring characters, called Repeat Offenders
http://members.tripod.com/~MindHarp/lorepeat.html
Jeanna
On 11 Jun 1999 01:24:34 GMT, james...@aol.com.schpam (Jimmy Mack)
wrote:
---
Constance Jenkins
>i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
>defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
>was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
Shambala Green...who was a zealous advocate for each of her clients
without ever sinking into "shark territory".
Actually, I can only remember a few defense attorneys they actually
painted (or at least that I perceived it) as being sleazy.
Attorneys are supposed to look after the best interests of their
clients and zealously defend them. I think they do a passable job of
showing that.
What exactly is it that you dislike? I've never noticed an
overwhelming bias...but then I'm not an attorney <G>
Consta
TVFan87656
>Ed Herrman was a great defense attorney. He had style and seemed to be pretty
>gleeful during cross.
Edward Herrmann played all his courtroom scenes with such gusto, you could tell
he enjoyed the character. L&O should bring him back next season.
Other defense attorneys I like(d): Shambala, Lainie, Arthur Gold, the women's
rights attorney who appeared a few times during seasons 4\5 (remember the ep
with Laura Linney who killed the Japanese man in his hotel room, and her lawyer
argued she killed because of a reaction to the traumas she went through in
Japan?)
-----------------------------------------------
Munch: You're not gonna smoke now are you, while we're eating?
Stan: It's still got it's little cover on.
Munch: So you practice safe smoking, is that it?
Homicide: Life on the Streets "Gone for Good
William December Starr
sb4...@mail.state.ne.us said:
> Having once been a defense attorney, I feel qualified to comment on
> this subject. First of all, I agree with your take on Shambala
> Green. While defense attorneys are bound to zealously represent
> their clients within the bounds of the law, Green's actions would
> just about guarantee a complaint to the bar association or a
> contempt citation. The actions of the defense attorney who
> represented the Russian mafia member in the season finale are even
> worse and would merit disbarment in many states.
Admittedly, the details of that episode have mostly drained out of my
brain by now, but as best as I can recall the only wrongdoing that the
defense attorney was even _suspected_ of (by Jack McCoy, that pillar
of disinterested analysis of the facts) was being the source of the
leak of the witness list. Despite the fact that McCoy had the man's
rights arbitrarily and unconstitutionally violated for it, no evidence
was ever put forth supporting the allegation.
alex kim
proves that not all defence attorneys are wrriten as someone arrgant,
condescendint and egotistical.
"David W. Costello, ESQ." wrote:
> i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
> defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
> was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
> the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
> hired to kill the alleged rapist). the program makes defense lawyers out to
> be arrogant, condescending and egotistical. now don't get me wrong, there
> many, many defense lawyers who not only fit the mold but enhance the image.
Diamond
news:37604E...@mail.state.ne.us...
> Having once been a defense attorney, I feel qualified to comment on this
> subject. First of all, I agree with your take on Shambala Green. While
> defense attorneys are bound to zealously represent their clients within
> the bounds of the law, Green's actions would just about guarantee a
> complaint to the bar association or a contempt citation.
I don't think Green's conduct was too bad. I don't think her defense of
Laura Debiasi (sp?), Davy Zifrin, or Claire Danes' character was unethical.
But I'm from California where we've had very little State Bar disciplinary
action for the last two years. (Gov. Wilson vetoed the State Bar funding
bill.)
> One of the best defense attorney portrayals I've seen on L&O was the
> defense attorney from Texas who Shambala Green called to take the case
> of a black defendant. He gave Ben Stone fits, yet he was by far the
> best defense attorney I've seen on that show. If I'm not mistaken, he's
> been back a time or two since then.
That was the case where the defendant shot his girlfriend's rapist, right?
Wasn't the defendant Hispanic? I thought defense counsel argued that the
defendant's culture dictated that he revenge the rape of his girlfriend?
Wasn't the defense counsel the guy who played McCloud's (Dennis Weaver's)
superior? What other episode(s) was he in?
ssnare
>Paul Rubinette became a defence attorney after he left DA's office. I thnk
this
>proves that not all defence attorneys are wrriten as someone arrgant,
>condescendint and egotistical.
Oh, I disagree.....very much so.....Robinette's character had become cynical
and back-handed as a defense attorney. He was willing to stoop to levels
that he hated while in the DAs office.
As a matter of fact, he was very critical of a case in which the race card
was being used as a defense, but then when he returned as a defense
attorney, he claimed it was "all about race"
Chris Crandall
A lot of the comments on this thread have, IMHO, missed the point.
Law and Order is a show that features governmental workers doing their
job, working hard, not getting paid as much as many of the people they
deal with, but having the best interests of the public at heart (most of
the time).
Defense lawyers often come across poorly--especially when they represent
big money clients.
If you think that Law and Order isn't about presenting some of the things
that government is good at in a positive light (policing and the justice
system), and presenting a more progressive view of the world than most
other shows (e.g., being primarily critical of the death penalty,
pro-abortion, pro-civil rights, skeptical of big developers,
anti-prejudice), then you're missing the point.
Dick Wolf's show has a political and social viewpoint, and it's perhaps
the best drama that consistently presents such a viewpoint.
The show is not conservative-friendly. But there are very few shows like
it--those shows that have a strong political viewpoint on TV are either
heavily conservative, or relegated to late-night PBS or the Bravo Channel.
True, there's plenty of sleaze factor among lawyers (and others) on L&O.
But I suspect a count of "sleazoids" would show a preponderance of them
among the private sector, and primarily among the moneyed, employer class,
rather than among the paycheck-to-paycheck employee class.
JEParham65
>: defense attorney from Texas who Shambala Green called to take the case
>: of a black defendant. He gave Ben Stone fits, yet he was by far the
>: best defense attorney I've seen on that show. If I'm not mistaken, he's
>: been back a time or two since then.
Are you sure it was a black kid?
I forget the name of the episiode, but wasn't he defending a Puerto Rican kid
that murdered another Puerto Rican kid that had raped his girlfriend?
The defense theory was that in some cultures, and in particular this kid's
(Peurto Rican, I believe) if someone did that, it was your actual duty to
avenge the transgression.
I may be wrong... which wouldn't surprise me...as it wouldn't be the first
time.... take my first marriage for example (Shudder).
ssnare
the cops and the DA office.
You don't keep viewers by having cases where the opposition is nice and
lets evidence go by when it could convict their client. The "bad guy" on
the show has to be VERY bad, so it keeps us nailed to our seats. A lot of
times the bad guy is the criminal....sometimes it's the defense
counsel......most of the time it's both.
The end result of it all.....great television.
Chris Crandall wrote in message <7jrhfj$dl0$1...@news.cc.ukans.edu>...
>
>A lot of the comments on this thread have, IMHO, missed the point.
>Law and Order is a show that features governmental workers doing their
>job, working hard, not getting paid as much as many of the people they
>deal with, but having the best interests of the public at heart (most of
>the time).
>
>Defense lawyers often come across poorly--especially when they represent
>big money clients.-to-paycheck employee class.
Game 6 E3
>defense attorney from Texas who Shambala Green called to take the case
>of a black defendant. He gave Ben Stone fits, yet he was by far the
>best defense attorney I've seen on that show. If I'm not mistaken, he's
>been back a time or two since then.
>
Cheif Clifford from "McCloud."
Game 6 E3
>characters?
>
Plenty. For example Ruth Miller, whom you cited in your posting. Others
include Sally Bell, Arthur Gold, Norman Rothenberg, Doug Greer, William Patton,
Shambala Green and the incompetent Max Hellman who represents his clients so
poorly that they always dump him beofre they go to trial (played by Ron Orbach,
Jerry's cousin). In fact one recurring attorney, Sally Goldman played by
Rosemary DeAngelis, showed up as a judge in "Shadow."
Ms Mog
and Anne Jackson) who played Claire's lawyer in "Censure" as well as appearing
in at least one other episode.
I also like Maria Tucci, but my sleepy brain can't recall her character's name
or any of the episodes she appeared in.
I'll sleep on it... :-)
Drakkenfyre
fed up with crime. It's a backlash. Heck, many of us love the strong-arm
tactics of the TV cops, but abhor this kind of behavior in real life.
But it's still darned good entertainment.
Drak
Drakkenfyre
TVFan87656
>One of my favorite defense attorneys is Marcia Wallach (daughter of Eli
>Wallach
>and Anne Jackson) who played Claire's lawyer in "Censure" as well as
>appearing
>in at least one other episode.
I like the defense attorney in the season 6 "Angel", whose incompetence was one
of the most entertaining parts in that ep. I'd love to see him return.
-----------------------------------------------
"Oh poor you."
Livia Soprano, The Sopranos.
Game 6 E3
>name
>or any of the episodes she appeared in.
>
That's Helen Brolin.
Game 6 E3
>I like the defense attorney in the season 6 "Angel", whose incompetence was
>one
>of the most entertaining parts in that ep. I'd love to see him return.
That was Ross Fineman played by Fisher Stevens (Michelle Pfieffer's old
boyfriend). Actually, I thought that his incompetence was a ruse.
Mike Carson
<eagl...@sgi.net> wrote:
>i am a big fan of l & o but i am dissappointed on how the program portrays
>defense lawyers. i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
>was ever put in a positive situation
You raise a good point but IMHO it is the only show (possibly
excluding the Practice) to pay positive attention to prosecuting
attornies.
Constance Jenkins
>I like the defense attorney in the season 6 "Angel", whose incompetence was one
>of the most entertaining parts in that ep. I'd love to see him return.
>
Fisher Stevens. I thought his "incompetence" was studied. He
managed to sucker punch McCoy there for a minute by luring him into
thinking he was an idiot.
Consta
Samuel Bethune
Constance Jenkins wrote in message
<3763c36e....@news.mindspring.com>...
I remember that particular episode. At first I thought he was one of the
most imcompetent lawyers I'd ever seen. By the end of the episode, I was
awestruck. He was one of the most devious, crafty defense attorneys I've
ever seen on the show, although IMHO he came perilously close to crossing
the line into unethical behavior.
Sam
Constance Jenkins
>
>I remember that particular episode. At first I thought he was one of the
>most imcompetent lawyers I'd ever seen. By the end of the episode, I was
>awestruck. He was one of the most devious, crafty defense attorneys I've
>ever seen on the show, although IMHO he came perilously close to crossing
>the line into unethical behavior.
I thought he pretty well crossed it <G>.
Fisher Stevens is a good actor. He does smarmy particularly well.
Consta
A.E. Jabbour
Mosey wrote:
> In article <mWQ73.289$Pl.1...@news.sgi.net>,
> "David W. Costello, ESQ." <eagl...@sgi.net> wrote:
> the program makes defense lawyers
> out to
> > be arrogant, condescending and egotistical. now don't get me wrong,
> there
> > many, many defense lawyers who not only fit the mold but enhance the
> image.
>
> No offense, but are you a murder DL, or do you know a lot of them? The
> show deals with a lot of murder trials, where a guy is accused (and
> usually with a pretty good motive) of flat out killing someone.
>
> This isn't a defense lawyer trying to get a kid off of a cruising
> violation to make a point. Or a flag burner or some other "right"
> related thing. Who are you going to find outside the suicide camps that
> murder is even a gray issue?
>
> The defense lawyer I would think HAVE to be sleezy, they certainly can't
> argue on principle and generally have a lot of evidence against their
> client.
>
> Does anyone know what percentage of people brought up on murder get
> convicted compared to other crimes?
>
> --
> John Mosey FIRE BANDO!
> http://www.kevinmitnick.com FREE KEVIN!
> http://www.mosey.com Mosey's Fantasy Baseball
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Hmmm. So, if I am an attorney, and I defend a murderer, I "HAVE to be
sleezy"? Excuse me, maybe I missed that part of civics class. It was my
understanding that every defendant has a right to representation, and a
right to be *tried* by his peers before he is deemed guilty? Or am I
misunderstanding some part of the constitution?
I believe that on L&O, both sides are occassionally portrayed in a poor
light. I think it is part of McCoy's appeal that he basically is so blinded
by his own sense of justice that he often is willing to circumvent the law,
or at least ethical boundaries to get what he wants. If the prosecutors in
L&O were portrayed as perfect white-hats, who never did anything wrong, and
were somehow so pure as the driven snow....would it be an interesting show?
I don't think so. It would be Matlock, onyl with prosecutors.
The fact is that on the show, all sides have been portrayed in negative
lights and positive lights: The police, the DA's office, Judges, Defense
Atty.'s, and regular citizens. That is what makes the show, IMO: it's
balance and realism.
And you know, just for your information, your job while defending your
client is not to "get him off". It is to give him the best defense that you
can within the boundaries of ethics and what you have to work with. It's
the lawyers that believe that their job in each case is to win no matter
what that are the bad lawyers, no matter what side they are on.
Sincerely,
AEJ
bro...@my-deja.com
defense lawyers and denigrate the police and prosecutors. Law and
Order provides the only balance available. I have watched this program
off and on over the years and perhaps I have not seen the worst of the
defense lawyers that they have portrayed, but I don't see the problems
that seem to bother you. Showing the abuse of evidence suppressing
tactics is a good lesson for the public at large.
William December Starr
bro...@my-deja.com said:
> There are plenty of programs now and in the past that positively
> glorify defense lawyers and denigrate the police and prosecutors.
> Law and Order provides the only balance available.
Of course, sometimes L&O shows the police and prosecutors in a
less-than-positive light as well.
> I have watched this program off and on over the years and perhaps I
> have not seen the worst of the defense lawyers that they have
> portrayed, but I don't see the problems that seem to bother you.
> Showing the abuse of evidence suppressing tactics is a good lesson
> for the public at large.
Abuse?
Samuel Bethune
bro...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7k6nhi$4r8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>There are plenty of programs now and in the past that positively glorify
>defense lawyers and denigrate the police and prosecutors. Law and
>off and on over the years and perhaps I have not seen the worst of the
>defense lawyers that they have portrayed, but I don't see the problems
>that seem to bother you. Showing the abuse of evidence suppressing
>tactics is a good lesson for the public at large.
I'll agree that there are some (not plenty) of shows out there that glorify
defense attorneys, but the only one I can think of that really denigrates
police officers is "The Practice", which on more than one occasion has done
a hatchet job on them. I've never seen police officers put down on "Perry
Mason", "Judd for the Defense", "The Defenders", "Matlock" and only
occasionally on "L.A. Law". Please provide some examples of these "plenty
of shows now and in the past" that you're referring to, aside from the
occasional "dirty cop" plotline that almost every lawyer or cop show has run
at one time or another.
Sam
Martin Wallace
One interesting example that I can think of, Sam, is Steven Bochco's
Murder One. I don't know if the portrayal of cops as willing to bend
(if not snap in two) the rules was consistent throughout the show, but
there were quite a few examples (IIRC)of the police deliberately
harrassing or even charging defense attornies who had clients that the
cops didn't like.
This may not be as large an element as I'm recalling, but it stuck in my
mind because the initial lead (Daniel Benzali?) who played an ethical
defense attorney constantly having to deal with the dirty, or at least
ethically challenged police and prosecutors on MO, was the same actor
who played a sleazy mob lawyer on NYPD Blue. I thought it was neat how
on one SB show, the police and prosecutors were the good guys and on
another they were the bad guys. I used to amuse myself by pretending
that both shows took place in the same "universe," (ie that DB played
the same character in each show) and that the difference reflected not
a difference in facts but in the POV adopted by each show.
Having said that, I think that the belief that started this thread, that
defense lawyers are badly portrayed on L&O is basically due to the way
that we're always treated to the behind-the-scenes on the prosecutors
and police and not the defense. In point of fact for a lot of the
episodes I think what our heroes do sometimes is pretty sleazy--my
"favorite" being the number of times they've threatened to put largely
innocent family members in jail in order to (frankly) extort a
confession from someone they "know" is guilty.
Martin
PotatoChip
Martin Wallace wrote in message <376992F2...@ns.sympatico.ca>...
I'm not familiar with that show or episode.. Do the cops get caught? Or do
they get away with it?
PotatoChip
Samuel Bethune wrote in message <92966045...@news.remarQ.com>...
>
>bro...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7k6nhi$4r8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>>There are plenty of programs now and in the past that positively glorify
>>defense lawyers and denigrate the police and prosecutors. Law and
>>Order provides the only balance available. I have watched this program
>>off and on over the years and perhaps I have not seen the worst of the
>>defense lawyers that they have portrayed, but I don't see the problems
>>that seem to bother you. Showing the abuse of evidence suppressing
>>tactics is a good lesson for the public at large.
>
>
>I'll agree that there are some (not plenty) of shows out there that glorify
>defense attorneys, but the only one I can think of that really denigrates
>police officers is "The Practice", which on more than one occasion has done
>a hatchet job on them.
If you feel "The Practice" disses the police you have a very perverted view
of that show. Most of the episodes cogently illustrae the questionable
ethics of teh firms defenses. Even to the point of having them get sued.
Unlike shows like Perry Mason, Matlock et al, "The Practice" does not show
law in the rosy viewpoint of absolutism that so many jurists and attorneys
ssem to want the public to believe. "The Practice" unlike those other shows
clearly illustrates that there are no moral absolutism in the application of
law and can never be. Too bad you just don't get it.
There are very few if any anti-cops shows on TV.
? I've never seen police officers put down on "Perry
>Mason", "Judd for the Defense", "The Defenders", "Matlock" and only
>occasionally on "L.A. Law".
Of course not, these were fluff shows that presented life in black and
white, good and evil. Easy to watch and understand, entertaining in a light
manner, but have no real depth nor do they present people with moral or
ethical issues that REAL life forces us to confront.
> Please provide some examples of these "plenty
>of shows now and in the past" that you're referring to, aside from the
>occasional "dirty cop" plotline that almost every lawyer or cop show has
run
>at one time or another.
Sam, almost all of the popular TV shows currently in production for network
or cable that involve police, glorify them. it is ubiquitous. From "Walker"
to "Cops" it is a police state on US television. It is extremely ugly. Wolf
manages to put a dig or two each season against the police and other law
enforcement types like DAs, but most of his episodes are pro cops.
Game 6 E3
>? I've never seen police officers put down on "Perry
>>Mason", "Judd for the Defense", "The Defenders", "Matlock" and only
>>occasionally on "L.A. Law".
>
>Of course not, these were fluff shows that presented life in black and
>white, good and evil. Easy to watch and understand, entertaining in a light
>manner, but have no real depth nor do they present people with moral or
>ethical issues that REAL life forces us to confront.
>
the Defense" fits this description and "The Defenders" certainly didn't. It
was the L&O of its day, taking on controversial issues in the real world.
PotatoChip
Game 6 E3 wrote in message <19990618023055...@ng-cb1.aol.com>...
Well I have to admitt not watching those last two so I should not have
included them in my rant. I stand corrected.
( I vaguely remember Judd for the Defense even existing, but "The Defenders
is totally lost to my brain cells) ;)
Martha Eckert
myself) is when the Lieutenant or Claire or somebody (not just these) will say
something like "we can't hold these people any longer. Then there's a discussion
about evidence that exonerates them, and more...we can't hold them any longer.
Then.... (and I love/hate this)....well, why don't you just hide that report for a
couple of hours"--to see if a confession will be forthcoming!
This is just absolutely amazing to me. I have no idea if it happens here at all
or with any frequency. I certainly hope not, but I'm not naive enough to rule it
out. It really just makes me sick. I don't ever want to win a case that bad that
I would ignore this type of behavior. I think it's unethical, and I like my law
license enough to not do it.
(Sorry for the high horse routine!)
Martha
Ms Mog
<< ( I vaguely remember Judd for the Defense even existing, but "The Defenders
is totally lost to my brain cells) ;) >>
That's because you aren't an old fart like we are... :-)
Any geezers out there remember East Side, West Side??
Game 6 E3
How could any show with George C. Scott and Cicely Tyson as social workers not
make it past the first season? It boggles the mind.
Samuel Bethune
>Potato Chip said:
>
><< ( I vaguely remember Judd for the Defense even existing, but "The
Defenders
>is totally lost to my brain cells) ;) >>
>
contrary to the blowhard who said this show and "Judd the the Defense"
regularly denigrated police officers, the fact is that they never did.
Lavos999
>i can remember only one episode in which a defense lawyer
>was ever put in a positive situation ( the episode from the marathon were
>the victim alleges self defense to an alleged rape attempt but really was
>hired to kill the alleged rapist).
Really? I thought this was actually one of the most *unethical* acts by a
defense attorney in the show's history. The attorney basically sold out her
client. I was disgusted by it. Yes, the client was guilty, but the defense
attorney's job is to zealously represent the client regardless of that. In
addition, there were various other cases ("Homesick" comes to mind) where a
defense attorney's zealousness helped the D.A.'s office to see that they had
suspected the wrong person.
> the program makes defense lawyers out to
>be arrogant, condescending and egotistical.
I don't see this at all. Most of the defense attorneys do everything in their
power to get their clients off the hook (or at least get them a good plea
bargain), which is their job.
----------
"As a basic step of self-esteem, learn to treat as the mark of a cannibal any
man's *demand* for your help. To demand it is to claim that your life is *his*
property."
- John Galt
Lavos999
>I always thought that words like arrogant, condescending and
>egotistical described Shambala Green to a T. :)
Well, yes, but she was certainly zealous in the defense of her clients! I just
loved how she was willing to try even the most crazy tactics, like having her
client hole up in a church, to avoid or minimize the impact on the defendant.
Although from a *personal* standpoint I thought playing the race card in
"Sanctuary" was despicable, it was the *right* thing for her to do *as a
defense attorney* because it helped get her client off.
Lavos999
>Out of curioisty ... have any defense attorneys have been reoccuring
>characters?
Shambala Green (played by Lorraine Toussaint) appeared in several episodes. So
did the defense attorney in "Point of View" and "Working Mom".
Sue
Lavos999 wrote in message <19990621091238...@ng-fu1.aol.com>...
>Brian Barjenbruch <bri...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>I always thought that words like arrogant, condescending and
>>egotistical described Shambala Green to a T. :)
>
>Well, yes, but she was certainly zealous in the defense of her clients! I
just
>loved how she was willing to try even the most crazy tactics, like having
her
>client hole up in a church, to avoid or minimize the impact on the
defendant.
>Although from a *personal* standpoint I thought playing the race card in
>"Sanctuary" was despicable, it was the *right* thing for her to do *as a
>defense attorney* because it helped get her client off.
You brought to mind an episode of "LA Law" where Grace was prosecuting
a black minister who shot two white intruders in his church. He shot them
in the back as they were retreating. His defense lawyer was played by
James Earl Jones. She was bringing up credible evidence to show that
the shooting was not in self-defense and not justified, and he kept playing
the race card. Outside the courtroom she confronted him, saying "race has
nothing to do with this case!" and he replied, "You pick your issues, and
I'll
pick mine." He got his client off (the case ended in mis-trial.)
Diamond
> Really? I thought this was actually one of the most *unethical* acts by a
> defense attorney in the show's history. The attorney basically sold out
her
> client. I was disgusted by it. Yes, the client was guilty, but the defense
> attorney's job is to zealously represent the client regardless of that.
While an attorney has an obligation to zealously represent her client, she
may not knowingly allow a client to present false testimony or otherwise
commit a fraud upon the court. [ABA Model Rule 3.3(a)(4)]. An attorney who
knowingly allows her client to lie on the stand may also be guilty of
subornation of perjury.
IMHO Lanie S. (Mary Kastrinsky's attorney) acted properly.
Lorie
>Brian Barjenbruch <bri...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>I always thought that words like arrogant, condescending and
>>egotistical described Shambala Green to a T. :)
>
>Well, yes, but she was certainly zealous in the defense of her clients! I
just
>loved how she was willing to try even the most crazy tactics, like having
her
>client hole up in a church, to avoid or minimize the impact on the
defendant.
>Although from a *personal* standpoint I thought playing the race card in
>"Sanctuary" was despicable, it was the *right* thing for her to do *as a
>defense attorney* because it helped get her client off.
*Getting the client off* isn't actually a part of the job description that
I've read for defense attorneys. Making certain that the client's rights
aren't getting thrown out the window is more to the point. If a defendant's
rights are being trashed due to racial bias, then the *race card* is
appropriate. If a defendant is of a different race than others in the law
enforcement/judicial process but is nevertheless being treated in accordance
to the Constitution, then the *race card* only serves to muddy the waters
and make a good case look questionable.
Lorie
"The only people who have to face reality are the ones who are too dumb
to duck when they see it coming."
<http://www.tackandapparel.com><http://www.in-housedesign.com>
William December Starr
"Lorie" <lo...@in-housedesignDOT.com> said:
> *Getting the client off* isn't actually a part of the job description
> that I've read for defense attorneys. Making certain that the
> client's rights aren't getting thrown out the window is more to the
> point. If a defendant's rights are being trashed due to racial bias,
> then the *race card* is appropriate. If a defendant is of a different
> race than others in the law enforcement/judicial process but is
> nevertheless being treated in accordance to the Constitution, then the
> *race card* only serves to muddy the waters and make a good case look
> questionable.
Getting a client off -- legally -- *is* part of the job description.
Practically every state in the Union, and the federal government, have
enacted laws patterned closely on (or identical to) either the American
Bar Association Model Code of Professional Responsibility or the
American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The
former is the set of suggested rules that the ABA promulgated in 1969;
the latter was a re-evaluation, revision and rewrite that the ABA
developed in the late 70s/early 80s, mostly in response to the behavior
of some lawyers during a small affair called "Watergate."
Below are excerpts from both. I've highlighted certain parts with
asterisks (*) in the first column.
From the American Bar Association Model Code of Professional
Responsibility:
CANON 7
* A LAWYER SHOULD REPRESENT A CLIENT
* ZEALOUSLY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW
Ethical Considerations
* EC 7-1. The duty of a lawyer, both to a client and to the legal
* system, is to represent the client zealously within the bounds of the
* law, which includes Disciplinary Rules and enforceable professional
* regulations. The professional responsibility of a lawyer derives from
his or her membership in a profession which has the duty of assisting
members of the public to secure and protect available legal rights and
benefits. In our government of laws and not of men, each member of our
society is entitled to have his or her conduct judged and regulated in
accordance with the law; to seek any lawful objective through legally
permissible means; and to present for adjudication any lawful claim,
issue, or defense.
And from the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct:
PREAMBLE: A LAWYER'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A lawyer is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal
system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the
quality of justice.
As a representative of clients, a lawyer performs various functions.
As advisor, a lawyer provides a client with an informed understanding
of the client's legal rights and obligations and explains their
* practical implications. As advocate, a lawyer zealously asserts the
* client's position under the rules of the adversary system. As
negotiator, a lawyer seeks a result advantageous to the client but
consistent with requirements of honest dealing with others. As
intermediary between clients, a lawyer seeks to reconcile their
divergent interests as an advisor and, to a limited extent, as a
spokesperson for each client. A lawyer acts as evaluator by examining
a client's legal affairs and reporting about them to the client or to
others.
Game 6 E3
>may not knowingly allow a client to present false testimony or otherwise
>commit a fraud upon the court. [ABA Model Rule 3.3(a)(4)]. An attorney who
>knowingly allows her client to lie on the stand may also be guilty of
>subornation of perjury.
>
putting Mary Kastrinsky on the stand. She blackmailed her into taking a guilty
plea by refusing to defend her any further. Even a guilty defendant is
entitled to a vigorous defense and lanie said that she wouldn't even make a
summation to the jury. She certainly seemed capable of formulating one that
wouldn't be fraudulent.
Diamond
news:19990622042836...@ng-cd1.aol.com...
> The problem was that Lanie didn't stop at refusing to subborn perjury by
> putting Mary Kastrinsky on the stand. She blackmailed her into taking a
guilty
> plea by refusing to defend her any further. Even a guilty defendant is
> entitled to a vigorous defense and lanie said that she wouldn't even make
a
> summation to the jury. She certainly seemed capable of formulating one
that
> wouldn't be fraudulent.
You expected Lanie, an officer of the court, to put on a defense that she
knew was fraudulent?
The defendant is not entitled to a false defense.
ABA Model Rule 3.4 provides:
A lawyer shall not: . . . (e) in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer
does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by
admissible evidence, . . .
NY DR 7-102 [1200.33] Representing a Client Within the Bounds of the Law.
A. In the representation of a client, a lawyer shall not:
1. File a suit, assert a position, conduct a defense, delay a trial, or
take other action on behalf of the client when the lawyer knows or when it
is obvious that such action would serve merely to harass or maliciously
injure another.
2. Knowingly advance a claim or defense that is unwarranted under
existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such claim or defense if it
can be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or
reversal of existing law.
3. Conceal or knowingly fail to disclose that which the lawyer is
required by law to reveal.
4. Knowingly use perjured testimony or false evidence.
5. Knowingly make a false statement of law or fact.
6. Participate in the creation or preservation of evidence when the
lawyer knows or it is obvious that the evidence is false.
7. Counsel or assist the client in conduct that the lawyer knows to be
illegal or fraudulent.
8. Knowingly engage in other illegal conduct or conduct contrary to a
Disciplinary Rule.
WhinySista
What about the "OJ Simpson Show" that ran for a whole year? That was nothing
if not anti-cop.
Game 6 E3
>You expected Lanie, an officer of the court, to put on a defense that she
>knew was fraudulent?
>The defendant is not entitled to a false defense.
>
No but she's entitled to a vigorous dfefense. Lanie refused to furnish any
defense at all unless Mary Kastrinsky took the deal being forced on her.
Constance Jenkins
That's not precisely true. Lanie didn't say "if you take the deal,
I'll do anything for you." She simply said that she would not
perpetrate a fraud on the court, which meant she would not put the
woman on the stand and would not give a closing argument, both of
which, under the defense she had thus far presented, be subjorning
perjury.
I suppose it depends on how you interpret Lanie's character (from her
several appearances). I don't believe she would ever "sell out" her
client. OTOH, she is an ethical attorney and won't violate the canons
of ethics, either.
Consta
Chris Crandall
: That's not precisely true. Lanie didn't say "if you take the deal,
: I'll do anything for you." She simply said that she would not
: perpetrate a fraud on the court, which meant she would not put the
: woman on the stand and would not give a closing argument, both of
: which, under the defense she had thus far presented, be subjorning
: perjury.
The failure to give a closing argument, to me, smacks of defection.
There is no reason that she cannot attack the prosecution's case, the
veracity of the witnesses, exploit loopholes, etc. While her client did
admit to shooting the victim, it's not as if she can say nothing. And,
there's no reason why her client couldn't testify in the narrative, AFAIK.
It was dramatic, and because the lawyer "seemed" ethical, it makes for
good TV, but not very good advocacy, IMHO.
Constance Jenkins
>The failure to give a closing argument, to me, smacks of defection.
>
>There is no reason that she cannot attack the prosecution's case, the
>veracity of the witnesses, exploit loopholes, etc. While her client did
>admit to shooting the victim, it's not as if she can say nothing. And,
>there's no reason why her client couldn't testify in the narrative, AFAIK.
>
>It was dramatic, and because the lawyer "seemed" ethical, it makes for
>good TV, but not very good advocacy, IMHO.
We're going to have to agree to disagree, I suspect.
As I understand subornation of perjury, any attorney who knowing
allows a witness to testify under oath to a lie is guilty of that
ethical infraction. IF Lanie allowed that woman to get on the stand
and say anything OTHER than "I killed him because a mob boss paid me
to do it," she would be suborning perjury. Since she could be
relatively certain her client would lie under oath, she had no ethical
choice but to a) remove herself from the case (which I rather thought
she should have done), b) not allow the woman to testify or c) commit
an ethical violation.
As for the closing argument, I can see your point, but it still comes
down to arguing a case she knows to be a lie. I don't know where the
canons of ethics covers deliberate falsehood in arguments to the jury.
I'm not an attorney.
But, when all is said and done, I still think Lanie was not so much
trying to help Stone nail her client as she was trying to stay true to
her own ethics.
Consta
WhinySista
certainly for an appeal?
GOP Gal 1
at the end), you could still appeal on the grounds of "ineffective counsel".
Of course, every defendant appeals on this basis and hardly any win. Still, it
is a possibility.
Game 6 E3
>That's not precisely true. Lanie didn't say "if you take the deal,
>I'll do anything for you." She simply said that she would not
>perpetrate a fraud on the court, which meant she would not put the
>woman on the stand and would not give a closing argument, both of
>which, under the defense she had thus far presented, be subjorning
>perjury.
>
>several appearances). I don't believe she would ever "sell out" her
>client. OTOH, she is an ethical attorney and won't violate the canons
>of ethics, either.
>
Lainie took the case because of a feminist agenda. When Stone confronts her
with evidence of mary kastrinsky receiving payment for killing the victim, she
mulls at momentarily, continuing with the case. When forcing the deal on
kastrinky she didn't say, Take the deal and I'll do anything for you." She did
say, in effect, "If you don't take the deal I'll stop defending you at all."
To me that's worse.
Constance Jenkins
>
>Lainie took the case because of a feminist agenda. When Stone confronts her
>with evidence of mary kastrinsky receiving payment for killing the victim, she
>mulls at momentarily, continuing with the case. When forcing the deal on
>kastrinky she didn't say, Take the deal and I'll do anything for you." She did
>say, in effect, "If you don't take the deal I'll stop defending you at all."
>To me that's worse.
>
Again, I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.
It depends on how you interpret Lanie's intentions. You interpret
them one way, I another.
Consta
bro...@my-deja.com
police and set down and go through it episode by episode and record the
subjects discussed in the episode. You will quickly discover that the
largest group of subjects is bad cops and bad police work. You didn't
even read my message or you would have known that my discussion
centered on the portrayal of defense lawyers. There have been precious
few television or movie portrayals of prosecutor as principal
characters and this has led to a pro defense lawyer portrayal since the
beginning of TV. It is true that early shows did not take on the
police, however those following the 60's sure did.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Martin Wallace
General rule discovered after posting for months on Usenet:
Never respond to a post that begins with the two word phrase "you
people."
Martin
PotatoChip
bro...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7l31lv$3k3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>You people are incredible. Take any of the shows that you say glorify
>police and set down and go through it episode by episode and record the
>subjects discussed in the episode. You will quickly discover that the
>largest group of subjects is bad cops and bad police work. You didn't
>even read my message or you would have known that my discussion
>centered on the portrayal of defense lawyers. There have been precious
>few television or movie portrayals of prosecutor as principal
>characters and this has led to a pro defense lawyer portrayal since the
>beginning of TV. It is true that early shows did not take on the
>police, however those following the 60's sure did
HAHAHAHAHAH you msut be a troll...Walker Texas Ranger ring a bell? the
most violent show on TV is also the most supportive of cops... Get REAL
bucko!!!! Next you will claim that NYPD and Hill Street Blues were anti
cop....LMAO!
Bitsybrain
Game 6 E3
>Also Mr. Gold, and Ruthie (played by Patti LuPone)
>
Another recurring defense attorney, Sally Goldman played by Rosemary DeAngelis,
showe up as the judge who authorized McCoy's sting operation in "Shadow."