Money won’t buy you better justice
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
On occasion, clients will hesitantly - almost embarrassingly - ask if giving us pds money will make things better for their case. Perhaps it will make us investigate defenses with more vigor or make us move their case to the top of our pile. Obviously, for the ethical attorney, the answer is no. That question is also a stupid question to ask private attorneys: they charge their fee and offering more money shouldn’t make them want to work more (some of the privates can chime in here).
There’s another problem with these sorts of questions: that money can be the answer to all of one’s problems. For example, a perfectly legal search can become problematic because $500 changed hands between the defendant and counsel or $2000 will create a third-party defense when you’re caught on tape with your name on a large cardboard card hanging from your neck, committing the offense, while looking straight at the camera, shouting loudly “I AM JOHN DOE. I AM COMMITTING THIS CRIME.”
Which is why I chuckle when defendants say things like “why did I pay that guy so much? I could have gotten the same result with a public defender” or “man, he didn’t do nothin’. The offer stayed the same”. It’s also really shady for a private to take a case away from a pd with the promise of a better offer. The other day, I read a transcript in which both the judge and the prosecutor stated on the record that the offer made to the defendant was the same that was made when he was represented by the public defender. The judge said “some defendants think that if they fire the pd and hire a private attorney, the offers are going to get better. That’s not the case.”
I’ve heard judges tell defendants “not to waste their money”, because whatever the private attorney can do, the public defender can do.
Folks - it’s the facts. Either there’s a defense or there isn’t. (In)competence reaches across both sections of the bar. There are incompetent public defenders and just as many incompetent private attorneys. Money won’t make them perform better. Or, at least, it shouldn’t.
Sphere: Related Content
Loading ...
You put an awful lot of things into one narrow paradigm. I think I’ll do something about this in the morning.
Is it all about plea offers?
Yeah, I do meander with my thoughts. It’s about offers, investigations..all sorts of things. Just the general idea that more money will make results more favorable.
Maybe I am wrong, but I’d be willing to bet that in some jurisdictions it pays to hire a juiced-in criminal defense attorney.
Attorneys that promise a better deal from prosecutor are committing an ethical violation. A lawyer is simply not supposed to promise a specific result, and while a plea offer is not a specific result, it damn well is close enough for obvious reasons. Personally, I would encourage the defendants to file a complaint with the bar authorities. If an attorney gets enough of those, then maybe he’ll stop because it just wouldn’t be worth it.
Sometimes money buys resources. I’m all about public defending, but a private attorney who has a smaller caseload just has more time to give to each case and more time to literally SEE his clients (or should, I surmise). It doesn’t necessarily mean the lawyering is better, but it may make the client feel better — especially in a world where we believe we get what we pay for.
I’ve worked with folks who would take it personally when a client hired a private attorney and “fired” the PD. It’s happened to me a few times, and when clients ask me whether they can hire a private attorney, my answer is always the same: “My job is to represent people who cannot afford to hire an attorney. If you can afford it, please, go ahead.”
One thing many may forget is that as a defendant with a pd you are entitled to matching funds. It can amount to a defense worth well over $100k if the pd is smart enought to motion for the vouchers in a complex case.