Public Defender vs State’s Attorney: The defender’s point of view
Posted by: trandolph in OpinionPublic Defenders: Priceless
Why do I want to be a public defender? Because I do not believe that money should dictate someone’s access to equal justice.
So many times in the past people have asked me, “How could you defend all those guilty people, all those murderers?” As law students, we should all
see the flaws in that question by now.
First of all, believe it or not, not everyone who gets arrested is actually guilty. As a matter of fact, not everyone who gets convicted of a crime and sits in jail for 20 years is guilty either. (Just ask the prosecutor in Dallas, Texas). And second, not everyone who gets arrested is a murderer. In fact, murders only account for a small fraction of all violent crimes that take place in this country each year.
But even with all of the flaws in
that annoying question, I think that part of the answer lies in what John Adams said in his passionate closing argument on behalf of the British soldiers accused of shooting and killing five Americans during the Boston Massacre: Even the most despised criminal in American history is entitled to a legal defense. And as the famous saying goes: It is better to let ten guilty men go free, than to convict one innocent man.
Unfortunately, many prosecutors these days, including the Clarence Thomas supporter who is writing the opposition to this opinion, do not seem to know the difference between guilt and innocence – just ask the prosecutor from the Clarence Thomas supporter’s hometown. Nor do prosecutors seem to care about an accused’s innocence, particularly, I think, because they cannot seem to comprehend the simple concept of “innocent until proven guilty”. In fact, I’ll go so far as to say that if prosecutors and cops, because they are indeed on the same dark side, had their way in this country, the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution would probably not exist. Actually, they already pretend as if they don’t exist, but I’m starting to get off track here.
As a result of the actions of the brave souls that take it upon themselves to stand up for the rights of the unpopular Americans, many prosecutors have found ways to “beat the system” by using unfair and underhanded techniques. As the Dallas prosecutor at least impliedly admits, he allows the Innocence Project
of Texas to scour through old case files in his office. Even so, the act of one so-called “heroic” prosecutor is hardly enough to make up for the damage that has already been done. Therefore, it has largely become the function of public defenders to act as an honorable “police force”, if you will, that stands between the powerful government and the poor little guy, forcing prosecutors to do their jobs currently while honoring all rights of anyone accused of a crime, whether it be murder or jaywalking.But I think that the other part of the answer to that irritating question is this: As a public defender, there are times when you stand by your client in court and rejoice when a verdict of “not guilty” is returned. And, of course, there are times when your client accepts a guilty plea, or has to listen to a jury read off a verdict of “guilty.” You may
be satisfied in knowing that you helped secure your client the best plea agreement possible, or you may feel that you weren’t cut out for criminal defense and that you let your client down when he or she is taken into custody after being found guilty. But I know that this much is true: When you’ve done everything that you can do, and things don’t work out as well as you had hoped, but the client still turns to you, shakes your hand, looks you in the eye and says, “Thank you for giving me the time of day and giving me the trial no one else wanted me to have,” it makes all the difference in the world. It makes my career of defending the rights of “all those guilty people, all those murderers” worthwhile, and my very costly license to practice law…well…priceless.

Entries (RSS)