Tuesday, August 26, 2003

The Myth of Lawyer Incivility

In your recent article about "incivility" among lawyers, I was amused to see the infamous phrase I coined a decade ago being trotted out by Mr. Carney. I penned the phrase in response to an allegedly more seasoned attorney’s delay tactics and numerous derisive taunts about my lack of trial skills, lack of experience with a particular Judge, and the merits of my client’s case. I chided this attorney for not answering the "damn phone" and I informed him, tongue in cheek, that "a retarded monkey with Alzheimer's" could win the case. Although too flippant in my expressions, I do not regret them. I only lament that your readers do not have the benefit of experiencing the condescending behavior that inspired them.

Fact is, I was as angry then and I am now with the Bar’s Graybeards that ignore the sources of incivility. While a velvet tongue is useful in maintaining civility, there are greater sins of incivility rampant among our judges and the Utah Bar’s senior leadership. These fossils of the imagined halcyon days when all lawyers and judges were civil invariably mislabel frank and direct speech that calls them on their bullish behavior as "uncivil." With self-righteous indignation and the veiled agenda of hobbling their competition, they target younger lawyers or the more flamboyant for punishment for being the alleged epitome of incivility.

While these senior attorneys and judges may never utter a "damn" nor a sarcastic phrase, many are guilty of more substantial incivility. They use their positions and knowledge, not as civilizing tools of persuasion and justice, but as weapons to bludgeon and demonstrate their superiority. They belittle, connive and patronize. They are rude and inpatient, often treating attorneys and parties before them with no concern for their humanity, their schedules or their time. They never enlighten, empathize or apologize. No, the Bar membership does not suffer from a lack of civility, it suffers from a lack of leadership. To the Frank Carneys of the Bar, I say clean up the leadership before you smugly tally the sins of the rank and file.

Loren M. Lambert

August 26, 2003

Friday, August 1, 2003

Krakauer Coughs Up a Crock

Jon Krakauer recently intimated that the LDS church has culpability for the Lafferty murders. What a crock. He needs to hang out more on death row instead of venturing into thin air. If he did, I suspect he would discover that most murderers have some petty or grandiose excuse for their heinous actions–whether it be the Twinkie defense, the I’m-on-a-diet defense, the I-must-cleanse-humanity defense or the God–told–me-to–do-it defense. Yet, no one suggests the abolishment of Twinkies, diets, politics or religion. Rare is the murderer who admits killing because they’re just a sick bastard who enjoyed it.

Maybe I misunderstood Mr. Krakauer. Maybe what he really meant to say was that many seemingly innocuous entities that teach a particular dogma or set of rules and require obedience thereto harbor fanatics and psychopaths. If so these entities, when possible, should root them out. I agree. It’s farfetched, however, to state that the LDS Church, as an entity, had anything to do with the Lafferty murders. Murderers simply blanket themselves in whatever philosophical cloak that’s at hand to cover the nakedness of their depravity and to comfort their failing consciences. Had the Laffertys been members of the Mickey Mouse Club, we’d probably be reading, "Under the Banner of Mickey," instead of "Under the Banner of Heaven."

Perhaps those reading Mr. Krakauer’s book will misunderstand his message and, like Lenin, will advocate the extermination of religion and its adherents. If they do, they are no better than the Laffertys. Religion is as endemic to human thought as is music. Both course through our souls. Deprived of either we will wither or invent them anew. Fail to choose a religion and a religion will inexorably choose you. It could be the LDS church, the I-hate-religion-religion, the Amway religion, the fans-of–Jon–Krakauer religion, the drunkard’s religion, the AA religion, or even the I-work-and-write-like-a-slave religion. So choose wisely. While the tune of my soul may not be music to your ears, and while your or my religion may cause some to exclaim, "What the %$#?," let’s grant everyone their little piece of faith-based irrationality and then work hard to weed out the zealots and psychopaths.

Loren M. Lambert © August 1st, 2003