President Bush, in presenting his plan to try the inmates at Guantanamo pursuant to rules that would have made Herod, the Sanhedrin and Pontius Pilot blush, explained that his goal was to give justice to those who gave no justice to others. This is in keeping with his lengthy history of sound bite blather that never bears any resemblance to the substance behind the spin. If it were otherwise, he would have admitted it was his goal to bring swift and predetermined judgment upon the heads of those that are accused of the same.
Tragically, in his haste to salvage his flagging support, he, along with many of us, have forgotten that the America we should love and idealize, is not the America of swift judgment, of retribution, of preemptive strikes or of the short term gain at the expense of the long term ideal. Nor is it the America that labels another human being a "non-combatant" so that decency can be dispensed with and torture inflicted. It is the America that, no matter how imperfectly we had lived up to its ideals, still strives to adhere to the creed that all mankind is created equal and possesses certain inalienable rights that are not lost because of the whims of an ever increasingly strident, isolated, and out of touch leader.
It is the preservation and perpetuation of this American ideal that should be foremost in our minds and that will, in the long run bring peace more assuredly than any swift trial, conviction and execution of the rabble confined at Guantanamo. Summarily try then kill this small handful of mortals and a thousand more will spring up in their place; rob them of their propaganda by taking the higher ground, and they will fade into oblivion.
Loren M. Lambert
Sept. 14, 2006 ©
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Saturday, August 5, 2006
It's All About Sex
Whether you’re anti-porn, pro-porn, or just secretly pro-porn during weak moments and anti-porn in public or when penitent, we all should agree on one thing: sexuality, and its co-conspirator, nudity, are powerfully commanding forces that demand (and certainly get) our attention whether we like it or not. In fact, I daresay, that sex, next to greed, is the driving force behind terrorism. That’s right, not oil, not religion, not nationalism, but sex. Let’s face it, "sex is industry, it sells cars, it sells magazines," as the Switch Foot song goes, and whether we admit it or not, we "can’t get no satisfaction," because if we could, none of this would matter.
The reaction to sex, and it’s co-conspirator nudity, is a wonder to behold among us Homo sapiens. For example, when is the last time you held up the picture of a dog and then your dog start going into heat or humping? Nor do you see teenage female hippos get disgusted when they see the overweight buttocks of a fellow hippo protruding from the waters edge of the local swimming hole. The ability to cause disgust, anger, surprise, wonder, awe and arousal by depiction of the human form is both an amazing and powerful thing. Some would argue that its power should be completely suppressed, others that it should be let loose without limits. Neither approach is right.
Unfortunately, the data cannot prove that pornography causes certain sexual depravities. Consequently, the verdicts still out. What came first? The chicken or the egg? The desire and drive to feed the depravity with pornography or the pornography and then the depravity? On the other hand, if giving into sexual desire led to criminality, most of us would be criminals. All sexual beings have a drive to explore their sexuality. It is innate, it is inborn, you cannot cut it off without damage any more then you can lop off your own arm or gouge out your eye.
Although we are entitled to live our lives as chaste and nonsexual as we choose, we should not become puritanical, prudish, Victorian and self-righteous. King David and King Solomon were among the first pornographers. Although their explanations and focus regarding their many wives and concubines may have been different, their desire was no different than that of our modern-day Flints. Furthermore, I remain unconvinced that the choice of our modern-day Mormon leaders, including Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, to have many wives had nothing to do with sex. This is not to say that if those choices were influenced by sex, they were necessarily evil. When Mormons say that Brigham Young’s decision to have many wives had everything to do with complying with God’s wishes and nothing to do with sensual pleasure, they are deluding themselves and equating sexual pleasure with evil. Using an analogy that even right-wing, gun-toting ideologues will understand, sex is not evil anymore than guns are evil. It is equally wrong both to deny the reality of sexual desire as it is to proclaim that monogamy has and always will be the rule.
There is nothing wrong with the maximization of sexual pleasure, so long as it doesn’t involve force, coercion, minors, the need for welfare, undue risk, physical harm, and disequilibrium. On the other hand, as a society we should not begrudge the desire that many of us have to control when, where, and how we and our children will be sexually aroused and sexually involved. While we should respect the sexual expression of others, we should not have to experience a constant barrage of conduct which either directly or indirectly destroys all ability to choose the boundaries of our sexuality.
Saturation cheapens sex’s currency, gives free rein to those who are prone to overstimulation, and destroys freedom, while creating complete depravity for the weaker among us. Suppression, on the other hand, ignores the force that, when unduly bottled up, will erupt surging in unexpected and uncontrollable manners.
Just as we have learned to give freedom to speech, the practice of religion, and the pursuit of happiness, we need to find a way to provide both freedom and security for those who believe sex can be plowed under by cold showers, jumping jacks, hymn singing, and emotional and physical castrations, as well as those who believe that their sexual pleasure should include everything and anything up to ensuring that their fence posts and knotty pines have been introduced to their sexual prowess.
Loren M. Lambert
©August 2006
The reaction to sex, and it’s co-conspirator nudity, is a wonder to behold among us Homo sapiens. For example, when is the last time you held up the picture of a dog and then your dog start going into heat or humping? Nor do you see teenage female hippos get disgusted when they see the overweight buttocks of a fellow hippo protruding from the waters edge of the local swimming hole. The ability to cause disgust, anger, surprise, wonder, awe and arousal by depiction of the human form is both an amazing and powerful thing. Some would argue that its power should be completely suppressed, others that it should be let loose without limits. Neither approach is right.
Unfortunately, the data cannot prove that pornography causes certain sexual depravities. Consequently, the verdicts still out. What came first? The chicken or the egg? The desire and drive to feed the depravity with pornography or the pornography and then the depravity? On the other hand, if giving into sexual desire led to criminality, most of us would be criminals. All sexual beings have a drive to explore their sexuality. It is innate, it is inborn, you cannot cut it off without damage any more then you can lop off your own arm or gouge out your eye.
Although we are entitled to live our lives as chaste and nonsexual as we choose, we should not become puritanical, prudish, Victorian and self-righteous. King David and King Solomon were among the first pornographers. Although their explanations and focus regarding their many wives and concubines may have been different, their desire was no different than that of our modern-day Flints. Furthermore, I remain unconvinced that the choice of our modern-day Mormon leaders, including Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, to have many wives had nothing to do with sex. This is not to say that if those choices were influenced by sex, they were necessarily evil. When Mormons say that Brigham Young’s decision to have many wives had everything to do with complying with God’s wishes and nothing to do with sensual pleasure, they are deluding themselves and equating sexual pleasure with evil. Using an analogy that even right-wing, gun-toting ideologues will understand, sex is not evil anymore than guns are evil. It is equally wrong both to deny the reality of sexual desire as it is to proclaim that monogamy has and always will be the rule.
There is nothing wrong with the maximization of sexual pleasure, so long as it doesn’t involve force, coercion, minors, the need for welfare, undue risk, physical harm, and disequilibrium. On the other hand, as a society we should not begrudge the desire that many of us have to control when, where, and how we and our children will be sexually aroused and sexually involved. While we should respect the sexual expression of others, we should not have to experience a constant barrage of conduct which either directly or indirectly destroys all ability to choose the boundaries of our sexuality.
Saturation cheapens sex’s currency, gives free rein to those who are prone to overstimulation, and destroys freedom, while creating complete depravity for the weaker among us. Suppression, on the other hand, ignores the force that, when unduly bottled up, will erupt surging in unexpected and uncontrollable manners.
Just as we have learned to give freedom to speech, the practice of religion, and the pursuit of happiness, we need to find a way to provide both freedom and security for those who believe sex can be plowed under by cold showers, jumping jacks, hymn singing, and emotional and physical castrations, as well as those who believe that their sexual pleasure should include everything and anything up to ensuring that their fence posts and knotty pines have been introduced to their sexual prowess.
Loren M. Lambert
©August 2006
Thursday, June 15, 2006
World Cup Soccer Sleeper--Ra, Ra, ZZZzz--sleepy time
If basketball were as exciting as soccer, imagine the possibilities. The hoop could be fifty feet up. The court would be a mile long. A goal keeper flying on a broomstick could keep anything coming close from going in. And best of all–the replays on the jumbo tron!
"Lets see that again. Wow, look how Dirk goes in, launches the ball. Its going up, up, up and now down, down, down. Its coming close. Oh no, four inches of ball hits the rim and sends it off into hyper-space. What a fantastic attempt by the Dirkinator. Amazing. He’s an incredible shooter.
Here’s another angle, notice how Dirk is one jigometer off balance. Then the ball zeros in. A fly on that rim would think it was safe until the last split second, when the ball, zeroing in, crashes against the rim.
Lets show that again, only this time–that’s right, super, sloooooow mo-o-o! Now would be a good time to check on Grandma or do your Kidney dialysis. Otherwise, pay attention. Hone in on every excruciating detail of this fantastic effort by the Dirkmiester. Look at those muscles flex and bulge, watch his cheeks jiggle, then read his pulse on that carotid artery. Count the beads of sweat flying from his hair and onto the ball. There’s the release. This would be a good time to purchase your favorite beverage. Back? Good. Brace yourself. Here comes the impact. Notice the force this bullet shot exerts as it bashes the rim. Man, the reverberations are shaking through the entire backboard and into the stadium.
But that’s not all folks. We have a real treat for you today at the World Cup. Here’s what our infra red and gamma ray camera picked up. See that line? That’s Dirk’s gaze up to the basket. Oh, and yes, he does wear Hanes and have an "I love Mom," tattoo on his jumping muscle. Now, watch the ball as it nears the rim. See that florescent purple aura around the ball? That, my friends, is the life force, the spirit, or the will that only powerful athletes like Dirkster can give. Then, notice on the ball there’s a red palm print from the heat off Dirk’s almost perfect touch. Phenomenal. Look! The life force aura is separating from the ball. It goes through the hoop then merges back into the ball. That, sports fans, is the mark of a true champion. It shows that Dirk wanted it-- but it just wasn’t enough. . . Now back to the game"
Ra, Ra, Zzz--sleepy time.
If soccer was as boring as real basketball, you would shorten the field, enlarge the goal, cover the entire back area surrounding the goal with a taught ball-deflecting net that would immediately propel misses back into play. But this would ruin the game with action filled, lightning fast, multi-strategic and provocative high scoring goal making and thereby eliminate the reason we all go to soccer games–to ponder between goals how to eliminate scoring all together and to thereby have more time to check up on Grandma.
Loren M. Lambert
© June 15, 2006
"Lets see that again. Wow, look how Dirk goes in, launches the ball. Its going up, up, up and now down, down, down. Its coming close. Oh no, four inches of ball hits the rim and sends it off into hyper-space. What a fantastic attempt by the Dirkinator. Amazing. He’s an incredible shooter.
Here’s another angle, notice how Dirk is one jigometer off balance. Then the ball zeros in. A fly on that rim would think it was safe until the last split second, when the ball, zeroing in, crashes against the rim.
Lets show that again, only this time–that’s right, super, sloooooow mo-o-o! Now would be a good time to check on Grandma or do your Kidney dialysis. Otherwise, pay attention. Hone in on every excruciating detail of this fantastic effort by the Dirkmiester. Look at those muscles flex and bulge, watch his cheeks jiggle, then read his pulse on that carotid artery. Count the beads of sweat flying from his hair and onto the ball. There’s the release. This would be a good time to purchase your favorite beverage. Back? Good. Brace yourself. Here comes the impact. Notice the force this bullet shot exerts as it bashes the rim. Man, the reverberations are shaking through the entire backboard and into the stadium.
But that’s not all folks. We have a real treat for you today at the World Cup. Here’s what our infra red and gamma ray camera picked up. See that line? That’s Dirk’s gaze up to the basket. Oh, and yes, he does wear Hanes and have an "I love Mom," tattoo on his jumping muscle. Now, watch the ball as it nears the rim. See that florescent purple aura around the ball? That, my friends, is the life force, the spirit, or the will that only powerful athletes like Dirkster can give. Then, notice on the ball there’s a red palm print from the heat off Dirk’s almost perfect touch. Phenomenal. Look! The life force aura is separating from the ball. It goes through the hoop then merges back into the ball. That, sports fans, is the mark of a true champion. It shows that Dirk wanted it-- but it just wasn’t enough. . . Now back to the game"
Ra, Ra, Zzz--sleepy time.
If soccer was as boring as real basketball, you would shorten the field, enlarge the goal, cover the entire back area surrounding the goal with a taught ball-deflecting net that would immediately propel misses back into play. But this would ruin the game with action filled, lightning fast, multi-strategic and provocative high scoring goal making and thereby eliminate the reason we all go to soccer games–to ponder between goals how to eliminate scoring all together and to thereby have more time to check up on Grandma.
Loren M. Lambert
© June 15, 2006
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Trash Team Treat Rosters
I hadn’t seen as many overhanging, bulging bellies at a sporting event since our entire Lamaze class attended the Sumo wrestling world championships in Seattle. Yet there they were, punctuating the field in my twelve-year-old-son’s soccer game. The best player, when he wasn’t gasping for breath, red-faced and bent over (which was about 75% of the time), had a belly that would have caused any decent wage earning obstetrician to immediately induce labor. That is, if the boy had the excuse of pregnancy. But he didn’t. No. He had the excuse that has evolved to be the most important yet pernicious ritual of all little league sports--the team treat roster.
Watching him and several other chunkers bouncing up and down the field almost made me nostalgic for days when not only was there no team treat roster, there was strict water rationing--an invention of the Bataan death march survivors. And who knows, maybe introducing them to waist reducing Marlboros would be, in the long run, just as healthy.
Well, then again, perhaps watching the kids prematurely wearing out their knees sustaining their burgeoning girths is better than watching them die from cancer or pass out from heat stroke like a few did in my day, but do you see my point? The pendulum has swung a bit too far and is sagging, getting heavier daily, and may just snap before it can swing back.
I mean miss a few practices, no big deal. Blow off a couple of games, okay, we’ll let it pass. But forget to bring the treats on your assigned day, and you will be blindfolded before the goal box, and stripped naked with one hundred soccer balls drilled at your defenseless body. All of this with no line of teammates in a groin-protecting stance, providing a small wall of hope. Such public punishments would certainly make soccer more appealing to the masses.
What, then, is the result of our society gone mad with team treat rosters, Sunday school bribes, Dads and Donuts Day, bring a treat to work on Fridays and plug-the-school-budget-with-soda-sells? Hint, it ain’t Twiggy. So, for the love of Pete, as a first step back from the blubbery brink, let’s trash the team treat rosters.
Loren M. Lambert
© May 18, 2006
Watching him and several other chunkers bouncing up and down the field almost made me nostalgic for days when not only was there no team treat roster, there was strict water rationing--an invention of the Bataan death march survivors. And who knows, maybe introducing them to waist reducing Marlboros would be, in the long run, just as healthy.
Well, then again, perhaps watching the kids prematurely wearing out their knees sustaining their burgeoning girths is better than watching them die from cancer or pass out from heat stroke like a few did in my day, but do you see my point? The pendulum has swung a bit too far and is sagging, getting heavier daily, and may just snap before it can swing back.
I mean miss a few practices, no big deal. Blow off a couple of games, okay, we’ll let it pass. But forget to bring the treats on your assigned day, and you will be blindfolded before the goal box, and stripped naked with one hundred soccer balls drilled at your defenseless body. All of this with no line of teammates in a groin-protecting stance, providing a small wall of hope. Such public punishments would certainly make soccer more appealing to the masses.
What, then, is the result of our society gone mad with team treat rosters, Sunday school bribes, Dads and Donuts Day, bring a treat to work on Fridays and plug-the-school-budget-with-soda-sells? Hint, it ain’t Twiggy. So, for the love of Pete, as a first step back from the blubbery brink, let’s trash the team treat rosters.
Loren M. Lambert
© May 18, 2006
Monday, April 10, 2006
"Natives" Be Warned
Ask any Native American what the fate is of a people that cannot control its borders. The answer is obvious--annihilation and marginalization. If a nation cannot control immigration into its borders, then immigration will control it--for better or for worse.
Forget the debates on what the depth, breadth and width of immigration should be. They are irrelevant until the borders are shut tight, by whatever means, to the undocumented masses. This is the overarching issue. It has nothing to do with legitimacy, race, color, culture, religion or country of origin. This is now our home. Expediency, not legitimacy, demands that we control first our borders and second the influx of those desiring the privilege of calling themselves Americans.
We can ignore the lesson we ruthlessly imposed upon the backs of our native brothers and have that same lesson visited upon our own heads, or we can choose our fate. To so choose should not include negotiating with the undocumented, the cordoning off of our laws into the infertile grounds of the reservation. This is not to say that illegal immigrants who would dictate their legitimacy are not worthy of this privilege. It is only to recognize that it will be mere handfuls that will bring us future 9/11's in manifestations even more destructive than the loss of life and property that was so dearly suffered in New York.
Let us therefore make prudence the better part of benevolence because the preservation of our culture and land may be the greatest gift we can offer the world.
Loren Lambert
© April 10, 2006
Forget the debates on what the depth, breadth and width of immigration should be. They are irrelevant until the borders are shut tight, by whatever means, to the undocumented masses. This is the overarching issue. It has nothing to do with legitimacy, race, color, culture, religion or country of origin. This is now our home. Expediency, not legitimacy, demands that we control first our borders and second the influx of those desiring the privilege of calling themselves Americans.
We can ignore the lesson we ruthlessly imposed upon the backs of our native brothers and have that same lesson visited upon our own heads, or we can choose our fate. To so choose should not include negotiating with the undocumented, the cordoning off of our laws into the infertile grounds of the reservation. This is not to say that illegal immigrants who would dictate their legitimacy are not worthy of this privilege. It is only to recognize that it will be mere handfuls that will bring us future 9/11's in manifestations even more destructive than the loss of life and property that was so dearly suffered in New York.
Let us therefore make prudence the better part of benevolence because the preservation of our culture and land may be the greatest gift we can offer the world.
Loren Lambert
© April 10, 2006
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
The Right To Be A Prude
We the people, by indifference, neglect and indulgence, have allowed you, the media moguls, the mavens of marketing, the captains of industry, the stars of celluloid, to entertain us with violence, lewdness, vulgarity, and pettiness. All we, the beleaguered minority, ask in return is that you allow us the right to be prudes when we so choose.
Problem is, this right, unlike many other rights--like the right to be sober, the right to be drug-free, and the right to practice our religion--requires some degree of cooperation from you. Now, I humbly concede in my unrepentant prudishness that your agenda to fill my environment with unabashed, in-your-face, mammary and genitalia displays may be as natural as free running sewage, don’t force feed me with it. It is inexcusable that you, our executive, judiciary, and legislative branches of government and our captains of industry, cannot channel, confine, and package this virtual stream of porn so that it can be restricted to the proper time, place and setting of our choosing.
And while I appreciate the primal courage of all the naked hikers, streakers and performance artists and their need to educate all of us Victorian-steeped Pollyannas in our unhealthy prudishness, I must say sometimes I cannot distinguish you from all the flashers, pedophiles and rapists. Please respect my right to be a prude and let me and my family make a conscious choice to join your world without it being forced upon us. Therefore, when in my neighborhood, whether walking my streets, knocking at my door, or performing on my television screen or computer monitor, please come fully clothed, unless invited to do otherwise.
Loren M. Lambert
©March 15, 2006
Problem is, this right, unlike many other rights--like the right to be sober, the right to be drug-free, and the right to practice our religion--requires some degree of cooperation from you. Now, I humbly concede in my unrepentant prudishness that your agenda to fill my environment with unabashed, in-your-face, mammary and genitalia displays may be as natural as free running sewage, don’t force feed me with it. It is inexcusable that you, our executive, judiciary, and legislative branches of government and our captains of industry, cannot channel, confine, and package this virtual stream of porn so that it can be restricted to the proper time, place and setting of our choosing.
And while I appreciate the primal courage of all the naked hikers, streakers and performance artists and their need to educate all of us Victorian-steeped Pollyannas in our unhealthy prudishness, I must say sometimes I cannot distinguish you from all the flashers, pedophiles and rapists. Please respect my right to be a prude and let me and my family make a conscious choice to join your world without it being forced upon us. Therefore, when in my neighborhood, whether walking my streets, knocking at my door, or performing on my television screen or computer monitor, please come fully clothed, unless invited to do otherwise.
Loren M. Lambert
©March 15, 2006
Wednesday, March 1, 2006
Prosecutors Eat Green Jell-O
Invariably, like green Jell-O on a paper plate, after telling some new acquaintance that I am a criminal defense attorney, she’ll ask, "Don’t you feel like a carp carcass washed up on a Great Salt Lake beach when you get some criminal off?" Well, no. Not exactly. But before I answer that, I have a better question. Next time you meet a prosecutor ask, "Don’t you feel like Liberty Park pond scum when you’ve convicted an innocent person or some guy spends thousands of dollars defending himself and is acquitted?" Or, if you meet an insurance defense counsel, ask, "Don’t you feel bad when, because of artifice, some hyper technicality in the insurance policy or by bullying tactics, you assist your company in dodging payment of a valid claim?" Or maybe you could call one of our legislators and ask, "Wouldn’t you feel bad if you passed a law that provided further privilege and protection to the few but powerful, yet harmed the weak and the many?"
You see I’ll admit that I have probably successfully defended "guilty" individuals but I’ve also, as have my fellow colleagues successfully defended many innocent people in cases that if my fellow defense counsel and I had played God and worried about feeling like a carp carcass washed up on the Great Salt Lake, there’d be dozens of innocent citizens sitting in the pokey.
And why would this occur, you ask? Because according to the prosecutors I’ve met, they are God, and they think that all the people who help land some defendant in the dock, from the highest Law Enforcement Officer down to the lowliest snitch, are infallible. So, would a prosecutor ever admit they convicted the wrong person or ever apologize to an acquitted defendant? No. Does it happen? Yes, more often than you think.
My second favorite comment from people is, "I hope you’re not one of those personal injury lawyers." Well I am one of "those personal injury lawyers."
If you asked all 10,000 plus attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders in the State of Utah what side of slavery, segregation, or Jim Crow they would have been on, all 10,000 plus would swear on the salt from the Great Salt Lake that they, long before the rest, would have denounced slavery and championed the rights of the disenfranchised. Who are they kidding? Who were the attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders that fought to maintain the rights of slave holders and to suppress the liberated slaves and their children? They were the same type of people who today, because of their privileged parentage, wealth or high intelligence, just like their slavery supporting predecessors, have chosen careers supporting certain entities solely because they could further enhance their fortune. Such persons can only thank providence and not their own good sense if the horse they have chosen to ride happens to be worthy of our respect.
More specifically, it is the prosecutor who never turned down a doubtful case or who never had any hint of guilt towards an acquitted defendant who deserves our disdain. It is the insurance or corporate counsel who has never seen anything but the virtue in profit at all costs and whose every thought and deed was because the corporation wanted it so who warrants our disrespect. It is the Judge who sees himself as an unfeeling cog beholden to only the most powerful who merits our concern. It is the legislator whose every decision is governed by not what is good for the whole, but what will endear her to the most powerful that should reap our mistrust.
Fortunately, slave supporters rarely rise from the ranks of the slaves, the downtrodden, or the underprivileged, nor from the ranks of the attorneys who represent them. For instance, unlike prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys, criminal defense attorneys hold no illusions about the sanctity of their class of clients. Consequently, again unlike prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys, criminal defense attorneys don’t mindlessly do whatever their client ask and can and do attempt to influence their clients for good. Also, no defense counsel or group of defense counsels doing their jobs, however large, has ever corrupted a judicial system or country. The same cannot be said about judges, prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys. So don’t fear the underdogs, fear their counterparts.
Now, before all you 10,000 plus Utah attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders get too indignant, I realize that whatever legal or legislative sins you might be guilty of are probably small in comparison to those of the supporters of slavery and that every thing you did was "legal" and expected of you. All I hope is that you at least ponder these questions: (1) With my same outlook, temperament and motivations, what side of slavery, segregation, or Jim Crow would have been on if I lived a hundred years or more ago, and (2) What are the issues that, like slavery, will a hundred years from now be so easy to see the right from the wrong and where do I stand on these issues?" If in so doing you have even the slightest inkling that you’re, metaphorically speaking, "a slave supporter," I challenge you to try to move your clients, decisions, constituents, family, self and colleagues to the right side of that issue. Then, and only then, will there be no doubt that had you lived a hundred years or more ago, you, before all the rest, would have denounced slavery and championed the rights of the disenfranchised.
Loren M. Lambert
March 1, 2006©
You see I’ll admit that I have probably successfully defended "guilty" individuals but I’ve also, as have my fellow colleagues successfully defended many innocent people in cases that if my fellow defense counsel and I had played God and worried about feeling like a carp carcass washed up on the Great Salt Lake, there’d be dozens of innocent citizens sitting in the pokey.
And why would this occur, you ask? Because according to the prosecutors I’ve met, they are God, and they think that all the people who help land some defendant in the dock, from the highest Law Enforcement Officer down to the lowliest snitch, are infallible. So, would a prosecutor ever admit they convicted the wrong person or ever apologize to an acquitted defendant? No. Does it happen? Yes, more often than you think.
My second favorite comment from people is, "I hope you’re not one of those personal injury lawyers." Well I am one of "those personal injury lawyers."
If you asked all 10,000 plus attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders in the State of Utah what side of slavery, segregation, or Jim Crow they would have been on, all 10,000 plus would swear on the salt from the Great Salt Lake that they, long before the rest, would have denounced slavery and championed the rights of the disenfranchised. Who are they kidding? Who were the attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders that fought to maintain the rights of slave holders and to suppress the liberated slaves and their children? They were the same type of people who today, because of their privileged parentage, wealth or high intelligence, just like their slavery supporting predecessors, have chosen careers supporting certain entities solely because they could further enhance their fortune. Such persons can only thank providence and not their own good sense if the horse they have chosen to ride happens to be worthy of our respect.
More specifically, it is the prosecutor who never turned down a doubtful case or who never had any hint of guilt towards an acquitted defendant who deserves our disdain. It is the insurance or corporate counsel who has never seen anything but the virtue in profit at all costs and whose every thought and deed was because the corporation wanted it so who warrants our disrespect. It is the Judge who sees himself as an unfeeling cog beholden to only the most powerful who merits our concern. It is the legislator whose every decision is governed by not what is good for the whole, but what will endear her to the most powerful that should reap our mistrust.
Fortunately, slave supporters rarely rise from the ranks of the slaves, the downtrodden, or the underprivileged, nor from the ranks of the attorneys who represent them. For instance, unlike prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys, criminal defense attorneys hold no illusions about the sanctity of their class of clients. Consequently, again unlike prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys, criminal defense attorneys don’t mindlessly do whatever their client ask and can and do attempt to influence their clients for good. Also, no defense counsel or group of defense counsels doing their jobs, however large, has ever corrupted a judicial system or country. The same cannot be said about judges, prosecutors, corporate counsels and insurance company attorneys. So don’t fear the underdogs, fear their counterparts.
Now, before all you 10,000 plus Utah attorneys, judges, legislators or office holders get too indignant, I realize that whatever legal or legislative sins you might be guilty of are probably small in comparison to those of the supporters of slavery and that every thing you did was "legal" and expected of you. All I hope is that you at least ponder these questions: (1) With my same outlook, temperament and motivations, what side of slavery, segregation, or Jim Crow would have been on if I lived a hundred years or more ago, and (2) What are the issues that, like slavery, will a hundred years from now be so easy to see the right from the wrong and where do I stand on these issues?" If in so doing you have even the slightest inkling that you’re, metaphorically speaking, "a slave supporter," I challenge you to try to move your clients, decisions, constituents, family, self and colleagues to the right side of that issue. Then, and only then, will there be no doubt that had you lived a hundred years or more ago, you, before all the rest, would have denounced slavery and championed the rights of the disenfranchised.
Loren M. Lambert
March 1, 2006©
Saturday, February 4, 2006
Dining with Nancy Workman
Nancy Workman has been admitted into an elite and exclusive club that most of us will never have the privilege to join (God Forbid)--those acquitted of criminal charges. And among even this elite group she is in a subclass almost all to her own--those whose private attorney's fees are paid for at public expense--to the tune of $100,000. Despite the overblown tab--this is as it should be.
The rest of this elite club are divided into two groups. The acquitted poor who were appointed public defenders and the acquitted middle class who, to preserve their freedom and hopefully good name, must relish a bitter victory because of the financial ruin--which was the price of fighting the State. It should not be this way. No one should have to face the furry and power of the State when it brings its weight to bear in a misguided prosecution.
Despite popular belief, many such prosecutions are misguided. The completely innocent do find themselves facing the bar of judgment. These are the victims of lies, politics, mistakes, incompetence and over zealousness.
We have long decried the horrendous violence of a vigilante lynching mob/ but we should just as well bemoan the wrenching impoverishment of a financial lynching at the hands of an arrogant, ignorant or mistaken prosecution. A prosecution that amasses, not the raging mob that pulls you from your bed in full view of the cameras, but the quiet, unfeeling, unseen mob of government functionaries that pulls the house down around you. This is one of the last great injustices in our criminal system that should be remedied.
But it will not happen. No one cares about this elite minority, that is until that exclusive invitation is personally delivered to your door by one of our unformed servants. When it does, just hope you have all your dues saved up, or, no matter how innocent you know you are, you may not make it to dine with Nancy.
Loren M. Lambert, February 4, 2006 ©
The rest of this elite club are divided into two groups. The acquitted poor who were appointed public defenders and the acquitted middle class who, to preserve their freedom and hopefully good name, must relish a bitter victory because of the financial ruin--which was the price of fighting the State. It should not be this way. No one should have to face the furry and power of the State when it brings its weight to bear in a misguided prosecution.
Despite popular belief, many such prosecutions are misguided. The completely innocent do find themselves facing the bar of judgment. These are the victims of lies, politics, mistakes, incompetence and over zealousness.
We have long decried the horrendous violence of a vigilante lynching mob/ but we should just as well bemoan the wrenching impoverishment of a financial lynching at the hands of an arrogant, ignorant or mistaken prosecution. A prosecution that amasses, not the raging mob that pulls you from your bed in full view of the cameras, but the quiet, unfeeling, unseen mob of government functionaries that pulls the house down around you. This is one of the last great injustices in our criminal system that should be remedied.
But it will not happen. No one cares about this elite minority, that is until that exclusive invitation is personally delivered to your door by one of our unformed servants. When it does, just hope you have all your dues saved up, or, no matter how innocent you know you are, you may not make it to dine with Nancy.
Loren M. Lambert, February 4, 2006 ©
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)