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
Wednesday, 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©
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)