If you were a lawyer, would you prefer to prosecute or defend? Would you prosecute someone you felt was innocent? Defend someone you thought was guilty? (Serendipity Bible 10th Anniversary Edition, page 1077).
I
would suspect that the ideal lawyer would be someone who could
perform either role passionately – that of defense or prosecution.
Not only this, but someone who could effectively play devil's
advocate if necessary either in defense or prosecution – could
powerfully prosecute the innocent and defend the guilty. Our legal
system which guarantees legal representation really requires this of
lawyers. To a large extent, the sense of justice requires much more
than objectivity. It requires passionate subjectivity. We have to
believe in theory and practice that everyone – even the state –
requires a full throttle presentation of their case. We do not expect
cold, judicial objectivity from advocates but rather passion. A
defense or prosecuting attorney who struggles too hard to be coolly
fair, objective, and judicial simply does not understand the role
they are to play to effectuate justice through process. We do not
expect attorneys to be primarily scientists but salesmen. This said,
it should be recognized that a jury expects to have their cake and
eat it too. In other words, a prosecutor or a defense attorney that
showed no regard for objectivity in seeking the discovery of the
facts of the case would lose credibility. While we expect an
attorney (like a salesman) to be biased, we will fault him if he
seems giddy and without his feet planted firmly on the ground.
This
no doubt is why we frequently turn to lawyers to fill the roles of
politicians. Like a legal representative, we do not expect our
political advocates to be coolly objective and dispassionate in all
matters. We expect to see some passion, some emotion. We must ask;
What kind of constituents would choose a cold fish for a
representative? My guess is a citadel of intellectuals who are
unwilling and unable to accept life on realistic terms - people
unwilling to accept their own humanity with its inherent untidy
transactional processes.
And
of course I speak not only of lawyers, but of all of us. Unless we
are delusional and phony even to ourselves, we cannot believe that we
approach life disinterestedly. We must intentionally recognize our
biases and seek helpful – yet possible and practical - ways to adjudicate them.
Print Page
