Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Another Great Moment in Trial Advocacy

I had just explained to the jury all the rea­sons that the government’s star wit­ness couldn’t be believed (based on his crim­i­nal his­tory): he’s a thief, and thieves lie; he’s a rob­ber, and rob­bers lie; he’s an orga­nized crim­i­nal, and orga­nized crim­i­nals lie; etc.

Gov­ern­ment lawyer Con­nie Spence gets up for her clos­ing argu­ment. “You know who else lies?”, she screeches.

LAWYERS lie!”

And she writes the word LAWYERS in big red let­ters on the flip pad.

I went back to the court­room today to get that page from the flip pad. I’m going to get it framed and hang it in my office, and every time I look at it I’m going to laugh.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

20 Responses to “Another Great Moment in Trial Advocacy”

  1. Lyle Jones says:

    That’ll make a GREAT souvenir.

  2. carey says:

    Would that be con­sid­ered a confession?

  3. Mark Yanis says:

    Isn’t that prosec mis­con­duct? (I assume she was tak­ing a shot at you.)

  4. Mike Parr says:

    Con­grat­u­la­tions on your win. Are you going to con­tinue to rep­re­sent him in his other cases? I’d enjoy com­ing down to whichever cour­t­house and observ­ing you in action.

  5. Anna Durbin says:

    Any juror com­ments on that? H’mm. I guess the pros­e­cu­tor does not con­sider her­self a lawyer. Or was she admit­ting that she lies? Wow, how great that she got scream­ing mad!

    Mark, did your client testify?

    I want hear more about how you pulled off this miracle.

  6. Jackie Carpenter says:

    Mark Yanis, Bennett’s client is a for­mer lawyer. I think we can assume she was say­ing lawyers lie and talk­ing about the defendant.

    I agree; if lawyers lie, and you are a lawyer … Hmmmm… I can’t believe a word of your argument!

  7. Norm Pattis says:

    Dou­bly funny given the poor creature’s last name.

  8. Lewis Kennedy says:

    And the judge is also a lawyer.

    What did he say?

    I assume you’re appeal­ing on grounds of pros­e­cu­to­r­ial abuse and mis­con­duct (as sug­gested by Mr. Yanis) — espe­cially if the judge ignored it — which, I guess he did (because you don’t men­tion a con­tempt find­ing) — such that the prosecutor’s fault has been com­pounded by mis­di­rec­tion (by omission).

    Before fram­ing this price­less page from the flip pad you’ll have to file it as a pro­duc­tion in your appeal — that’s if your lad was con­victed of course.

    You can call the rogue pros­e­cu­tor as a defence wit­ness to speak to its authen­tic­ity as part of your appeal. Don’t agree that this is a sam­ple of her hand­writ­ing. She’ll enjoy that.

    And will your client be com­plain­ing to her pro­fes­sional body — for bring­ing your (our) pro­fes­sion into dis­re­pute? Hey, an upset foot­ball coach wouldn’t be allowed to pull this kind of stunt with­out consequences.

  9. Kathleen E. Casey says:

    Not too bright is she?

  10. RBM says:

    She goes to the board, which was fac­ing the jury and you couldn’t see, writes Lawyers and says, “You know who else lies? point­ing to her writ­ten word, Lawyer’s Lie!” Mark, you get up like you’re going to climb over the judge’s bench to get that objec­tion heard.

  11. Lewis Kennedy,

    Mark can’t appeal the case, because he won.

    I gotta admit that I thought Mark had an uphill bat­tle based on what I knew about the case. That’s some good trial-lawyerin’, my friend.

    Con­grats!

  12. Lori Rodriguez says:

    Con­grats on the win!!
    Just a prac­tice note, I believe another objec­tion to this would be “strik­ing at the defen­dant over the shoul­ders of coun­sel.” I learned that from a great trial lawyer who once objected with “Objec­tion, Judge–my shoul­ders are get­ting sore!” because he couldn’t remem­ber the actual word­ing.
    I agree, though, that there would be a pros­e­cu­to­r­ial mis­con­duct argu­ment as well. And, yes, since lawyers lie, and the prosecutor’s a lawyer and is also the one who’s brought the charges in the first place and who has the bur­den of proof.…hmmmm…maybe the jurors were quite astute.

  13. Lori Rodriguez says:

    :) It also would have been great to jump up and yell back, “Speak for your­self!” All’s well that ends well; con­grats again on the win!!

  14. Anna Durbin says:

    Lori: That’s the objec­tion I would want to have been quick enough to make. But they usu­ally come to me when I am away at night afterward.

  15. Alex Scharff says:

    One time in a fed­eral drug case, a fel­low attor­ney argued gov­ern­ment over­reach­ing and entrap­ment to which the fed­eral pros­e­cu­tor responded, “He’s paid to say that.” Objec­tion sus­tained, instruc­tion to dis­re­gard granted, mis­trial denied. 5th Cir­cuit says harm­less error. “Lawyers lie” vs ““Paid to say that”–I won­der if any appel­late court would ever reverse on such a basis.…

  16. Jim Oliver says:

    Objec­tion, no foundation!”

  17. That’s only because lawyers are Cre­tans (/cretins).

Leave a non-anonymous Reply