There’s likely a sociological theory that can explain what happens in the heads of otherwise fine people when they find themselves on a board or in an office which gives them a bit of an ego boost and some small amount of power.  They are suddenly taken with their self-importance, so much so that they appear to believe that they are better, smarter, more insider, than their brethren. 

And dear colleagues in the criminal defense bar, we are, sadly, every bit as bad as anyone else when it comes to this phenomenon.

First, Norm Pattis raised the issue with the Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association,

Is it true that one of the executive committee members wrote to federal prosecutors urging a criminal investigation of a prominent Connecticut criminal defense lawyer? I am told that this is true. But I do not know it to be so. Rumor swirls right now about an investigation focused on the relationship between Waterbury State’s Attorney John Connelly and Martin Minnella. A federal grand jury is pressing hard, reviewing files in the state’s attorney’s office and seeking to review records in Minnella’s firm. I represent Mr. Minnella.

The other day, I asked the president-elect of the CCDLA, Jennifer Zito, to voice opposition to the federal government’s decision to contact current and former clients of Mr. Minnella’s. I do not know what the executive committee will do, if anything. But the scope of the investigation seems ominous to me.

Bizarrely, there are inner sanctums of these associations, where the insiders talk amongst themselves about what these organizations should do and why.  What makes it bizarre is that they do so with a sense of paternalism, that they know better than their membership, other criminal defense lawyers, and that when and if information of their secret decisions is revealed, it will be spun and distorted to appease the members. 

There will be no leaks beforehand, as the important decision-makers don’t want to be bothered by the thoughts of those outsiders whose money funds their games.  The members shouldn’t worry their pretty heads.  Their leaders will handle it all and tell them only as much, and in such a way, as they deem best.

Then Mark Bennett wrote about the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, where the outrage of a challenge occurred.

In the contested election to which [Bill] Harris refers, Gary Trichter made an end-run around the old-fashioned way, getting on the ballot and forcing a general election for the position of president-elect. (I wrote about it here.) At the time, Harris was the chair of the Nominating Committee. He designed the election process. And he supported Gary Trichter’s opponent in the election.

Feelings were hurt; since Trichter won the election, most of those hurt feelings belonged to members of the entrenched TCDLA establishment.

Harris, as president, sent out a screed asserting that the comments of some CDL blawger showed “a reckless disregard for the truth,” to which Bennett cries “foul”.

What Harris and his pals saw as “venomous attacks” were passionate responses to their missteps. It is not members’ critical responses, but rather the conduct of TCDLA’s “leaders” that discredited the association. Harris’s dedication of his President’s Message to the correction of those who don’t agree with him for lack of civility shows that they still don’t get it.

Challenging the very important officers and officials is a heinous offense to the insiders, who only want to be adored and respected by their members.  When the curtains are pulled back, it makes them look bad.  They don’t want to look bad. 

I’ve gone from being as inside as anyone could be with the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers to having quit office twice (not once, but twice) because I couldn’t stomach the nonsense, the egos, the stupidity, the incompetence and the deception.  It’s not that I don’t like the people individually, or that they aren’t good lawyers, but that something awfully bad happens when they put on the hat of office.  It squishes their brain until it pops out their ears and makes a nasty mess.

In New York, the vast majority of the membership is clueless about the tens of thousand of dollars of their dues having been squandered through malfeasance and misfeasance, while internal power struggles (a laughable concept given that there’s no power to be had) and gutlessness have undermined any meaningful focus on the things that would serve the criminal defense bar. 

To a large extent, this has been fostered by presidents manipulating the unchallenged nominations for board and officers to put their cronies into office to support their pet goals.  They puff illusory member benefits to keep those dues checks flowing and the organization alive so they can get their Best Lawyer of the Year award at the next gala dinner to honor themselves.  Is this what’s happening in Connecticut and Texas as well?  What about other states? 

At the annual meeting of the Florida Association, I saw a contested election play out.  It happened in the right way for the right reasons, and with good humor and grace.  I saw transparency.  I saw a membership that was active and knowledgable, one unwilling to let the pompous pretend to be their leaders, and instead demanded that they be servants of the Association.  I was blown away, having watched what my home association used to be before being taken over by the little people who needed to feel important at the expense of the membership and the association’s purpose.

Criticism, and even open acknowledgment of problems, is viewed as disloyalty to the cause.  The petty nobodies in charge use their office to attack the critics and deceive the members, because the members are just foolish children incapable of understanding the very important thoughts and work being done by the inner sanctum.   

It’s not that all the people involved are evil, pompous or petty.  Many are troubled by the abuse and deception, the in-fighting over self-interest, the concealment of problems, dissembling and paternalism.  Yet they aren’t willing to buck the group mentality by going public to the members, becoming pariahs within the inner sanctum.  If they can’t take it, they quit, but remain silent.  There remains some inexplicable debt of silence to the insiders rather than a fiduciary duty of honesty and fidelity to the members.

It wasn’t always this way.  It doesn’t have to be this way.  But it won’t change as it currently exists, with an entrenched establishment whose purpose is its own perpetuation and little else.  The criminal defense bar is in desperate need of a strong, clear voice, now more than ever.  And instead, our once vital associations have become petty fiefdoms whose primary purpose is the self-aggrandizement of a few, often unworthy, self-important insiders. 

We, criminal defense lawyers, are not their children, and don’t need to enable this.  And they, most assuredly, are not our Daddy.  It’s time to take back those of our associations that have lost focus and no longer serve the criminal defense bar.  Enough with the lies and nonsense, and enough with supporting associations that don’t support us.

Update:  Timing is everything, right?  Within minutes of this posting, Norm posted about the “response” he received from CCDLA president-elect Jennifer Zito:

Incoming president of the Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association Jennifer Zito called yesterday to give me a piece of her mind: I had maligned the group needlessly, mischaracterized her reaction to my request for help with over-reaching federal prosecutors, and otherwise behaved like a shmuck. What’s more, the board members she spoke to adamantly deny having spoken to the feds about investigating Martin Minnella.

The board is not going to submit to a polling. If I want someone recused from consideration of whether to protest to the Justice Department the new-fangled practice of interviewing a lawyer’s current clients, I can ask for it. Indeed, one board member told Zito I lacked the courage to confront the board member directly on this issue. Please, spare me the juvenalia. What next, bitch slaps at three paces in some Dunkin Donuts parking lot? A public denial is at least reliable and capable of rebuttal.

Man, I love it when my old buddy Norm shows up, the guy with balls you can hear clang all the way from Bethany to Long Island, and isn’t afraid of calling ’em as they are, no matter whose feelings get hurt.

You tell ’em, Norm.