My pal, Fresno criminal defense lawyer Rick Horowitz, tells the story of the guy calling to find a lawyer for his case. It’s not exactly a new story.
This morning, I received a phone call from the jail. Some poor guy is “between a rock and a hard place,” in that he’s been locked up for allegedly committing a crime – a physical assault on another person.
And he needs help.
Well, that’s what I’m here for, right?
So the guy starts to launch into his story, but before he gets very far, I stop him, because 1) I don’t like to discuss the specifics of someone’s alleged criminal activity on a recorded phone call, and 2) before too much time is taken up – because, yes, jail calls are damned expensive – I want to make sure the person I’m speaking with is actually looking to hire an attorney.
Most callers want to tell their story. Not the story, but their story. The story is factual and informative, and it rarely takes very long to tell. Their story is replete with emotion and excuses, explanations and rationalizations, and it takes forever. The story is useful. Their story is sometimes cathartic, but more often a scam.
The scam is that by convincing a lawyer that you are an innocent, maligned person off the top, they will respond with two things, an assurance that they will not let the injustice of conviction happen to you, and that they will represent you for free because what is being done to you is such an awful injustice.
A small part of what makes life as a private criminal defense lawyer not all the fun it’s always cracked up to be is the realization that the “private” aspect of the professional description requires one not just to pay attention to the law, not just to be a zealous advocate for clients, but also to be at least a passably-decent business person.
Private lawyers don’t get a paycheck. The guy at the garage won’t fix our cars for free, and the lady checking out groceries at the supermarket still scans our foodstuffs and charges us the balance. Rent is paid on offices. Salaries are paid staff. Taxes are paid to the government and our 4G is not inherently unlimited.
Part of what makes this all so difficult is the knowledge that I cannot guarantee my clients, even those who might actually be innocent, are going to obtain a “good” result by hiring me. (By “good” I mean one that is going to have them feeling grand, dancing jigs, or singing my praises.)
Some want a guarantee. Some want to know what their “chances are.” Some lawyers give them assurances. Truthful lawyers don’t. The truth is, we don’t know. Rick offered no guarantee, but the guy wanted him to come to jail to visit him nonetheless. Rick quoted him a $250 fee for the visit.
I simply can’t afford to spend all my time visiting people at the jail who have no plans to hire me. Not if I want to keep my office open so that I really am here to help people, which is why I became a criminal defense attorney in the first place.
A fee to meet to allow the defendant to decide whether to retain him? Outrageous? The free consultation concept is a tricky one. It started with personal injury lawyers, and metastasized from there. Sometimes, it’s a legit request. Other times, it’s to get free advice, or find a way to kill some time at someone else’s expense. People in jail like visits. It’s a terribly boring place.
It was at this point that the caller said, “All you care about is the money.” And he hung up on me.
But here’s something to think about: since, if he were looking to hire me, he would be spending far more than $250, be getting far more of my time than one jail visit, and have an attorney willing to go to the mat to fight for him, but he did not want to put up $250 as a show of good faith – $250 which, again, if he hired me, he would get back
…who is it that only cares about the money?
Up to now, this story is fairly pedestrian, and one that gets repeated over and over. Stop yawning. There’s a reason for telling it. Notice how it ended, with Rick feeling compelled to justify his charge, feeling guilty about not extending himself by meeting with this guy in jail for no fee?
Rick feels the sense of responsibility to help a human being, even one who is trying to guilt him into doing something he knows better than to do. We all know that feeling. It’s one we have to fight constantly to survive.
This sense of duty permeates most criminal defense lawyers. There are days we wish we got a paycheck and didn’t have to be the bastards who charged. Even a guy like the one who called Rick, pulling the usual scam to get something for nothing from a lawyer because nobody ever thought of trying that before.
Bear in mind, most clients are, to some extent, criminals. Many lived street lives, getting by on their wits and scams. To them, we’re suits, clueless but for the odd lingo of law, and if we love them enough, we will pull out the magic words we save only for our dearest clients and make their problems disappear. They can endear themselves to us, like our Nigerian relatives, or guilt us by toying with our sense of justice.
Criminal defense lawyers tend to be far more committed to the cause of representing our clients than other lawyers. Not all criminal defense lawyers. Not all other lawyers. But this isn’t a practice area for people who don’t give a damn. Yet, as I tell lawyers who ask, we are lawyers to serve defendants, but we go to work in the morning to earn a living. If you don’t get this, you won’t survive as a criminal defense lawyer.
Some get shaken by the scam. Some get angry at it. But this is the life we chose, serving a group of people who may not well appreciate what we do and why. Don’t feel guilty about it. We get paid for our services.* We offer no guarantees. In return, we use whatever magical law words we can muster to serve our clients’ interests, even when their approach is to see what they can get over on us. As long as they pay.
* This is where most would insert the obligatory pro bono caveat. I do not. Pro bono is a gift we give when we choose to do so. It cannot be taken from us by force.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I come here for perspective. Thank you for helping me with a (not a legal problem) I have been wrestling with in my professional life.
This is an extremely problematical area for me (and others, obviously). As a civilian, my sympathies lie with the incarcerated man seeking competent legal representation at a reasonable cost, or pro bono–as the case may be. And not with the CDL whose oppressive overhead is weighing heavily upon him. Plenty of working class folks struggle with their overhead expenses and costs of living. Why should lawyers (and doctors) be considered exempt from these everyday burdens? Just because you are a lawyer (or doctor), that does not mean you get drive a Mercedes off the showroom floor or join that fancy country club which may or may not be open to Jews and minorities.
Having been dragged thru the so-called criminal justice system w/out warrant or probable cause–as posted by me 1000 times,–and given a kangaroo court trial in a certain northeaster jurisdiction, I have some observations and some strong opinions. P.S., my opinions are almost always “strong”! Qne seldom wrong?!?
I did read Mr. Horowitz’s posting on Aug. 5. It got my dander up, and I did submit a thoughtful, carefully articulated and sincere comment based on my own experiences and deep thought processes. The comment is currently awaiting “moderation”.
No other comments have been approved by Mr. Horowitz. I did save my submission. It starts out like this, and I will not reproduce the entire bloody things which may be articulate, but wordy and partly tangential:
“Your comment is awaiting moderation.
“Well, let me say this about that! I am luving this post. You know why? Cause I’ve heard this rant before,… not before Christ, but before, once upon a time… Namely, one prominent criminal defense attorney in the corrupt State of CONnecticut.
“In person, at a “symposium” conducted by People Against Injustice, New Haven, where I had a front-row seat. Now picture this: Here’s this prominent CDL b!tching and moaning about how much money it costs to run a law office in the corrupt State of CT. Puhleeeze! That is not why I came here. I came here to hear about and learn about justice and injustice in the state courts. You Mr. CDL are out of line, talking about your personal and busyness problems! Clients come first, as SHG in the Empire State has repeatedly posted.
“Yadda, yadda, yadda! The overhead, the lights, the secretaries, the stationery, the postage, the gofers, the Xerox copy machine, the frequent trips to the jails and the courtrooms–not to mention annual CLE conventions in Hawaii. The tears are dripping down my cheeks. Puhleeeze, get to the punchline! I’m bored out of my gourd. Who told you to become a lawyer, and what were they thinking? You don’t get enough monies to pay for the gas, the insurance, the tolls,… and me, the jailed one/defendant, gets No Respect.
How do you like them apples? No, no, no,…. we are not on the same page, simpley!”
The rest of the comment is available upon request, but if you know my writing style, you can write it yourself. End of rant on a very important topic in the legal arena, once again picked up by our Host:
Who Pays and How Much? (If you happen to be incarcerated, it stands to reason that you’re not earning too much money–unless your stocks and bonds are soaring. That point often escapes notice by the courts, for reasons unknown?)
Beyond the insanity and angst, Bill, you ask two questions that I really want to answer:
We’re not, which is why we have to pay to play like everyone else. We practice law for a living. You bitch at your car mechanic for not fixing your Ferrari for free? You bitch at the waiter at Nobu for bringing you a check? Don’t bitch on the lawyer for charging. His kids need shoes too. When lawyers get free meals at Nobu, you can have free representation. Until then, they pay and you pay. Life sucks for everybody. You’re not special.
And when was the last time you had a “free antiques day, take whatever you want”? Let me know next time, so I can pick out a few nice things.
Most aren’t getting a Mercedes, and they’re lucky to get a Hyundai. But they should be getting Mercedes, every one of them, provided they work hard and do the right thing. Know why, Bill? They took three years of their life and went to law school. They lost three years of income. They paid three years of absurdly high tuition, and maybe took out ridiculously huge loans to cover it. All for the glory of saving your butt.
Do you think your butt is that fascinating that people everywhere want to lose three years of income and spend three years of tuition just to listen to you piss and moan? They made a commitment to education at their own expense, and they deserve to get a secure decent livelihood for it on the back end. If not, why would anybody put up with you?
Nice turnaround, and fast. That’s what I like about you: Quick-Draw McGraw. You are There, and paying attention. Lawyers, lawyers everywhere, but not a drop to drink! Honey, would you mind passing me another beer? We signed up for the Barleycorn School of Commenting on bLAWgs! The faster we go, the behinder we get. Lawyers we don’t need; money we need to hire a good one.
I don’t understand why everyone else is so slow. It takes 2 seconds. What’s the big deal?
The issues of tuition, three years of income, the work to get through law school, and the pay cut I’d get as a reward for those sacrifices are why I’m not becoming a lawyer. While I hope I never have to hire a defense attorney, I do not begrudge them their fees.
After running a computer consulting business and finding myself barely breaking even at $125 an hour, I find their fees to be quite reasonable given what they’ve done to acquire their skills.
I think the portion of your comment “awaiting moderation” on my blog (actually, it’s not: it’s in the trash) which you posted here, and the first phrase of Scott’s response, pretty much covers why I didn’t post it.
If you’d just said what you meant (“you don’t deserve to make enough money to keep your office open”), without the nastiness that obfuscates that point, I might have posted, and responded, to it.
It’s interesting that you did not take the same tone with Scott that you took with me.
In any event, as Scott noted, most of us don’t drive Mercedes. But I do think that having spent the time, energy, and as Scott also notes, a ton of money, which may not be paid back before I die, I think I should at least be allowed to own a car.
And if you post on my blog like you do on Scott’s, maybe more of your rants will get through.
I don’t really care if you or anyone else posts my comments. Different day, different tone! Am trying to address issues, not personalities. I think you, Rick, are overly sensitive. That is OK, but you don’t have to get contentious. Save that for the courtroom, please. I do like to get posted and noticed, but it’s not necessary. I do not like the word “rant”. I prefer “vent”, and plead guilty to that. In case anyone is wondering, I have perfectly good reasons for venting which I’ve written about for a long time on various forums. SJ is currently my favorite forum. (Others have blocked me; am hurt but it’s not the end of the world quite yet. Certain family members and former friends have made themselves scarce.) And still,… no relief, no remedy, after fifteen years of trying. Where are those lawyers when you need them. Some of them have more excuses than God not to notice you. Some have hung up on me. I’ve hung up on others. Ha.
Don’t get me wrong: Many in the criminal justice arena have had it worse. Some are needlessly incarcerated. Some are injured or killed by trigger-happy LE. I am very sorry if I’m an average defendant in the middle of the pack, invisible to my elected representative, my minister, my family, my friends, the legal profession at large and/or the nonprofits which claim to do good for the downtrodden of Amerika.
I liked your posting of Aug. 5. I have admired some of your previous postings. You do not write often, but when you do, it usually noteworthy. This entry was right up my alley because, who gets paid for what and how much has been a concern of mine for years? I put that in a long email to Scott this morning. I have similar concerns with the medical profession. Exorbitant fees and abusive billing practices by doctors and hospitals are legion. I put up an example from my own medical history.
Scott took up your cause and I was pleased to read his entry. Just because I happen to be a civilian, who by definition is on the other side of the fence, does not mean that I’m opposed to your or anyone in your profession from earning a decent living. I’m not that cruel. I would not begrudge you a fancy car or a yacht either. Somebody has to buy those things and parade them around town! My biggest concern relating to this Feeling Guilty topic is this: You or I get arrested by local LE for one reason or another, and the State puts you, the defendant, automatically on the hook for $5–7500. That may not be a lot of money to
Mr. Presidential Candidate Trump, but it is a lot of money if you don’t have it, or cannot get it. Do you think for one moment that Mr. Trump would loan/donate enough money for me, or anyone else, to pay a retainer fee? I do not think so.
Some lawyers want to get rich quick, and some bail bonds are set excessively high for reasons which are not exactly clear to me. I think this has to change, and I believe it is changing as we speak in certain jurisdictions–one of them being Caulifornia. I would like to think that I played no small part in changes which I, and others, believe are inevitable in the criminal justice system. It simpley is not working. It’s archaic, inefficient, time and resource consuming, and “unjust”. That is the worst part. It does keep a lot of people busily employed putting so-called criminals behind bars and making the upper classes feel safe from the heathens and lowlifes amongst us.
I lived in a certain northeaster city for ten years with a famous university. What I learned after living in some of the poorer neighborhoods was that you have little to fear other than rogue city cops who defied departmental guidelines, tried to meet arrest quotas, used dubious “confidential informants’ to rat on citizens, engaged in beat-down behaviors and utilized excessive force will- nilly. Testilying under oath in our “courts of law”?!? Now the chickens have come to roost nationwide. I observed all of this 15-20 years ago and went public with my cases and other cases of note under my real name about ten years ago when I discovered the “internet”.
I hope this addresses your concerns and look forward to more insightful postings from your precinct/station on the Left Coast. Good luck getting that Mercedes; you deserve it.
Bill, have you ever considered writing much shorter comments (and emails) in the hope that someone might read one?
My comments are shorter than Carl David Ceder’s, that Texas CDL who made a big splash here a couple of years ago,… and less threatening and less repetitive. Long Comments R Us. Long-winded fool, we’ll work on it. Just sayin’. Have you ever considered yoga postures and meditation? Can’t hurt, might help! How about Legal Commentariat at Fox News? Something like Nina Totenberg at NPR.
I did legal commentary at Fox & Friends in the 90s. They dumped me for Napolitano. Try to be better than Ceder. He’s not the bar.
This is a non sequitur. What happened to you is terrible, and I’m sorry, but for god’s sake it is not always relevant.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Just because you, Andrew, call it a ‘non sequitur” does not mean,… you are proficient,… in Latin. Nor does it mean it is a non sequitur. Let me guess? You are not even a lawyer. You are either a law prof or a philosophy prof And you graduated at the top of your class!
What did I do to deserve two gatling gun comments?
P.S., My non sequiturs normally are deleted by the host. Unless,… they are irrelevant, funny, off-the-wall, or just plain stewpid. Also, I’m normally the one to call someone out for being “illogical”. You’re throwing me a curve-ball. Hope you enjoyed my commenting, and trust that you will give them a second-read. Ha.
If your comments ever approached rational thought, you might get a better reception. But all anyone sees is an incoherent, unhinged rant. Emphasis on rant. What you say barely makes sense, and the tone is needlessly hostile. Seriously, take a few more minutes to think before you write, and realize that people like SHG are not your enemy here.
Everybody is good and fucked already. Everybody.
Sometimes the shenanigans make sense. Sometimes the noise is your own.
Forces foist.
Would be nice to just get over it already and live happily ever after with the gypsy astronauts.
Suffrage isn’t new. Neither is entry.
Pick up the pieces and make it relevant.
Oh…..snap!
Ok then…it has been past time, I guess, to pay the CDL’s to think.
Think, be happy, get paid.
The niche within the greater legal guild really needs to stop “considering” and start stomping on some umbrellas.
Until then…I guess.
Forlorn juggling.
And free consults for PI lawyers are very misleading. The intake secretary has the potential client bring their police report and medical records, or sends them to “their clinic” where a first year signs up a good case in the doctor’s waiting room. I don’t know of PI lawyer getting basic facts and then deciding on the case.
In criminal law only the attorney can decide what is needed to defend the current case. That’s time I can’t work on my paying clients’ cases. I charge a reasonable time for a detailed consult. If they hire me, it’s absorbed into the retainer and if not then at least they got 45min-1hr of me giving them quality advice, explaining their options, looking at the police report and seeing if they allege the right statutes, what future charges could be introduced off the arrest report, defense witnesses he may need, etc. That’s valuable and thus worth money. Doctors charge before surgery. A consult benefits the client, not the lawyer, and we are paid for our legal thoughts or time.
No, Marc. Not all PI lawyers work that way. That you don’t know any honest and competent PI lawyers is a reflection of you, not PI lawyers.
Certainly not all, and definitely not for large cases like wrongful deaths from deep pocket negligence, injuries from constitutional right violations, and big damage cases or possible class action lead plaintiffs. The average PI firm with other three lawyers that looks for home runs but takes lots of singles (BI policies with $20K caps) and those singles can’t get a lawyer speaking to them for 20 min before they even sign. I’ve done some PI but those are for prior clients who refuse to take my referrals elsewhere. I like the idea of being able to continue helping families I’ve built a relationship with. But my observations on PI firms speaks to what I observe of them, not my actions. Regardless my point is that a criminal consult is far more nuanced than looking at a police report and seeing if there’s a ran red light or a DUI with bodily injury arrest, etc. for negligence liability.
Plane wrecks, of course the consults are free. Slip and falls or car wrecks with just soft tissue damage, a paralegal does intake through asking the client to sign the insurance settlement checks for their $12K on the $20K policy.
Tell Turk that. He’s a solo. He probably doesn’t realize he’s doing it all wrong, actually meeting with potential clients, personally assessing their cases and giving them his best counsel.
PI law is a gamble. You front your time and your money so you have to pick the good cases and make sure those good cases have collectible defendants. Criminal law doesn’t have that problem. Somebody can have a crappy case but you still get paid the same and do the same or even more work to mitigate the damage and work miracles. We don’t need consults as much other than knowing their charges, the county/fed dist, and their priors before having a good pricing idea. In PI you need more info to decide if you should take the case.
I don’t know how solo PIs handle the logistics. My experience with PI firms have at least several lawyers and a greater number of support staff. I’m a solo and I honestly don’t know how I wold handle a walk-in stranger with a PI potential case. Probably id see if it’s worth my investment which is opposite how we decide criminal cases.
Honestly, as long as a client tells me the truth and keeps in communication with me, I don’t have issues. The only promise or guarantee is that I’ll do everything I can to help them and beyond that it’s outside my control.
Thanks for informing me how PI practice works. And crim law too. It’s not like I would have a clue if you didn’t explain it to me.
I don’t know of PI lawyer getting basic facts and then deciding on the case.
I have a name for lawyers like that: Bankrupt.
I know a lot of PI lawyers and I don’t know any that sign up a case without knowing the facts. Most cases are rejected, as many of the rejects just keep trying more lawyers.
The contingency fee is the greatest motivator to make sure the duds don’t walk in the door.