In
a fairly recent criminal case in Tennessee, an Assistant District
Attorney General asked the judge to make the defense attorneys stop
calling her "the Government," even though she actually represented the
government, which was charged with prosecuting the defendant. That's the
way trials work. The DA claimed that the term was derogatory and
prejudicial. She suggested an alternative title of "General R______."
The defense attorney, appropriately named Drew Justice, issued a
response to the request. He opened with a free speech claim, but then it
got better, as the defense came up with acceptable terms for their
side. First, the defendant should be referred to with his full name.
Alternatively,
he may be called simply "the Citizen Accused." This latter title sounds
more respectable than the criminal "Defendant." The designation "That
innocent man" would also be acceptable.
Moreover, defense counsel
does not wish to be referred to as a "lawyer," or a "defense attorney."
Those terms are substantially more prejudicial than probative. See
Tenn. R. Evid. 403. Rather, counsel for the Citizen Accused should be
referred to primarily as the "Defender of the Innocent." This title
seems particularly appropriate, because every Citizen Accused is
presumed innocent.
Alternatively, counsel would also accept the designation "Guardian of the Realm."
Further,
the Citizen Accused humbly requests an appropriate military title for
his own representative, to match that of the opposing counsel. Whenever
addressed by name, the name "Captain Justice" will be appropriate. While
less impressive than "General," still, the more humble term seems
suitable. After all, the Captain represents only a Citizen Accused,
whereas the General represents an entire State.
There's
more to the response. Ya know, if the word "government" has become so
derogatory as to prejudice a jury, maybe the government should do
something about its reputation instead of hiding its role.
Read the whole story at Lowering the Bar.
No comments:
Post a Comment