Don’t Judge a Criminal Defense Lawyer by Their Clients

One student explores what it’s like for lawyers to take on clients who are likely guilty.

By Hailey Richard

Lawyers everywhere defend what are known as “problematic clients.” But why? Why do they set themselves up to be criticized publicly? Why do they defend someone who is on the wrong side of the law? Why represent them at all?

I was bored. It was a random Saturday evening, and nothing seemed to keep my attention. I ambled over to the couch and lazily flipped on the television, scrolling aimlessly through the channels. I stopped on a news show that said “Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard.” I had heard a lot about the case but had never witnessed it live on TV. After spending nearly two hours with my eyes glued to the screen, my head was filled with questions. Why do lawyers choose to represent problematic clients? Do they not know many people are against them? Don’t they know that they appear to be on the wrong side of public opinion?

In that moment I decided that I was going to get to the bottom of it. Maybe I could help get some insight into the minds of these lawyers. I could possibly advocate for them and freshen their images for those who perceive them in a bad light. One could argue that now is the perfect time to investigate this, as the country has faced countless tragedies this year. The justice system now more than ever needs someone to share their side of things.

There are always at least two sides to every story. Two versions of the same truth. This was apparent when I interviewed two lawyers, Camilla and Scott, who requested to not use their last names to preserve their anonymity. They had several similarities. Both had jobs to represent clients and could not back out of it. Not because of their own volition though. They had been ordered to defend the clients by their law firms and could possibly face consequences upon refusal.

They both justified their representation of certain clients by stating that “everybody deserves the right to legal representation.” This answer seemed almost scripted, and Camilla seemed hesitant about her reply. When asked to elaborate, she related her experience with one case.

“It involved a group of incarcerated young women who accused male guards, custodians and administrators of the rape and sexual assault and inappropriate behavior of children while they were in the system,” she said. “One even became pregnant. So, as a mother and a woman, it was hard to represent an agency that was accused of knowing and ignoring the rampant sexual assault of children.”

I wanted to know if she faced public backlash that would make her position in the case worse. “Yes, I did face public backlash,” she said. “People called us enablers and immoral. Many even tried to persuade me to not take the case. Saying that I felt relief after the case was over is a huge understatement. I won the case but at no small price.”

Deception is the act of tricking someone. Forms of deception can be seen everywhere. Scott, the other lawyer, knows this well. One of his cases was based around it. When asked to summarize his case, he said the following:

“I’m not allowed to get into the specifics, but basically, there was a man who claimed that he got injured while at work,” he said. “He was lying. I knew he was lying, but my firm made me represent him anyway. There were even videos circulating of the man partying when he was supposed to be injured.”

It seemed clear that Scott felt taken advantage of by the firm. Lying in a court of law is no joke, and it takes one heck of a lawyer to make that lie believable and win his case like Scott did.

Money makes the world go round, as the saying goes. People can do terrible things just to get the stability and temporary relief that money provides. When asked if money was a factor in taking the case, both lawyers denied it, saying that “Money was not involved. It was a part of the job.”

From these interviews, I learned answers to questions that had been eating away at me. Most importantly, they provided me with the answer to the biggest question of all: Why lawyers represent clients who may be guilty? I learned that most of the time they have little choice in the matter, and their law firm often leaves little room for refusal.

And despite the stereotypes that lawyers are heartless, opportunist and self-centered, they are often the opposite. They are more vulnerable than people think and are often left reeling both emotionally and physically after cases. I learned to never judge a criminal defense lawyer based on their clients.