Answer: It depends! (Okay, I’ve been a lawyer for 30+ years)  Here’s the best lawyer money can buy.

The idea that money can get you the best defense lawyer to get you out of trouble is prevalant among people. It can be true, but for reasons you may not know. Here’s why–

I’ve tried over 100 jury trials, both as a prosecutor and defense lawyer, and with the exception of an occasional quirky, run-away jury, they usually get it right. They aren’t susceptible to “smoke and mirrors” from the lawyers. In my experience, juries focus on the evidence, as they should, rather than on the flashy, expensive lawyers. This means, no matter how good your lawyer is, if the evidence against you is overwhelming, you’ll probably be convicted.

What a good defense lawyer can do is to exploit any weaknesses in the evidence.  So, who is the best lawyer money can buy and why do the “famous” lawyers seem to be better than others?

Actually, as day-to-day lawyers for accused people, Public Defenders are the best. They practice nothing but criminal law, know the intricacies of the system, and know all the tricks that will work with the judges. So why don’t Public Defenders win most of their cases?

They have a couple problems to overcome. For one, they cannot choose their cases. A private lawyer, regardless of pay, can always turn down a “loser.” Public Defenders must handle the worst cases with the least defenses before juries. Of course, they’re going to lose often as a result. Probably no lawyer could win these kinds of cases.

Second, since they’re representing poor people, it’s easier to convict these defendants. Why? Because the juries, for the most part, are middle-class people drawn from the community. If the defendant is working, has a family, dresses well, and has an education, the jurors can identify with that defendant, to some degree. Public Defender clients, by definition, don’t have any of the above advantages. They often even look like criminals. (Well, they are, aren’t they?)

As a prosecutor, one of the toughest defendants I tried to convict had been a US Air Force veteran, had a full time job, had a college degree, came to court everyday with a blue suit and his wife, who sat in the front row. He was good looking and sounded intelligent. The jury acquitted him. Conversely, most Public Defender clients don’t look this way at all.

Does that mean the more expensive defense lawyer is the best lawyer money can buy? Sometimes, it could be true, particularly if the lawyer uses some of the fee for investigation, both on site and scientific.

Regardless, each lawyer must deal with the evidence against his/her client. If it’s weak, many lawyers could prevail. If it’s overwhelming, it’ll be tough for all defense lawyers.

What do you think? Have you had any exeriences good or bad?

The post Here’s the Best Lawyer Money can Buy! appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

And look for the new book launch party at:

Magers & Quinn Bookstore

3038 Hennepin Ave. So., Mpls.

June 16 2015 from 4:30-7:30.

Free food, wine, and live music!!

The post My New Book—The Cover appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Later, he confessed to everything.

Charged with 1st degree murder, he found it hard to plead guilty and check himself into a lifetime of prison, so he went to trial. His only hope lay in two possible outcomes: the jury would feel some sympathy for him and let him off with less than Murder 1 or the facts, as they came out in the trial, wouldn’t support the full charge. A mosquito had more hope of surviving the winter than Jim did of getting any leniency.

I was appointed to defend Jim.  How could I defend a guilty person?  The answer starts with: he was guilty…but of what?

When the Medical Examiner who conducted the autopsy on the victim testified, he broke the case wide open for Jim.

To prove Murder in the 1st degree, the prosecution must show that the killer “premeditated and intended” to kill the victim. That means the killer had some time to think about things, to realize what he was doing and, if possible, stop before death. For instance, if someone shoots a victim once, you could say it was intentional or maybe even accidental. But the third, fourth, and fifth shots would certainly be premeditated. In Minnesota, 2nd degree murder is defined as “intentional but without premeditation.”

Justivce means not only convicting a guilty person but also making sure the conviction fits exactly what the person did. Which one was Jim guilty of?

The Medical Examiner testified about the cause of death—choking around the throat that cut-off air to the victim which suffocated her. But…in this case, when Jim started to choke her, he broke a part of her spine that would have caused death instantaneously, without the long suffocation. For the defense, the Medical Examiner opened a huge door.

If Jim had broken her spinal column quickly, killed her instantly, then how could he have thought about what he was doing? How could he have premeditated the killing? He certainly intended to kill the girl, but did he have time to contemplate it, to premeditate the killing?

The jury decided he did not and found him guilty of 2nd degree Murder.  You may disagree that he deserved a break but to answer your question of how could I defend a guilty person, this case shows you how. I have to admit it wasn’t easy, but I think justice was done here.  What do you think?

The post How Can You Defend a Guilty Person? Part II appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Technically, my job defending anyone is to force the State to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If I have personal doubts as to my client’s innocence, I never even breathe the word “innocent.” Instead, I remind the jury to evaluate the State’s case; the defendant is presumed innocent by the system. The funny part is that I’ve rarely had a client admit they were guilty. Even if it looked pretty obvious, they maintained their innocence. And the more you get into a case, the murkier facts often become. So many times, I’m not sure who’s an innocent or guilty person.

Maybe the best way to let you know how this feels is to tell you a story of a case I tried several years ago.

It involved a young man, 17 years old, who was married. They were both poor and struggled to make ends meet. One night when the boy–I’ll call him Jim–came home after looking for a job during the day, he found his wife having sex with another man on the couch of their apartment.

Jim erupted in anger and pain. First, he kicked the other man out then turned on the woman. A fight started and he strangled her to death by choking her with his hands. That was gruesome enough but afterward, to divert attention from him–the obvious culprit–he stripped her body, spray-painted it in gang graffiti, and left her in the middle of an intersection to make it look like a gang crime.

After having been charged with Murder in the 1st degree, he was certified and transferred to adult court where I met him. Because the crime was so heinous and the proseutor’s case was so strong, they didn’t offer Jim any kind of a plea bargain. Like any person looking at life imprisonment, Jim found it hard to plead guilty, even though he eventually admitted he killed her. We set the case for trial, which was his right to demand.

From my standpoint as his lawyer, sometimes the charging decision made by the prosecutor does not fit the crime. In other words, maybe the accused person is not guilty of Assault 1 but is guilty of Assault 3, a lesser crime with a shorter penalty. That was the strategy in Jim’s case. I had two goals: maybe the jury would have sympathy for the young guy and convict him of something less serious or the facts, as determined in a trial through the witnesses, wouldn’t warrant the full Murder 1 conviction. So, we launched into the trial with this crime of the heart.

When the Medical Examiner who’d performed the autopsy on the victim testified, he broke the case wide open–to Jim’s favor.

Since I hate to write lengthy blogs, I’ll pause for now and continue the story with my next one.

The post How can you defend a guilty person!? Part 1 appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

If you know the client did the crime, how can you represent a guilty person?  There are three answers to that:

1.  Very few clients ever fully admit they’re guilty!  Most lie and deny everything.  Even though the evidence makes them look guilty.  I’ve learned to withhold judgement.  You never know for sure.  Often, the defendant may be guilty—but not of the exact crime they’re accused of doing.  I defended a guilty person who admitted that he strangled his wife to death.  He was charged with Murder in the 1st. degree.  At trial, the medical evidence showed the crime could not have been premeditated to prove first degree murder.  The jury found him guilty of second degree murder.

2.  Everyone is entitled to a strong defense.  The system is adversarial.  It’s designed that way.  So both sides must be strong.  I must still defend a guilty person by challenging the government’s case.  That means the evidence, the witnesses, and the forensic testing. It’s a way to test the government’s case and make sure they’re being honest.  As citizens, we can’t let the government run over us without a check on their power.

3.  People are innocent sometimes.  How many times have you been accused of doing something (probably not a crime!) that was wrong?  Even with careful police work, witnesses, and forensic evidence, sometimes innocent people are accused and even convicted.  Think of the number of people in prison who are released, years later, after being cleared by DNA analysis, for instance.  This point ties into Number 1: I don’t always know for certain if a client is guilty or not.  Therefore, I have to even defend a guilty people and let the jury system make the final decision.

What do you think?  Could you defend a guilty person?

The post Three Reasons to Defend a Guilty Person appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.