<<
>>

Standard Guilty Pleas

In the earlier chapter on attitudes, most lawyers were shown to display a presump­tion of guilt regarding their clients. That the lawyer-client relationship might be infused by such a philosophy challenges the autonomy of clients in the decision­making process.

This ethos, then, was also present in the outcomes of cases, shaping and restricting the choices that clients could make. This can also be seen in my own research. All the lawyers were observed to operate in a default mode, whereby they assumed that clients would plead guilty, and thus helped ensure that they did just that. Displays of this position were often muted, drawn out in ostensibly neutral statements and rhetorical questions. The following quotes, drawn from the begin­ning of consultations with clients at the Magistrates’ Court, are illustrative:

So, what will it be today, guilty pleas?

(Leo, senior partner, Radcliffe and Musk, OR) [Client] It's a criminal damage. The thing is, I was so drunk that I can't remember. [Lawyer] I think you're happy to plead guilty, Mr Warne.

(Shane Warne, client, and 'Thomas, partner, Swining MacSage, OR)

[Client] What's going to happen today?

[Lawyer] Let's just fill out the legal aid [form] first.

[Client] Okay, but what's going to happen, an adjournment or what?

[Lawyer] I think you might be dealt with.

[Client] Dealt with?

[Lawyer] You might be.

[Client] What, sentenced?

[Lawyer] Yeah.

[Client] What about the plea?

[Lawyer] Well, you'll be entering a plea.

[Client] What, for this? For an assault on a policeman?

[Lawyer] Yeah.

[Client] No, I'm not pleading guilty.

[Lawyer] Oh, right. Well let's discuss what you'll plead in a minute. Do the legal aid first.

(Shaun Tait, client, and Denise, solicitor, Radcliffe and Musk, OR) Lawyers seemed reluctant to recommend openly that clients pleaded guilty.

As such, there were awkward moments on the occasions that clients repeated their subtle encouragement back in unambiguous terms. This can be appreciated in the following extract - one of many similar incidents from across the firms - involving an office meeting between a Swining MacSage partner, Thomas, and his client. It took place at half past four, the afternoon before the client was due to face trial for charges of assaulting police officers. Thomas had spent over half an hour ‘going round in circles' as he asked the client if he wanted to plead guilty; the client stead­fastly replied in the negative. Thomas explained how weak his case was and then again asked the client if he wanted to plead guilty. Eventually, the client realised that Thomas was trying to tell him he should plead guilty:

[Client] So you're recommending that I go guilty?

[Lawyer] I am going to say to you that, well, your chances ofsuccess in a trial are extremely slim. And, well, if you were saying that it may have happened, sort of, not intentionally, but, maybe that you, sort of, I don't know, maybe urinated and then you caught him accidentally then, well, you could plead guilty on that basis. And you were spitting, not intending to spit directly at them, but you just wanted them away out of the cell and it, maybe, caught them. Accidentally.

[Client] So if I do what you say, would the court see it as bad that I didn't plead guilty straight away?

[Lawyer] Well, I don't think, if we notify them, sort of, fairly soon then I don't think it would be too much of a problem at all. I think, with this, that the court expected a plea on the first occasion. Which, maybe, leaves you in a situation where you feel rushed.

[Client] Yeah.

[Lawyer] Well, we didn't have all the information. You obviously felt rushed in to it. So I think if we vacate now then it won't be a problem at all. And I would hope that, well, the court have got a number of options.

[Client] Right, if you think that's the right thing to do, I'll say it's guilty then.

[Lawyer] Okay. As long as you're certain then. Guilty.

(Justin Langer, client, and Thomas, partner, Swining MacSage, OR)

Lawyers from all firms framed their discussions with clients within the basic prem­ise that they would plead guilty. Ideally, most lawyers sought to proceed under an unspoken agreement. However, clients did not always conform and some circum­stances required lawyers to exert greater pressure.

<< | >>
Source: Newman Daniel. Legal Aid Lawyers and the Quest for Justice. Hart Publishing,2014. — 192 p.. 2014

More on the topic Standard Guilty Pleas:

  1. The Insanity Plea in Politically Related Trials
  2. The John Hinckley Trial
  3. John Lilburne and John Peter Zenger
  4. Chapter Three Litigation
  5. Christenson Ron. Political Trials: Gordian Knots in the Law. Routledge,2011. — 357 p., 2011
  6. INTRODUCTION: UNCOVERING MARRIED WOMEN
  7. Chapter Four Master and Client
  8. The Abolitionists and Their Arguments
  9. Interpretation in the Statutory Core
  10. The boundaries of the subject: the legal order broadly conceived