Privileges and duties--a dog's view
by Richard Barbuto
To those of you who know me it will come as no surprise that I have a talking dog. Spenser, the wonder dog, is a border collie who, in a household of three, is number two on the intelligence scale. I am number three so do the math. Spenser does many things that ordinary dogs cannot do. He predicts winners in sports events and has acted in an undercover capacity for the local police department to name a just two.
I was watching Anderson Cooper on CNN a few nights ago when Spenser wandered in and inquired as to what was on TV. The conversation went something like this.
Spenser: What are you watching?
Me: Anderson Cooper. He is going to have a segment on with David Martin, the lawyer that represented Cameron Todd Willingham at trial back in 1991.
Spenser: So what's the big deal?
Me: Mr. Willingham was executed in 2004 for an arson in which his three children were killed. Now there is a substantial body of evidence that the fire was an accident and Gov. Perry is being criticized for trying to cover up some facts by kicking people off a commission to get to the bottom of this.
Spenser: Let me take a wild guess. Is this going on in Texas by any chance?
Me: Yes. I should have mentioned that.
And so we watched the show. Mr. Martin appeared to be taking he position that if anything was said by anyone with which Martin did not agree that it was "absurd." Mr. Martin used that word quite a bit. Mr. Martin also made mention of an experiment that he conducted where he poured lighter fluid on a rug, lit it on fire and decided that it looked just like the rug in the Wllingham residence after the fire. I am not kidding. He actually said that--more than once. Now that's absurd. He also mentioned that he had been a criminal defense lawyer for 25 years.
After the segment was over I got barraged with questions from Spenser.
Spenser: You have been practicing criminal law for over 30 years. Don't you guys have certain duties to your clients, even after they are dead?
Me: Yes we do. There is an attorney client privilege that strictly prohibits an attorney from divulging confidences told to him by his client and there is a duty to represent the client within the law to the best of your ability. Loyalty and fidelity to the client are in there somewhere.
Spenser: Then I don't understand why the guy's lawyer was saying all those things. What do you think. You're the lawyer here.
Me: I don't know.
Spenser: Take a guess stupid. Not knowing something has never stopped you from running your mouth before.
Me: OK. OK. But I am only guessing.
Spenser: (Sigh.)
Me: Maybe he was looking for his 15 minutes of fame? Maybe he is a friend of the Governor who is up for re-election in a few months? Maybe he has been promised a nice job by somebody? Maybe he thought he was interviewing for a clown's position in the circus?
Spenser: Well, I am a dog and even I can figure out there is something wrong here. Want to hear what I think?
Me: Can I stop you?
Spenser: No. Don't be a smart ass. Here's what I think:
I was watching Anderson Cooper on CNN a few nights ago when Spenser wandered in and inquired as to what was on TV. The conversation went something like this.
Spenser: What are you watching?
Me: Anderson Cooper. He is going to have a segment on with David Martin, the lawyer that represented Cameron Todd Willingham at trial back in 1991.
Spenser: So what's the big deal?
Me: Mr. Willingham was executed in 2004 for an arson in which his three children were killed. Now there is a substantial body of evidence that the fire was an accident and Gov. Perry is being criticized for trying to cover up some facts by kicking people off a commission to get to the bottom of this.
Spenser: Let me take a wild guess. Is this going on in Texas by any chance?
Me: Yes. I should have mentioned that.
And so we watched the show. Mr. Martin appeared to be taking he position that if anything was said by anyone with which Martin did not agree that it was "absurd." Mr. Martin used that word quite a bit. Mr. Martin also made mention of an experiment that he conducted where he poured lighter fluid on a rug, lit it on fire and decided that it looked just like the rug in the Wllingham residence after the fire. I am not kidding. He actually said that--more than once. Now that's absurd. He also mentioned that he had been a criminal defense lawyer for 25 years.
After the segment was over I got barraged with questions from Spenser.
Spenser: You have been practicing criminal law for over 30 years. Don't you guys have certain duties to your clients, even after they are dead?
Me: Yes we do. There is an attorney client privilege that strictly prohibits an attorney from divulging confidences told to him by his client and there is a duty to represent the client within the law to the best of your ability. Loyalty and fidelity to the client are in there somewhere.
Spenser: Then I don't understand why the guy's lawyer was saying all those things. What do you think. You're the lawyer here.
Me: I don't know.
Spenser: Take a guess stupid. Not knowing something has never stopped you from running your mouth before.
Me: OK. OK. But I am only guessing.
Spenser: (Sigh.)
Me: Maybe he was looking for his 15 minutes of fame? Maybe he is a friend of the Governor who is up for re-election in a few months? Maybe he has been promised a nice job by somebody? Maybe he thought he was interviewing for a clown's position in the circus?
Spenser: Well, I am a dog and even I can figure out there is something wrong here. Want to hear what I think?
Me: Can I stop you?
Spenser: No. Don't be a smart ass. Here's what I think:
- I have to wonder if Mr. Martin was really on board with defending Mr. Willingham.
- Mr. Martin doesn't seem too open minded for a guy that did nothing wrong.
- This "I have been a defense lawyer for 25 years" stuff is a red herring. He was a defense lawyer for less than 10 years at the time of trial.
- This bourbon and branch experiment doesn't seem too reliable to me.
Me: Bourbon and branch?
Spenser: Yeah. That's when you get all liquored up on bourbon and branch water and go out and do something really stupid then try and pass it off as having some value.
Me: Anything else?
Spenser: Yeah. You defense lawyers should be more like dogs. We are loyal and you can tell us anything and we will keep it to ourselves--even if you die first.
3 Comments:
Just FYI: the reason his "experiment" is meaningless is pretty simple. I don't doubt that he could make a carpet he set on fire with lighter fluid look like the one in the Willingham house. The problem is that a whole lot of the time, carpets set on fire WITHOUT lighter fluid will end up looking like that--it's why REAL fire scientists don't try reading burn patterns like Rorschach tests, and instead look for things that actually have probative value. That kind of ignorance on Martin's part explains why he's so quick to defend the obviously incompetent fire marshall who declared this an arson.
One other thing: if you noticed on AC360, just before this segment they said that the juror who now questions her vote to convict was actually a family friend of one of the state's "expert" witnesses: how Martin failed to strike her during voir dire is a question that a bar committee ought to ask.
Thanks for the info on the fire investigation. I didn't get the idea that Mr. Martin concerned himself with science all that much.
Mr. Martin came across as a fool. Now that Mr. WIllingham has been executed, what remains important is clearing his name because it was his dying wish and to continue the fight for change in Texas to eliminate the Death Penalty. This state seems to convict more on emotion than fact. Shotgun justice. I am not sure why the stats are as high as they are in Texas but they are. And that, in and of itself, is a complete disgrace.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home