Last night while watching the movie The Lincoln Lawyer, I began reflecting upon a statement of a detective to a defense lawyer, "How do you sleep at night?" Ironically, Matthew McConaughey gets off the elevator and replies with a comment about how the district attorney's office could not be trusted. Later in the movie we learn that the Lincoln Lawyer's worst fear came true, an innocent man had gone to jail for a crime that he did not commit. While winning the trial for the current client, the Lincoln Lawyer exonerates his past client and corrects the past wrong by implicating his current client in the previous murder. This prompts the detective to say, "Just who are you working for?"
This movie illustrates a very real point. Defense lawyers, especially in high profile cases, are despised by the public even though the search for justice should be the goal of both sides. (Johnny Cochran, Jose Baez, and Drew Peterson's lawyer, Joel Brodsky BRODSKY INTERVIEW LINK come to mind.) It is unfortunate that the movie portrays defense lawyers as slimy. All lawyers, including prosecutors, like in the Casey Anthony trial, should not have a win at all costs attitude. (Putting on testimony that there were 84 searches for chloroform when in reality there was just one. JOHN BRADLEY LINK.) Fairness and integrity must extend to both sides of the bar despite any public pressure to rush to judgment. ANTHONY CAUTION LINK.
The reality is that both prosecutors and defense attorneys are necessary for our system of justice to function. So while the Nancy Graces of the world or those following the Lauren Spierer investigation may be frustrated when persons of interest do not speak based on advice of counsel, keep in mind the Fifth Amendment should always be considered before one opens his mouth as it is one of the rights our founding fathers fought and died to obtain.
In sum, the movie is very entertaining. However, for lawyers battling in the trenches each day, it highlights and reenforces some preconceived public perceptions that need to be corrected.
Posts
11 comments:
This made my day!
Good review. Even better movie.
Good job #7
I just seen that movie! Excellent plot, acting, and not to complicated.
The conflicts between defense and prosecution are real and many times the innocent ARE convicted, it appears the "Win at all costs" has damaged our justice system. There are times that the prosecution have hidden evidence of innocents just to obtain the conviction. (So what would make them and different than the criminal element itself?) Especially when the real criminal is left to run free and strike again...a double whammy to justice.
Need to stop rewarding prosecutes simply base on convictions and add a moral value as well. Than the defense will fall in line.
And the costs for one to defend themselves needs to be addressed to lesson the need for the back room deal that sends another group of alleged criminals to prison...they touch on this as well.
Good movie...I'll wait a short while and watch it again.
We need a Lincoln Lawyer to take over the L. Spierer investigation. Any takers?
One of McConaughey's better roles.
I really enjoyed the links!
I hate when movies try to trick you into watching them because they seem so “avant garde” like Lincoln Lawyer when we’re supposed to believe that Mickey is working out of his car for the whole movie like he’s homeless or something but it’s not really important to the story line. Although I liked this movie I’m glad that I saw it for free at home with my 3 month Blockbuster DVD mail subscription http://bit.ly/jYtohY rather than in the theater because I would have been disappointed if I paid $10. The nice thing is that it’s free for all new customers not just DISH employees like myself.
I liked Micky and the movie. You can keep your link
Fair review... I do wonder what such movies do to the legal professions public image. He was a bit to slick of a lawyer...
The legal aspects in the Lincoln Lawyer mostly revolve around ethic. Specifically, the duty of confidentiality becomes a major road block to justice.
On a deeper level it also questions the duties to a former client who pled to a crime he did not commit.
Does one's ethical obligation to the former client ever end?
Post a Comment