A Rare Legal Quest: From Murderer to Lawyer [Should an admitted murderer be admitted to the bar?]

The NY Times | Dec. 25, 2001 | Michael Janofsky

[abandon]

I hate to say this but,in my experiences with practicioners of the"legal??"profession,a convicted murderer might be an moral improvement!!!

I know, I know, he wasn't able to get your bail reduced so now your mad at all of them.

[Old Professer]

"ALL LAWYERS are CRIMINALS"

If that is the case sir, you are one who fellates goats.

I am a lawyer and I am NOT a criminal. I do appreciate lawyer jokes but your comment is just f**king baseless.

Society needs lawyers the same way aquariums needs "bottom-feeders"; however, the need doesn't change their nature nor what they do.

I am sure that you are an upstanding citizen, but, why the fraternal hostility?

I once worked in a laundry, I never did get that smell out of my mouth; finally, I quit, haven't looked back except on occasions like this.

Happy New Year.

[Marauder]

There's a precedent for this in the case of one John Wesley Hardin, a somewhat notorious outlaw during the 19th Century. He read the law during his imprisonment, and passed the bar upon his release.

He practiced in Gonzalez, then later El Paso until he was killed by a Sheriff in 1895.

[summer]

I hate to say this but, in my experiences with practicioners of the "legal??" profession, a convicted murderer might be a moral improvement!!!

LOL....unfortunately, I know exactly what you mean.

[summer]

Interesting! Thanks for the info.

[summer]

What do you think about this, FV?

[abandon]

Society needs lawyers the same way aquariums needs "bottom-feeders"; however, the need doesn't change their nature nor what they do.

How does defending Randy Weaver against unjust government charges qualify one as a "bottom-feeder?" Your rank generalization is overbroad and has little value.

[Congressman Billybob]

I was reading this thread, and considering whether I had anything to say and if so, what -- when I came across your post asking my reaction. So now I have to think it through.

A similar case came up in Maryland where I went to school and became a member of the Bar. A man who had driven the get-away car in a robbery, had served his time, had gone to law school, etc., was seeking admission to the Bar. He was refused.

Do I agree that some pretty scummy people have become, and have continued to be lawyers? Absolutely. Exhibit A is Terry McAuliffe, Chairman of the DNC, who accepted a $265,000 kickback while working for the White House, and has never been investigated, much less convicted and disbarred. (The insurance company that paid the kickback WAS convicted and paid a hefty fine.)

I cannot defend refusing admission to the Bar to this appearently rehabilitated murderer on the grounds that the Bar should not have criminals as members. It does have criminals as members, including the ex-Governor of my former state, Maryland, who took bribes, beat the rap on appeal, and rejoined the Bar Association.

However, I still think this man should be denied admission to the Bar. What message does it send to would-be law students and would-be lawyers that a known murderer can become a lawyer?

One factor is whether the time and effort this obviously intelligent man spent in getting his education, will be wasted? No, it will not be. About half of the members of my graduating class at Maryland Law did not become practicing attorneys. There are many other professions in which knowledge of the law is highly valuable, including, apparently, in the chatity that his wife, the former judge, has established.

It is a close call, primarily because the idea of rehabilitating criminals into useful members of society is so important. However, this man can be useful to society, perhaps even more useful, if he does not become a member of the Bar. So, after serious thought, my answer is that he should be rejected.

Thank you for posing the question to me.

Congressman Billybob

[wi jd]

What career choices currently exist for the person he killed?

Obviously, your question is rhetorical.

But what should we do, punish the murderer again? Did he not pay his debt to society by serving his sentence? 25 years is a long time.

[summer]

What a thoughtful response. Thank you. And, as it happens, I agree with your line of reasoning. I too was thinking there are other useful careers he can choose with his knowledge in the field of law, but, being a lawyer should not be one of them Thanks again.

[summer]

See post #28, because I agree with it. Thanks for your post.

[LN2Campy]

...his wife, Donna, 53, a former county court judge who married him six years after she met him while touring the prison and five years before he was released....

What's with these gals that hook up with cons that are still locked up? Is it just an extreme case of wanting "the bad boy"??

[Rodney King]

I think that he should be allowed in. Society has decided that he has paid his price(even though I would have put him in the electric chair). He went to law school and he passed the bar. Let him in. The whole holier than thou thing that lawyers play is BS. The bar exists not to protect consumers but to limit competition. It is the largest trust in the world and should be sued by the justice department. If the bar doesn't want him in, then I do.

[summer]

See if you feel the same after reading post #28. Maybe you will stay with your position; maybe not.

[summer]

Speaking as a woman, this is one subject I simply never could understand: the "allure" of the incarcerated guy. And, I never will understand it.

[wi jd]

What message does it send to would-be law students and would-be lawyers that a known murderer can become a lawyer?

Anyone who can take the LSAT, gain admission to a law school, pass his classes and pass a bar exam is a lawyer in my opinion. Whether that person is allowed to practice is a separate question.

It seems to me that the man has paid his dues to society and has rehabilitated himself. (That word "rehabilitated" always reminds me of Shawshank Redemption)

It is a tough call. I doubt any large firm would hire him b/c they undoubtedly do background checks. It would be bad for PR.

He could hang out his own shingle but I would be interested to see if he could drum up any business. I guess what I am saying is let the market decide.

[Rodney King]

It is definetly a tough call to make. I guess my main fear is not so much that this guy is getting a raw deal, but that I don't think it will be very long until the government starts making everyone who expresses anti-government thought a crime, with the Bar's soon using those crimes as excuses for not allowing non-liberals in to the bar.

[Rodney King]

He could hang out his own shingle but I would be interested to see if he could drum up any business

If he is smart, I would bet that he could drum up quite a lot of business from guilty people who would see him as someone they can trust. Also, he would be effective at getting the best plea bargains for people i.e. knowing which jails are better for serving out sentences etc.

[LADY J]

IMHO - many lawyers ARE criminals. They use fancy ploys to get leniency for killers who are paroled to go out and kill again.

I believe in the death penalty for murder to save some innocent soul from being at the mercy of a killer in the future.