Walk the Line revisited
Last week I explained why you should never get too close to a case. Have I ever been guilty of getting too close? Yes. That was what taught me that you always have to keep an objective view.
I undertook a criminal trial at a time when I did not do much crime. Although I was still pretty junior, I was already beginning to build the civil practice which is what I wanted to do. A solicitor who sent me civil work, with whom I had also become friends through our working relationship, wanted me to do the criminal trial. He asked me to do it as a personal favour to him, even though he would not be the solicitor instructing me. That was because he knew the defendant, but if I agreed to do the case the defendant would go with his recommendation. Not only did I do a fair amount of work for the solicitor, but I really liked him. I said I would do the case. When he was telling me about the defendant (after I had already agreed to take the case) something in his tone struck me. "Are you in love with this woman?" I asked him. "Yes, it's my girlfriend." he replied. He wanted me to do the case because he knew he could trust me to thoroughly prepare and fight to the finish.
The charge related to stealing from her employer. The documents relied on by the prosecution pointed to her. However, whoever was taking the money could have organised that, and since whoever had been doing it had plainly taken some care to cover their tracks it was not likely in my view that whoever was responsible would leave the documentation seemingly pointing to herself. Therefore the likely analysis was that someone else had done it, but taken care to point the finger of suspicion elsewhere should the thefts be discovered.
Theft from an employer is viewed seriously. Had the defendant pleaded guilty she could have expected possibly to avoid going to prison. If she was found guilty after a trial she would inevitably be sent to prison . She had never been in any trouble in her life. She was adamant she had not taken the money, and that if push came to shove she would rather go to prison than admit to doing something she hadn't done. I was sure that she hadn't done it, and therefore had the pressure of being personally responsible for avoiding a miscarriage of justice. Pressure intensified by her relationship with the solicitor (who of course was not the solicitor who acted in connection with the case).
The trial lasted for three days. It went well. After a three-day trial the jury took less than 20 minutes to acquit her. So you might say that getting too involved meant that there was no harm done.
Maybe not in this instance, but the perils were plain to see. I actually think that as the evidence developed, it was so obvious that the defendant had not committed the crime that it would have required a spectacular error on the defence behalf for her to be convicted. (Of course that is with the benefit of hindsight: it seemed nothing like that at the time). However I suspect that my blood pressure and heart rate were at cardiac arrest level for the entire period of the trial. (Both in and out of court). I also felt so strongly about it that I thought that had I lost the trial I would probably have left the Bar. Although it did not happen, thinking it through I realised that identifying too closely with the client meant that I could have lost the ability to make those cold and brutal decisions which you sometimes have to make in the best interests of the client, but cannot make if you get too close. Also the strain of emotional involvement meant that I would have a short professional life, and indeed a short life, if I carried on like that.
Obviously cases in which a huge amount is at stake are high pressure. You know what they mean to the people concerned. This would have been a pressure case in any event, because of the high stakes for the defendant. However, her being the girlfriend of a solicitor who I also regarded as a friend pushed it too far. You must care for the client, but care too much and you risk doing them a disservice.
I decided on two rules. One, I would never allow myself to get emotionally involved in a case again, because I did not think it was in the client's best interest. Secondly, that in serious matters (i.e. ones the outcome of which would make a huge difference to the people involved) I would not act for friends or relatives or their loved ones.