Human Problem
Posted by: Ed Chernoff
June 27, 2007

All seven of us sat in Federal Court in Brownsville, Texas; Defense attorneys for the damned. There was Grumpy, in his rumpled suit, the freckled naked circle of skin on the top of his head gleaming in the flourescent light. He had a contrary attitude, disagreeing to be disagreeable, arguing to be arguable and disputing in the end that he was ever that way at all. There were a couple of Sleepy's, starting the day as merely Dopeys, and then sinking under the weight of boredom and irrelevency. On down the line, we had it all. I guess you could say I was Sneezy, allergic as I am to sheer stupidity. Notable missing, however, was Happy.

Among other things, the Government says our clients were part of an enterprise that distributed tons of cocaine across the border of Mexico into the interior of the U.S. We have been told that the Government has so much evidence that even the phone logs would reach eight feet into the air. (No kidding, that was reported in their trial memorandum.) The Government team consists of various FBI agents, DEA agents and IRS agents, along with two experienced lawyers and paralegals. They assure us that there are a number of unindicted co-conspirators and other co-actors just chomping at the bit to sit up on the witness stand and point their accusatory fingers at our clients. In response to that bluster, came a blizzard of paper from the defense designed ostensibly to limit the horrible onslaught of evidence about to be thrust like daggers into the hearts of our clients.

Ok, so maybe I'm being dramatic, but the interaction we've had with our Government foes does seem a little too much like a play. I can't speak for the other Defense Attorneys, but every time Matt or I go to court on this case, it is implied that we are wasting our time, and we are always approached about pleading. I have to wonder why. We have been very clear from the beginning that we intend to try this case, and nothing we have seen so far has changed our opinion of our client's chances.

No doubt, it "looks" bad. It seems the entirety of our client's family has been involved in the drug trafficking trade. But... if we are to be judged only by our family's flaws, then let me apologize to my brother Anthony right now. (I assure you Bro, I never intended to get you indicted for conspiracy to commit intimacy avoidance, or aiding and abetting the substantive offense of alter abandonment.) Curiously, months into the case, the Government hasn't seen fit to show us what evidence directly links our client to the drug trade.

We aren't cowboys at Stradley, Chernoff & Alford LLP. We don't try cases for the experience. If the case warrants mitigation of damages, we artfully settle. But we don't fold our hand out of fear. We deal in Human problems, not legal ones. We are hired to stand before the Government and protect our clients. In our office, we have a famous photo of a student at Tianamen Square standing in front of a tank. He is holding a brief case. You've probably seen it. We have that photo for a reason. It reminds us of two things: Courage over tyranny, and...never take a knife into a gun fight!

So far though, it looks a whole lot like knife on knife. The nature of the government is to offer deals to co-defendants to testify against their breathern. It may be that by the time the jury panel is brought in, we are the only one left at the defense table. So be it. We've had to deal with that before. That's probably why we were hired. Our client professes his innocence and under the circumstances, that's good enough for us. If circumstances change, so shall we. However, right now we are gearing up for battle. One of the co-defendants has already expressed his intention to plead. His attorney assured us that his client had no deal to testify, and further added that the Assistant US Attorney on the case had never lost a trial. I was going to respond, but Matt interjected first. He said, "Well this victory ought to be even more glorious!" What was I going to add to that?

Permalink