Why Lawyers Aren’t Really Human

March 10, 2008 at 9:12 pm (Politics)

If you disagree, read this article from 60 minutes where two lawyers kept a secret that let an innocent man rot in jail for 26 years!  And if their client hadn’t released them to talk after his death, they would still be keeping it.

“Well, the vast majority of the public apparently believes that, but if you check with attorneys or ethics committees or you know anybody who knows the rules of conduct for attorneys, it’s very, very clear-it’s not morally clear-but we’re in a position to where we have to maintain client confidentiality, just as a priest would or a doctor would. It’s just a requirement of the law. The system wouldn’t work without it,” Coventry explained.

I think that a system that ‘requires’ attorneys to allow a man to spend 26 years in jail for a crime he didn’t commit is already quite broken.

They couldn’t contain it, the truth had to come out, so what did they do?

We made an affidavit that we had gotten information through privileged sources, that Alton Logan was not in fact guilty of killing the officer, that in fact somebody else did it.

That’s wonderful.  But did they show it to anyone?  Did they anonymously tell anyone that could prevent such a grave miscarriage of justice?  NO, of course not.   They’re lawyers, remember,  Cover their tails by writing the affidavit and then …

They sealed the affidavit in an envelope and put the envelope in a lockbox to keep it safe under Coventry’s bed.

Gee, thanks guys.  Big help there.  Now, an argument could be made (by weak minded morally flawed individuals) that if he was already in jail, that no additional harm was being done by keeping silent.  That’s not the case – the trial hadn’t even happened yet.  These two lawyers did show up for his sentencing, though.

  “I was in court the day they were dealing with the death penalty,” Coventry recalled.

Asked why he went to court, he told Simon, “‘Cause I had this information that this innocent guy was up there and the jury was deciding whether they’re gonna kill him or not.”

Coventry said his heart was racing when he went into the courtroom. “It was just creepy. Knowing I was looking at the jurors thinking, ‘My God, they’re going to decide to kill the wrong guy.'”

In the end, the jurors spared Logan’s life.

“It was a 10 to 2 vote. Ten for, two against. Two individuals saved my life,” Logan explained.

And the jurors saved Kunz and Coventry from coming forward. “We thought that somehow we would stop at least the execution. We weren’t gonna let that go,” Coventry told Simon.

Well that’s nice.  They ‘SAY’ that they’ll keep a man from being wrongly executed.  I think that they wouldn’t have said anything that day, waiting to see what the appeals did.  Then they would have waited to see if he got a reprieve from the Governor, and about the time the switch was being thrown ‘MIGHT’ have said something.  But maybe not – we really don’t know.

“So it’s just okay to prevent his execution if necessary, but it was not okay to prevent his going to prison for the rest of his life?” Simon asked.

“Morally there’s very little difference and were torn about that, but in terms of the canons of ethics, there is a difference, you can prevent a death,” Coventry replied.

“But the minute he was not sentenced to death, the minute he was sentenced to life in prison, you decided to do nothing?” Simon asked.

“Yes,” Kunz said. “I can’t explain it. I ddon’t know why that made the difference but I know it did.”

Morally, there is NO difference between allowing a man to be wrongfully convicted – regardless of the punishment.  The difference is that these two sub-humans don’t know if they would have been able to live with knowing that they had killed someone.  They knew it was wrong, and decided to place their precious ‘canon of ethics’ above what everyone else who hasn’t been to law school knows to be right.

“Couldn’t you have leaked it to somebody? To a reporter, to an administrator, to the governor, to somebody?” Simon asked.

“The only thing we could have leaked is that Andrew Wilson confessed to us. And how could we leak that to anybody without putting him in jeopardy?” Kunz replied. “It may cause us to lose some sleep. But, but I lose more sleep if I put Andrew Wilson’s neck in the in the noose.”

“He was guilty and Logan was not. So, yes his head should be in the noose. And Logan should go free. It’s perfectly obvious to somebody who isn’t a lawyer,” Simon pointed out. “Andrew Wilson was guilty, was he not?”

“Yes. And that’s up to the system to decide. It’s not up to me as his lawyer to decide that he was guilty and so he should be punished and Logan should go free,” Kunz said.

Again we find that they really don’t qualify as human.  They’d rather see a man wrongly convicted and jailed for half his life than to have a murderer who confessed to them punished – if it means breaking their precious ethics.  Note the last ‘up to the system to decide’ is weasel speak for ‘Nobody should ever have to take responsibility for their actions without being forced to do so by a court.’

“In terms of my conscience, my conscience is that I did the right thing. Do I feel bad about Logan? Absolutely I feel bad about Logan,” Coventry admitted.

They wouldn’t know conscience if it walked up and hit them with a baseball bat.

 The attorneys say they were so tormented over Logan’s imprisonment that they convinced Wilson to let them reveal that Wilson was the real killer after Wilson’s death. Late last year, Wilson died. The two attorneys finally took their affidavit out of the lockbox, and they called Logan’s lawyer, pubic defender Harold Winston.

A member of the human race doesn’t need the permission of a murderer to do the right thing.  Especially if that murderer is dead.  But for some reason, they wouldn’t reveal what they knew without it.   I’m really sorry they were so tormented, though.  Really, I am (/sarcasm)

And just to show that it’s not just these two lawyers that are ‘bad apples’, the attorney for Logan (the innocent man in jail)

… agrees the two attorneys had to remain silent until Wilson died. “I wish there had been a way this could have come out earlier. Under the…Illinois ethics code, I think the only way would have been if Andrew Wilson had released his lawyers earlier,” he explained.

But these bottom-feeders are really proud of themselves, that they finally came forward and ‘did the right thing.’

“There may be other attorneys who have similar secrets that they’re keeping. I don’t wanna be too defensive but what makes this case so different, is that Dale and I came forward. And that Dale had the good sense to talk to Wilson before his death. And get his permission. ‘If you die, can we talk?’ Without that, we wouldn’t be here today,” Kunz said.

But note that if they hadn’t gotten the murderers permission, they would still have kept their mouths shut.

Asked what they would say to him if they were able to visit Logan in his cell, one of the attorneys said, “There’s nothing you can say. Well, it’s been difficult for us. But there’s no comparison what so ever to what it’s been for this poor guy.”

“How has it been difficult for them?” Logan inquired.

“Alton, whether or not you can understand it, we’ve been hurting for you for 26 years,” Kunz said. “How often did I think about it? Probably 250 times a year. I mean I thought about it regularly.”

I think that this scum-sucking lawyer wants us to feel sorry for him.  After all, he was troubled something like 250 times a year over the last 26 years.  Assuming that the ‘troubling’ was more than just a passing feeling (which I doubt), that leaves 115 days a year that he wasn’t troubled WHILE AN INNOCENT MAN WAS IN JAIL.  Multiply that by 26 years, and you come up with 2990 days, or 8 years and two months.  Which to me sounds like a lenient sentence for withholding that information.

The process has been started, but an innocent man is still in jail, and two lawyers who value their own version of ‘omerta’ over anything non-lawyers would recognize as right now have salved (what they claim to be) their consciences.

Don’t let their appearance fool you, anyone with a law degree that walks into a court room ‘believing in the system’ to work has resigned from the human race and joined a species known as ‘lawyer’.  They look like humans, they sound like humans (sometimes), but they have a language all their own and have replaced what humans call ‘morality’ with their ‘code of ethics’.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: