Public Defense

Prosecutors want hazardous duty pay?

By Gideon

A couple of years ago prosecutors in the State floated a bill asking for hazardous pay. They claimed that defendants threatened and stalked them. I remember the public defender’s office submitting testimony to the legislature saying, essentially, “you think your job is hazardous?”, and providing several examples of public defender employees being the subject of attacks by clients.

Here’s the latest story. PD Sue Hankins (who is a very nice lady and a pretty damn good lawyer) was in court with a client who wanted her replaced (and perhaps wanted to represent himself - that’s not entirely clear). His motion to “fire” her was denied, so he turned to her, started yelling and then spit on her.

Reality check, folks. Public defenders are more often the subject of clients’ ire than prosecutors or judges. I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve heard clients say: “Well, they’re only doing their job, but my lawyer, man he screwed me.”

They see prosecutors and judges as cogs in the wheel, a part of the system. We, on the other hand, are supposed to be their champions, their protectors. When we don’t give them what they want, they’re angry with us. Sure you’ll have the occasional nutbag that follows the prosecutor home and tries to torch his house, but more often than not, they attack us, they lunge at us, they call us names, they spit on us, they cold-cock us in court. We’re almost always standing next to them or sitting at the table across from them, giving them unpleasant news. They react immediately and almost invariably toward the most accessible person: their lawyer.

So the next time a prosecutor wants to ask for hazardous duty pay, come do our jobs for a bit first.

ShareThis

Full post as published by A Public Defender on January 11, 2008 (boomark / email).