will never make up for a lack of ability on your part.'
How Many Rat CT Defense Lawyers
Can Fit In Feds' Pockets?
Norm Pattis Column & Comments
Criminal Law Today said...
Jealousy runs rampant in this business and that is unfortunate. Right now the talk of the Connecticut Criminal Defense Bar is what is going on in the City of Waterbury. This issue is a lightning rod situation. When Norman Pattis tries to raise a valid issue relevant to all members of the criminal bar regarding the position of the CCDLA he is accused of trying to undermine the organization. What reason Norman Pattis has to undermine the CCDLA and what he stands to gain from doing that is likely one of the questions of the ages.
There is a great deal of talk regarding what is going on in the City of Waterbury and the investigation of its Chief Prosecutor and a lawyer who has won more trials than most members of the bar combined.
This like many other things has been the subject of much gossip. Now this is a matter of public concern so discussion would seem to be appropriate. Many people want to advance their own agenda when it comes to this topic, these people want to ignore one major question that being “How did this investigation start”? The smart money is that a group of lawyers thought that it was a way to somehow increase their own “share” of the business by removing a prominent member of the bar, and this is well known.
Here is the bottom line as far as this is concerned. To those involved, you need to take a brief moment and make note of the fact you are not slick and you did not pull a [coup]. Just because your name does not appear on a letter does not mean that your involvement is not well known or you are fooling people into believing that you are not a part of this.
You should be prepared for the day when your questioned about conduct involving grievance panel investigations into the use of “runners”, multiple bar presentments taking place in the same month and a great deal of other activity that you believe nobody knows about. You were not “slick” in taking the actions that you did in this case nor were you” slick” the numerous other times you have tried similar stunts designed to humiliate lawyers by speaking ill of them behind their backs the basis being you are jealous of them and the success they have achieved in the area of trying cases. You are not “slick” when you attempt to steal business from practice areas you had no idea could be fruitful until you saw the fruits of their labor.
Maybe you should tell one of your partners in crime about the comments you make about him having to borrow money from his mom to pay his quarterly taxes. This is a complicated business but one thing about criminal law is fairly simple and straight forward. Those in need of a criminal defense attorney want a good one. They want a lawyer who has tried and won cases, and at a minimum brings their practice book to a jury trial. They want a lawyer who will work hard on their behalf and they want a lawyer knowledgeable on the law. If you do not possess these qualities then you will not be taking over any “market share” you believe you should have. The long list of people who you advised to plead guilty in cases where they did nothing wrong so as to not ruffle any feathers and who later realized this and voiced their displeasure to anyone who will listen is going to keep your share of the business where it exists today. You should take note of this before you pat yourself on the back behind clothes doors and give yourself so much credit for being so clever. One thing is clear and will not change pushing for a federal investigation will never make up for a lack of ability on your part.
September 5, 2010 11:34 PM
Norm Pattis Column & Comments