The local news media has recently given a great deal of coverage to a case involving two lawyers, Bill Winters & Marc Yonker, and their former employer, Richard Mulholland. One article, published in the St. Petersburg Times last week, provided a detailed account of the allegations of “theft, sex and deceit,” at issue in the case.
As sad as the case may be from an ethical point of view, sadder still are the comments that viewers posted in response to the article. One poster, “Jeff,” writes: “Lawyers are all a bunch of thieves just look who is running and ruining this country. It is all about how can you manipulate the law and make an obscene amount of money. Whatever happened to ethics??” Another, “Tom D” writes: “Lawyers are born thieves.” And yet another, “Jackie O” writes: “Ethical lawyers fall into the same category as jumbo shrimp, honest politicians or military intelligence. They do what they do best - find loopholes and lie with a straight face.”
Responses from those who appear to work in the legal profession sought in vain to defend lawyers. One particularly ham-handed response stated: “To all you lawyer haters out there-I hope you never need the services of a good atty!This country was founded by lawyers-& the practice of law is an honorable profession. I've found that people who constantly attack attys are actually just jealous!”
It is not new news that lawyers are often thought of as dishonest, unethical, and greedy. Those are beliefs that have existed as long as the legal profession itself. What should be of concern, however, is the fact that the resulting justice was overshadowed by the fact that the litigants happened to be lawyers.
The same story could have concerned the unethical practices of individuals in any profession, including doctors, architects, engineers, and accountants. If that were the case, it is unlikely that those commenting on the story would have immediately jumped on the bandwagon to criticize the profession as a whole, not just the individuals responsible for the egregious conduct.
But the fact that the story was about lawyers seemed to support or validate an already widely held belief that lawyers are essentially dishonest. To that extent, the story was fuel for an already burning fire. It is unfortunate because the vast majority of lawyers - including both plaintiff and defense lawyers - are highly ethical individuals that are horrified by stories such as this. The question we must ask ourselves as lawyers is: why don’t people believe that?
Perhaps it is just human nature to categorize all individuals belonging to a particular group as being “evil” or “bad,” because it is easier to do so than to take on the more difficult task of evaluating each individual. Stereotypes are a way of letting us off the hook for any responsibility that we might otherwise have for actually learning about an individual and determining whether or not the individual conforms to our stereotypical beliefs or not.
It is, for example, easier to discount Barrack Obama based on an unsubstantiated belief that he is Muslim, and therefore “bad,” because all Muslim’s are bad. It is human nature to take this path of least resistance, rather than perform even the most rudimentary research to determine whether or not Obama is actually a Muslim. And forget about the added step of determining whether or not Muslims are bad - that is simply too much work.
The same could be said about those who would categorize John McCain as “another George Bush,” without: a) really knowing who George Bush is; and/or, b) taking the time and doing the work required to know whether it is actually true that John McCain is so similar to George Bush as to be “another George Bush.”
What it boils down to is that we are all inherently lazy when it comes to taking on the hard work of a critical analysis involving individuals that belong to an easily identifiable and popularly maligned group. It is easier to simply define every member of that group by one easy to understand definition that requires little in the way of thinking or research.
If you want an interesting exercise demonstrating this concept, answer the following: All men are ___________. Chances are you thought of the word “dogs,” because the phrase “all men are dogs” has become so widely known that it evokes the same response virtually every time. Advertisers have mastered this concept, but unfortunately, lawyers haven’t.
Rather than lament the fact that many people have a high disregard for lawyers and/or our system of justice, we should simply do a better job of educating society. Imagine if lawyers throughout the nation focused on a simple repetitive concept that became so widely known that it was the first thing people thought of when they heard the word “lawyer”? Sound far fetched?
As a group, lawyers are notoriously unmanageable. Perhaps it is ego, perhaps it is control, but the reality is that it would take a miracle to get lawyers to agree on anything nationwide. Unfortunately, that miracle may come from an unlikely source: the American people. There may come a day when Americans become so fed up with lawyers and our system of justice, that they decide to take things into their own hands and significantly modify our judicial system. If that happens, lawyers may have no choice but to unite, or perish.
We should never forget that lawyers and our courts, even our United States Supreme Court, serve at the pleasure of the people. We should do a better job of educating people about the good things that we do so that we will continue to have that honor. If the comments in the Winters and Yonker case are any indication, “the people” do not currently believe that we are doing a very good job. We might want to take note of that, and do something to change it, before we have little choice in the matter.
