10 April 2005


I have a brochure on my desk for a CLE: "Indigent Criminal Defense - Advanced Skills for the Experienced Practitioner."

It looks like a good CLE, and about half of it looks like it could actually prove useful. On top of that, it'd be a good way to meet others who are doing the same thing I am (but not in the same courthouses). And the Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court appears to be hosting the thing so it would be politically advantageous to attend (not that His Honor, Chief Justice Hassell knows me from Adam - I'd just rather not walk into the Supreme Court one day and be asked why I wasn't there). Beyond all that, I'd actually like to go and could use the CLE credits.

So why am I not going? Because I'll be defending indigent clients that day in both Chesterfield and Powhatan counties. Isn't that ironic?

No really, I'm asking. I've been so confused since that song . . .


Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure that qualifies as ironic.

I myself, will probably have to miss a seminar this week on trial techniques for new prosecutors, because I will be busy -- doing a trial.

slickdpdx said...

Did you consider the possibility that the prosecutor looks forward to an objective bunch of people listening to the witnesses and cutting through all of the b.s. that a defense attorney or his/her client have been throwing out? Or that judges might be a little too lenient because the volume of crime they're exposed to means they don't take the crimes as seriously as a "regular person?" P.S. Beware the person that wants judges to do everything. I bet you could find a lot more authority for that in our jury system.