Many people say that they couldn't be a defense attorney because they
don't want to let the guilty client go free. But what about the
prosecutor who puts an innocent person behind bars?
I ask because I'm going through a dilemma of sorts. I haven't written anything here, but in November, I got a job working for the Salt Lake County District Attorney's office as a law clerk. I write different kinds of motions and memo's for the attorney's in the office.
I've always thought that I wanted to be a prosecutor to serve justice. Prosecutors get to help victims of crime, fight crime, and serve the public. Many prosecutors have an image of doing what's right and being zealous advocates for the public. Plus, being a prosecutor is not a bad resume builder when one runs for public office.
However, I didn't realize the "prosecutor's dilemma" until today. Without going into specifics, I'm working on a case right now where the truth of the matter is hard to find. Our office wants to prosecute the defendant to the fullest extent of the law, while the defense attorney's want to do the opposite. The problem is that I don't think the defendant is guilty based on the evidence that I've seen. There is truth somewhere, but neither side is trying to discover it because it doesn't serve their interests. From that perspective, it scares me that I'm facilitating a process that could potentially put an innocent man behind bars.
Basically, it comes down to this: would you rather see a guilty person go free or an innocent person go to prison? Or an alternative question: would you get more excitement from a "guilty" verdict as a prosecutor, or a "not-guilty" verdict as a defense attorney? (Assume that you don't know if this person is innocent or guilty).
Personally, I'd rather see a guilty person go free and would be more excited for a "not-guilty" verdict.
I wonder if the prosecutor's office is the wrong fit for me. But as I contemplate what that means, the consequences flood into my consciousness. I could obtain a not-guilty verdict for someone who didn't deserve one and could commit another crime. My love of law and justice don't seem to be congruent with being a defense attorney.
Or does it? I strongly believe that every person has the right to be vigorously defended by effective representation. The system wouldn't work without it. Criminal law requires that the state prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a defendant actually committed a crime. Without that, a person must be found innocent every time. Could my love of law and justice be complemented by requiring the state to prove that a person is guilty? I think I could really be effective at protecting the public from overzealous prosecutors who want to throw the proverbial book at people who don't actually deserve it.
But this raises the question: can I be more effective in promoting justice by being a prosecutor that makes sure every defendant gets a fair day in court?
