Women Criminal Defense Attorneys: Judy Clarke and Team Continue to Impress
The trial of Boston marathon defendant Tsarnaev officially started and Judy Clarke laid down the gauntlet in a fight for her client’s life. She wasted no time telling the jury in opening that her client committed the crime.
The New York Times called her strategy an echo of Clarence Darrow. Clarke told the jury she wasn’t contesting the who, what, where, and when of the government’s case, but only the why. She then went on to paint a picture of her client as a lost teenager who was controlled by a radical older brother. Clarke told the jury that her client would not sidestep responsibility for his crimes. This was a move that undoubtedly gained her credibility with the jury, being that she wasn’t going to try to insult their intelligence with some slick argument but rather told them the truth. It is amazing how jurors respond to being told the truth by a defense attorney.
Since the dramatic opening there have been countless daily reports of the parade of witnesses. Clarke and Miriam Conrad are taking every opportunity to extract detailed facts that support their theory. Some of the first witnesses were victims of the attack who shared harrowing stories of survival. CNN reported that the defense team did not cross-examine any of these witnesses. This was absolutely the right move. It showed respect for them and their stories, and that they were doing exactly what they promised in opening, not fighting the what.
When one of Tsarnaev’s friends was called to testify that he had given Tsarnaev the gun that was later used to kill a police officer, Conrad cross examined the witness about comments Tsarnaev made to his friend about his brother that clearly supported the defense theory that his brother was controlling and radical. There are similar reports for almost every witness that has taken the stand. I couldn’t help but imagine when reading these reports that Clarke and her team reminded me of skilled surgeons who are very methodically making incisions in a patient to get to the cancer in the patients body while trying to prevent it from spreading. It is a very deliberate and thoughtful dance.
No one would question that this is a tough defense case, but sometimes the answer to even the toughest case is simply the truth. And the truth is that family relationships are complicated and complex. The truth is that we have all seen this story before. Most of us have had the experience of representing a client who wasn’t predisposed to commit crime but committed a crime nonetheless at the bequest or prodding of a family member. I think this is such a universal experience that if you represent people accused of crime you surely have seen the effect of family influence on a client. So, the only difference here is that the crime that was committed resulted in unimaginable destruction. It doesn’t change the story behind what happened and bravo to Clarke and the entire defense team for having the courage to tell, what appears to be, Tsarnaev’s authentic story and hoping that the jury has the courage to listen and understand.