A Proposal for Criminal Defense Attorneys

Law enforcement has long used technology to gather evidence against the clients of criminal defense attorneys. Perhaps it is time to turn the tables on law enforcement. The article invites comment regarding a proposed web-site that would be focused on sharing individual citizen encounters with local law enforcement officers.

Every criminal defense attorney has read police reports purporting to describe "what happened" during a particular incident, only to be told an entirely different version of events by their clients or other witnesses. No defense attorney is so naive as to disbelieve that many of their clients lie on a fairly regular basis. However, if one were to take the police accounts at face value, they would also be left to conclude that police officers have never uttered a profane word in any of their cases. At least that is the experience of this writer, who, after having read thousands of reports, cannot recall a single incident where an officer was quoted using a cuss word.

Omissions of foul language by police officers are not particularly disturbing. What is more troubling are instances where suspects are alleged to have confessed to crimes after having been Mirandized, and the only evidence supporting the confession is a single officer's uncorroborated testimony. Many cases are largely decided based on this type of evidence, and the issue often boils down to the credibility of the officer versus the credibility of the criminal suspect.

Perhaps the most concerning cases are those rare occasions that involve actual physical abuse or intimidation by an officer. Suspects often complain of this type of behavior, but it is extremely problematical to substantiate. Further, it is difficult and time-consuming for defense counsel to investigate the validity of such allegations. The reality is that criminal defense lawyers do not have the resources to fully investigate every law enforcement official involved in every case.

A shared web-site among criminal defense attorneys might give lawyers a tool to help determine when additional investigation is warranted regarding police misconduct. Initial input would be solicited from citizens, including specific encounters with individual officers. Citizens could also report when they have filed formal complaints against law enforcement. This type of information is frequently difficult to access. If it were readily available through a database, however, this would help attorneys determine where to best direct their resources. Attorneys within the jurisdiction would also be able to provide input regarding their experience with the specific officer.

An arrangement such as this would not relieve attorneys of their duty to fully prepare their cases. However, it might alert the attorney in cases that are likely to hinge on officer credibility, and where there is an indication from their client that the officer acted improperly. Acknowledging that there is an opportunity for abuse in this proposal, it cannot be denied that similar abuses have been undertaken by law enforcement in the past.