The "Wow" Factor - February 7, 2008

I interviewed this morning with the Los Angeles County Public Defender where passion became the hot topic. Well, at least for me.

I did not want to interview for the position. I was going to miss a total of four hours of class, I had to take the train into the city, take the subway to Manhattan, and navigate the city campus of NYU to meet with the interviewers. I was not even considering working for them over the summer. I just wanted some interview practice time.

I knew I wanted to go home this summer, but I had no idea that the interviewers would be the ones having the impact on me. This was role-reversal at its best.

As with my last interview in Manhattan, I had to get up far too early to be happy about life. The train schedule runs at weird times. I arrived in Manhattan, hopped (well, walked) of the subway, paying special attention to the gap, and was one block from NYU. The University is not in any central area. It is spread throughout many different blocks, in varying buildings. Basically, the university buys buildings as they become available in the area. Everything is scattered about without any master plan. Knowing this, I arrived about one hour before my interview was scheduled to take place.

I could not find the Law School Building for check-in. I literally walked all the way around it.

After I checked in, I sat down to pass the time. I was not experiencing any anxiety whatsoever. I did not really care about this interview. I was just going because it was going to give me interview experience. With this in mind, I was as relaxed as was humanly possible.

I was greeted with the kind of warmth and cheer that was not of the New York breed. It was a relaxed, "it is actually nice to see you" type of welcome. I excitedly shook her hand, and down the hall we went. Waiting in the room was a man (whose name I will not even try to recreate) and two open chairs. I asked the Interviewers, both high ranking Public Defenders, where they would like me to sit. They asked me for my resume. I produced a beautifully prepared packet, secured by a very nice clasp-folder. Then they asked for another resume. Including the electronically submitted resume, they now had three copies total. They asked for a minute to look the resume over. I nodded in acceptance of this proposition - it is not like I really had a choice. I leaned over to my belongings, and pulled out my leather portfolio - to make it seem like I was sincerely interested in what we were discussing. The male interviewer turned to me and said, "Relax! Put that away. It is not necessary."

Heck yeah! Relaxed. Kick back. This is good stuff.

I told them that I missed this California attitude. Questioned as to where I grew up, I gave them the stock California response. When asked if I wanted to be in California over the summer, I responded that I can only handle so much New York. They nodded in agreement.

As they read, they picked out a few highlights. They wanted to know about how I got my internship with the Publisher of a significant newspaper. I explained my straight forward "I want to be your intern" approach.

The next statement was something close to, you get pretty involved in everything. "You have quite the initiative. A go-getter to say the least." I told them my parents continually remind me of this non-flaw flaw. "I do just about everything," I replied. "Which leaves me time for nothing. However, I manage my time to the smallest detail which allows me to do all that I want, when I want, with the highest possible quality. Passion."

I told them that when I undertake something, it gets my full attention. They wanted to know about wrestling, and I explained that every wrestler comes with an interesting story. I explained that I confronted the soccer coach, asked him if I would be awarded playing time. He asked me if I really wanted to know the answer. I responded that I would not have asked if I did not want to know. He told me most likely, very little playing time would be awarded. With that, I literally walked off the soccer field and into the wrestling room. I was horrible my first year, but after that, the rest was history. I told them that wrestling became a pretty significant part of my life, and was definitely a love - I miss it.

I continued to explain that my passion bleeds through in everything I do. I highlighted my two favorite passions: politics and journalism.

They caught right on to this potential problem, and dug right in. "Being a criminal defense attorney is not a popular choice if you want to go into politics. How do you reconcile this?"

I responded by explaining that the answer to this question is the same as defending a criminal I know is guilty: criminal defense should be held in high regard by the public. It is the fabric of our society, insomuch as it protects and defends the rights of individuals. Without a competent defense, our political system means nothing.

I proceeded to dispel the popular negative sentiment by using a California referendum as an example where voters overwhelmingly passed that changed the medical malpractice maximum award for a Plaintiff by making it significantly less. The people were worried that doctors were being unfairly sued for far too much. As it turns out, the measure ended up working against those who were adamantly in favor of it. The lesson is, people dislike defense attorneys until they need one, and chances are, either you or somebody you know will someday need one.

They replied, "You have no idea! We get calls in the middle of the night."

The male interviewer said that he gets calls all the time from police officers who he cross-examined in trials; people who otherwise loathe him.

In the end, everybody calls.

They then saw that I was already a clerk for a District Attorney's office. I chuckled. They looked at me funny for laughing. I explained to them that I did far too many things that I had no business doing. I then told them one of my favorite "Adventures in Law" stories.

The highly shortened version: I wrote many motions and briefs when I was a clerk. The one I wrote most often was a response to motions to suppress evidence. I had always submitted these motions to the Assistant District Attorney for review before they were filed. At one point, I wrote the opposition and gave it to her, business as usual. The next day she marched into the Bullpen - as it is commonly referred to by the practicing attorneys, the Bullpen is the room that is home to all the law clerks - and in front of everybody said, while pointing to a big red circle on the motion I gave to her, "How could you make a mistake like this? Any first-year law student knows how to do this correctly!"

I responded as calmly as one can when being dressed-down by an authority figure. "I am only a sophomore in college."

She turned bright red, and apologized. She then proceeded to teach me how to fix the problem. The other law clerks got quite the show.

I looked at the Public Defenders and said, "So, when I say I did many things I had no business doing, I really did things I had no business doing. That year I fell in love with criminal law."

Then the interview really started to get under way. They told me that they wanted to turn the interview around. The question they next posed was: "Why would you make a great prosecutor." Like just about every question asked, they are looking for something more than what is apparent on the surface.

I responded that I would be a great prosecutor because I infuse my passion into everything that I do. I added that any field of criminal law is something that would be exciting. I also discussed my love of debate, quick thinking, rhetorical speaking, and my ability to convey my thoughts, feelings, passion and reasoning through written and spoken word.

This was my way of answering why I would be a great defense attorney. Go me.

Then they asked me why I would make a poor prosecutor. To this I replied that I think that the prosecution has everything easier than defense and that regardless of the rule of law (innocent until proven guilty) that the defense always has a tougher time in court. Furthermore, the jury always looks at the defendant as guilty. They legitimize their projection of guilt from the start by reasoning the Defendant would not have been arrested if he/she did not do something wrong. Police do not just arrest anybody off the street. Because the prosecution has an easier time, I think that I would get bored with practice after a long time, and that I thrive on challenges. If I am not continually being challenged, I lose interest in that which I am expected to do.

I followed up that answer with the fact that I admire the Public Defender because they are very highly worked, underpaid and under-appreciated.

Near the end of the interview, things got serious. The male interviewer turned to me and said, "I am going to give you a case hypo, and we want to see how you answer the questions."

As he outlined the following to me, my mind was off to the races with where the question was going to come into play. Could it be about: malpractice, his verbalizing his guilt to me, witness tampering, ethics, etc.? Little did I know that the issue was all about a person's rights. Even though the hypo was based in criminal law, civil procedure was the knowledge that I tapped into.

The hypo took about five to ten minutes to completely verbally outline, and my answers were expected on the spot. It was a true test of knowledge, as there was no time to think. They pressured me to give answers within seconds of the question: they wanted to see what my instincts and thought processes would reveal.

Not difficult, right?

__________

The story is best told in person, but to summarize it as best as I can, the hypo dealt with me as a brand new Public Defender, assigned to my first case. My Client is a homosexual-hating, illegal immigrant loathing Born-Again Christian. He is charged with assault with a deadly weapon, the weapon being a beer bottle. Your Client says the police report and the charges are completely true, and that he did as charged. He will not, however, make a deal. He says that he is only with you, a half-rate attorney, because he does not have money. But, he makes it clear that there will be no plea or deal made. He is the only caregiver for his two daughters, and he is a trucker. Any record of a conviction causes his trucking license to be automatically revoked. As a life-long trucker, he will lose his income if he loses his license, and he will not be able to support his two girls. It is very clear that no deal will be made. During the night in question, your Client went to the bar to get his usual after-work beer. His days are spent sitting in traffic, so he unwinds by getting a beer and watching ESPN on the bar's television. He does this with normalcy. The entire bar was open, and he was sitting alone minding his own business when a Latino man came and sat down next to him. Your Client became agitated that the Latino man was invading his personal space, and because of his Latino looks, immediately thought he was an illegal immigrant, which upset him even more. My Client thinks that Latinos are the dirt of the world, and that they are ruining the economy, spending tax dollars and other such negative descriptions. Not long after, the Latino man started to "hit" on your Client. My Client started getting really upset and told the man to stop numerous times. The man took each denial and request to stop as a challenge, and tried to "hit" on him even more. My Client could not stand it anymore and hit him over the head with his beer bottle. The bar tender saw everything.

During the jury selection phase, when 11 of the 12 jurors have been selected, the Judge calls for a recess for lunch. He gives the specific instructions that no Juror is to talk to any of the Parties or the Parties' Attorneys, and same the other way around. Since it is my first trial (where I have been inside, cooped-up all morning), I decide to go to Quizno's to relax for a little and get out. When I park in the parking lot, I notice a woman - I only notice her because she is in front of me. She is wearing a shirt that reads "Homosexual = Sin = Aids" and in big letters underneath are the words "Burn In Hell". I also notice that her car has a bumper sticker that says "Illegals Deserve Death".

When I get back to court, the Judge calls the potential Juror Twelve to be questioned. I realize that this is the same woman I saw in the parking lot, but she is wearing a jacket, and her shirt is now covered. The Prosecution and Judge ask questions of the Juror, and you then follow up with my questions. The Prosecution has no problems with the Juror and does not use a peremptory challenge. All that is left is my approval, and she will officially be Juror Twelve.

I was now faced with three options:
1) I can say nothing and dismiss her with a Peremptory Challenge;
2) I can ask for a sidebar with the Judge and the Prosecutor and explain that I saw her, and what she is wearing - tell them all I know; or
3) Say nothing and allow her to be Juror Twelve.

-- What would you answer, and why?--

I told the two highly ranked Public Defenders that I would choose option (3).
__________

The male PD said, "Hmmm. OK. You say nothing and proceed through the trial. You get to the end, and the Jury is sent to deliberate. You become excited because I completed a trial through Jury deliberations, a milestone that 99% of attorneys never reach. Day one goes by without a verdict. You are getting really happy. Day two passes without a verdict. You are living on cloud nine - this is good news, a sign that the Jury is most likely hung or going in your favor. Day three passes as well. On day four, the Foreperson sends the Judge a letter saying 'Juror Twelve will not listen to anybody. She is set in her ways, and is a bigot. She is the only one will not agree on a verdict.' The note also says that Juror Twelve knew you saw her, and that you had knowledge of her beliefs.

The Judge calls for a sidebar. You and the Prosecutor approach the Judge. The Judge then asks you, "Did you know see Juror Twelve?"

-- What would you answer if you made the same decision as I? --

I then evoked my civil procedure knowledge. I told the Interviewers that I would answer, "Absolutely. I saw her in a parking lot."

He then asked, "Did you know about her beliefs?"

I replied that I had seen her wearing a shirt with statements on it, and that her car had a bumper sticker.

The male interviewer then turned to me and said, "Why did you not tell the court about this knowledge."
__________

My answer was the following:

First, my duty as an Attorney is to zealously advocate for my client. As such, it served my client no good by saying something.

Second, I did not violate the orders of the Judge. I did not speak to the potential Juror, I only saw her. Furthermore, it is unreasonable to expect me to avoid all contact with any potential Juror. If the order required no contact, I would have to walk around in a blacked-out bubble. I followed the order as stated by the Judge.

Third, if my client were "filthy-rich," not only would he have a high-powered Attorney on his behalf, but most likely Jury Consultants and Private Investigators that would have found out this information. Consultants and Private Investigators are legal, and would have provided the same outcome as my Quizno's sighting.

Finally most importantly, my client has the right to a jury of his peers (7th Amendment). My job is to protect my client's rights. Juror Twelve's beliefs happened to have perfectly paralleled those of my Client. Juror Twelve not only has as much right to be on the Jury as the rest of the Jurors, but arguably more so, because she is of the same background as my Client.

-- How did you answer? Close? Here is what one of my Professors said about my answer:
"Great story--great hypo. And you gave absolutely an A+ answer. You should apply for the criminal clinic next year." --

__________

I think my answer pretty much blew them away - heck, it even blew me away. It was surreal, like I was possessed. They were content, to say the least - the Interviewers were speechless. All that they could say was, "Okay! Do you have any questions for us?"

I proceeded to ask what clerks would be able to do in the office. "I know the website states that clerks research, interview witnesses, subpoena evidence and do other such assignments," I said. "But what do law clerks really do?"

The hands on nature of their answer, and the passion for allowing clerks to experience everything from arraignment to trial very much impressed me. The Public Defender's office went from the very bottom of my list - between clerking for an Eskimo in a small village outside Juneau, Alaska and just taking the summer off - to the very top.

I arrived at school with enough time to make it to my Civil Procedure. Again, the class zoomed by, and finally I went home. I had not eaten all day and my stomach was going crazy. I ate, and checked my email.

One of my past employers sent me a message asking me to call him. I use this past employer as a reference and letter of recommendation writer. I called him, and we chatted for a bit, catching up on each other's successes and news of the day.

He then made my day even better. He had been called by the Manhattan District Attorney's office. When I interviewed with the New York District Attorney (aka Manhattan District Attorney), I walked out, head hanging down and very much beaten to a pulp. It was pretty much the worst interview ever. I had very little in common with the ADA with whom I interviewed. I did not really understand the interview tactic until I discussed the substance of the interview with a friend. He pointed out that interviews of this caliber are not poised at finding out who you are - resumes and cover letters do that for you - interviews for positions like this are aimed at seeing how you hold up under pressure. Being the high pressure person I am, I guess I did relatively well. I am still not holding my breath. It is definitely a long-shot.

And that was my day. Pretty good, eh? I'd say so. I was pretty wowed by it. More days like this are just what I need. I go back to NYU in Manhattan tomorrow to drop by tables and schmooze potential employers. What's the worst that could happen?

I could be wowed.