Assignments
and Student Writing:
Student
Responses to "Letters to Known Readers" Assignment
Dear Shelby,
On Wednesday, my professor for "Law, Literature, and Film," invited her friend Cathy Byrne, a public defender, to come and speak with us about her profession. Cathy introduced herself and continued to tell us why she became a public defender, what her job entails, and then answered questions. Currently, she is working on an appeals case. Basically, what that means is that she reads the entire trial transcript and determines whether enough reason exists to grant an appeal. While she enjoys her job overall, even technical parts like reading transcripts that are from a few volumes to stack of volumes thick, her favorite part of the job occurs in the courtroom.
Cathy answered some questions about common perceptions of public defenders. They are not paid very much, but they enjoy their work more than anyone she and my professor know who works in a law firm. She also addressed the issue of whether public defenders are good at their jobs, or if they are people who barely pass the bar exam and cannot get any other job. Apparently, in Massachusetts, public defenders are highly qualified and very respected in their field. Of course, this is not true in all states.
As I sat listening to her speak, I thought about how I would really want her to be my attorney if I ever needed one. I also realized that the importance of checking up on a lawyer's background. She told us about how some people have wonderful public defenders assigned to them, and then hire a really poor lawyer who cannot best defend the client. So, if you are ever arrested, remember two things. Make sure to have an attorney present, and do not reject a public defender simply because they are free!
Hope all is well,
Susan
And
here is Elizabeth Wells' letter:
April 26, 2000
Dear Julie,
We just had a really cool speaker come to our Writing class and I though
you would be interested because she is a defense attorney in the Massachusetts
public defenders office. I know that you are interested in law and she
had a lot of interesting things to say. Her name is Cathy Byrne and
she currently works on appeal cases, but has previously been a regular
trial defense lawyer. She has been there for 13 years and before that
went to Boston College law school. While she attended school she had
two kids as well, which is pretty extraordinary.
When she first came in she began by telling us a little bit about some
of her cases, one in particular where the defendant was accused of raping
a woman. The background for the case is that the defendant had had a
relationship with this woman and then when she tried to break it off
he lost it and went to her home where he walked around the apartment
with a knife for four hours. He threatened to do harm to himself and
never directly threatened her. Some how in the course of these four
hours they ended up having sex and now he is being charged with rape.
The jury found him guilty of rape and four other charges that went along
with this four-hour encounter. Now Mrs. Byrne is working to get him
another trial because apparently one of the jurors, before the defense
had given their case, posted in a chat room that she wished they could
just convict him and get it over with. This violates the oath that every
juror gives to be impartial and to not discuss the case. Mrs. Byrne
thought that this was going to be a very interesting case because it
involved the Internet and it shows how the courts have to change and
adapt to the new technological advances that our society makes. This
is and interesting idea and I thought that it was interesting that they
were focusing on this to get him another trial instead of trying another
defense to prove that he really didn’t do it.
She also described some of her other cases, one involving a Cambodian
defendant who had shot his girlfriend's children. She found this case
to be very hard because of the linguistic and cultural barriers that
were already present between herself and the defendant. I found her
discussion of this case particularly interesting because she discussed
problems in working with the defendant, rather than problems dealing
with the fact that he did indeed shoot these innocent children and now
she was going to do everything she could to get him off. She did express
her difficulty in dealing with the mother of the children because of
the horrific act that was done, but that didn’t affect the way
that she was going to do her job. I found this really interesting because
I don’t think I could do that. I understand the whole innocent
until proven guilty but Mrs. Byrne even acknowledged that she knew this
guy had shot these children. So knowing this how do you work to get
him acquitted and if you do how do you continue believing in the system.
I don’t know if you’ve seen the movie …And Justice For
All but the same idea is expressed there. The defense attorney goes
crazy because he is defending a guilty person who most likely will be
released and commit the crime again. I don’t know if I could handle
knowing that I got a guilty person acquitted and that they went out
and committed another crime.
I really enjoyed hearing Mrs. Byrne speak about her cases and some of
the issues that are present in the legal system. I though that her job
sounds very interesting and she must be very strong in order to do it
well. I don’t think that I could do it as well because I would
get to rapped up in the idea of guilty versus not guilty as opposed
to do whatever to show reasonable doubt, no matter whether the defendant
is guilty or not. I wish she had talked a little more about this issue,
how she feels after winning cases where she knows the defendant was
guilty. She had a lot of interesting things to say and I am very reassured
because she had now idea that she wanted to be a lawyer until a couple
of years after she graduated from college so that makes me feel better
about not having a clue. Anyway I enjoyed this speaker and I think you
would have too. Talk to you later.
Elizabeth