In the mid-'60s, a fellow named Carl Coppolino may or may not have murdered his lover's husband and his own wife. He engaged the then-young but already famous F. Lee Bailey as his attorney and therein, I suppose, lies a tale. The very great John D. MacDonald decided to write a book about the two trials, one of which was in his backyard, Sarasota Florida. The book is called "No Deadly Drug." It is not a favorite among MacDonald fans. It would be too strong to say that it's boring; it would be too generous to say that it's fascinating. It is microscopically detailed; the parts that are a fan letter to Mr. Bailey, which is to say most of it, are quite good. Thus if you're a fan of John D. MacDonald but hate F. Lee Bailey, this will be your eternal reading assignment in Hell. However, it has its moments, and to save my attorney friend Terry any temptation ever to read it, I'll present them here (since I've run out of bookmarks):
pp. 168-9 (The Florida prosecutor also isn't a fan of F. Lee Bailey. One of the great put-downs ever.)
"I sincerely regret that Lee Bailey has felt it necessary to make a personal attack upon me in the press. My own feelings toward him tend more toward pity than resentment. I accordingly told the reporter Mr. Bailey had delivered his statements to that I did not choose to conduct a running argument with him in the press. I advised the reporter that not only would I not comment upon his statements but in addition do not care to hear them.
"However, having had my own share of disappointments in the practice of law, I feel that some comment is needed and I certainly hope Mr. Bailey will accept it for the reasons it is given.
"I have great concern for any young attorney who, as Mr. Bailey has done, advises the court that he doesn't have to read law because he makes the law. I readily appreciate the desperation he presently feels, and I recognize that his inexperience has not enabled him to cope with the frustration he obviously feels he has encountered here.
Quite frankly I was very impressed at the beginning of the preliminary hearing Monday with the potential Mr. Bailey demonstrated. I felt his comportment, demeanor and fine delivery were the equal of those demonstrated by Bill Strode and many of the other better Sarasota trial lawyers when they also were relying upon a background limited to six years of legal experience.
"I, therefore, was very disappointed to find that, unlike so many of Sarasota's better trial lawyers, Mr. Bailey has not learned to "roll with the punch".
"While in his inexperienced exasperation he may have thought a personal attack on me to be based on sound trial tactics, I want to assure him that I do not subscribe to such practices. I really believe Mr. Bailey is motivated by what he believes to be the best interests of his client rather than in accumulating personal publicity.
"I, therefore, anticipate that after he has been thoroughly indoctrinated into the intricacies of trial practice by such an experienced prosecutor as Vincent Keuper in New Jersey, he will be a much wiser young man when he returns here for trial on Nov. 7.
"I am confident he will be taught in New jersey to argue his case in the courtroom rather than in the press."
pp. 251-2 (The Florida prosecutor Schaub from the above note meets the New Jersey judge.)
"'Mr. Schaub,' said the judge, 'I will advise you that you are under the jurisdiction of this court when subpoenaed. I will remind you that your official position places you in the role of amicus curiae (friend of the court). I will inform you that we are not operating a travel agency here. Nor are we concerned about the travel expenses of persons not subpoenaed by the State of New Jersey. I wish you luck in your travel arrangements and the reimbursement of the expense thereof. But I will tell you that the subpoena is binding upon you. We expect you here when needed, Mr. Schaub.'
"'Yes, Your Honor,' said Frank Schaub and backed away and sat down. The judge asked the bailiff to bring in the next venireman.
"During that short wait, a reporter saw Lee Bailey write something on a corner of a sheet of a yellow legal pad, tear it off and reach back and put the note on Keuper's table. He saw Mr. Keuper read it and put it into a pocket. At his first opportunity the reporter accosted Mr. Keuper in the corridor and said, 'Can you tell me what was on that note Lee Bailey handed back to you?'
"Mr. Kuiper was wary. He glanced in both directions and said, 'Not for a newspaper story, you understand.'
"'Of course.'
"F. Lee Bailey had written, 'I will pay your expenses to Florida and give you half my fee if you will let Frank Schaub try your case.'
"Keuper grinned and said, 'I asked him and he promised me he'd sign his name to it after the trial is over.'"
pp. 345-6 (Fan letterest)
"On the evening of October 19, 1966, a Wednesday evening, the day before the bail hearing in the Monmouth County Court House, F. Lee Bailey explained one of the reasons for his success...
"'By the time I am called onto a case, I'm way behind. The prosecution has had months to put their case together, conduct investigations, take affidavits from witnesses.
"'They keep working and I start working. But they work the kind of day they're used to. Say they work a forty-hour week at their trade. How much of that is actual work? Three hours a day? Four? So I am working a twenty-hour day and I am driving my people to their maximum effort.
"'By the time we get up to the point of a hearing, I am still behind, but by not as much. I have closed some of the gap. Then somewhere between the hearing and the trial, I pass them, and I then know more about the facts of the case and the law than they do. And I keep working at the same pressure, widening the lead.
"'Then we come into court, and instead of their handing me a lot of ugly surprises, I have a few for them. They find out they should have asked a few more questions of their witnesses. They find there are some precedents under the law they didn't happen to locate. This business isn't a lot of spellbinding. The biggest part of it is hard work. And the only thing that counts is the evidence, and the defense lawyer had better know it cold before he walks in, or he isn't going to do a job for his client.'"
And THOSE were the interesting parts!
No comments:
Post a Comment