(Photo by Curtis Means-Pool/Getty Images)
As lawyers, we should know (and usually do know) more than nonlawyers. That is why, if you are like me, you have spent time over the past few days answering questions about the Trump trial, decisions made, strategies considered, and a myriad of other questions ranging from the thoughtful to the inane and downhill from there. I suggest that all reporters who ever get near a courthouse and who seem to be more interested in a “gotcha” question than understanding how criminal trials truly work get some basic training in criminal procedure to avoid silly questions (often of the “asked and answered” variety). Perhaps some understanding of the Fifth Amendment discussing the right against self-incrimination may be a place to start, along with even a smidgen of understanding about attorney-client privilege.
Granted, there were defense decisions made that had, at least some lawyers among us, asking “WTF?” about these strategies. And, given how the former now-felonious president has had a reputation for throwing both friend and foe under the bus, I would not be at all surprised to see the “IAC” argument (ineffective assistance of counsel, sorry Todd Blanche) as one of the grounds front and center in the appellant’s opening brief. While the trial is over, the case is not.
With all the controversy surrounding the Israel-Hamas war, be it there or here on various college campuses or elsewhere, pro-Israel, pro-Palestine, pro- or anti- Zionism, and wherever else the issues are front and center in this country, I am “hands off.” But I can’t resist noticing an issue that has surfaced in northern California — Alameda County to be precise (home of UC Berkeley, the former Oakland Raiders, et al.) Dozens of death row cases are being reviewed in Alameda County. Why? Notes from jury selection indicate that the prosecution intentionally excused prospective jurors because they thought they were Jewish.
The New York Times story listed some examples in one case of how the prosecution regarded potential Jewish jurors: “Weighing who should be struck from the jury pool and who should be kept, a prosecutor made notes about a prospective juror: ‘I liked him better than any other Jew but no way.’ Other notes about prospective jurors bore evidence of similar prejudice: ‘Banker. Jew?’ read one. ‘Jew? Yes,’ read another.”
The result? The federal judge overseeing this particular appeal has ordered a review of all death penalty cases in Alameda County for those still on death row.
For those of us who have nothing good to say about the country south of our border, it’s time to recognize that the citizens of Mexico have smashed through not one but two glass ceilings before we have even come close to smashing one. Claudia Sheinbaum is not only the first woman president of Mexico, but also the first Jew, a “two-fer.” The closest that this country has come to having a Jewish president was when Joe Leiberman, an observant Jew, was the vice presidential nominee in 2000 in Al Gore’s presidential campaign. We know how that turned out. The closest that this country has come to having a woman president was in 2016 when Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump duked it out. We all know what happened. Perhaps the election in Mexico has lessons for us, if we care to study them.
And, lastly, here’s some advice that is based on recent and painful experience. If you are still young enough to buy long-term care insurance, do so. As an old lady lawyer, I can tell you from personal experience that you never know when you might need it. When you do need it, it’s usually too late. Then the premiums are either prohibitively expensive or you are uninsurable for any one of a number of reasons. Some employers offer it as a benefit, but remember that when you leave, it also leaves. While standalone policies are not cheap by any means, the younger you buy it, the better and the lower the premium.
Do not make the mistake of thinking that long-term care insurance and disability insurance are the same. They aren’t. You may think that you will be one of the lucky ones who will never need long-term care insurance. That’s what I thought, but I did buy it decades ago, encouraged by my insurance broker friend.
Go without, then, but given the number of people who end up needing it, you may regret it. Seventy percent will need some long-term care at some point. (I am not making this number up.) And no, Medicare does not pay for long-term care. Think about it. You can thank me later.
Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.
#Trials #Tribulations #Law
