Sep 21, 2023·edited Sep 21, 2023Liked by Yassine Meskhout
Fantastic stuff. I would read a whole book like this. Always a pleasure to learn about the little details and rituals of these complex, historical, massively materially significant, and tbh mostly opaque (to me, an outsider, despite having many lawyer family/friends) processes and organizations.
One angle I enjoy thinking about is how similar patterns also exist in "private" organizations, but with some notable differences. Don't have specifics now but may add some later.
When I was an investigator for a private firm I was always surprised at how many DUI cases I got, mostly because there isn't much to investigate. You just check the stop location for uneven pavement and maybe FOIA the arresting officer, that's about it. Of course it later came out that the cops had been miscalibrating their Breathalyzers and a few dozen cases got dismissed, so you never know! Anyways, always enjoy these peeks behind the curtain--not many PDs talk openly about the mundane realities of criminal defense, so it's always nice to see that side acknowledged. Not every day can be springing a guy from death row, after all. And if you ever need a P.I. in LA, hit me up.
"Choosing to navigate the legal field without an attorney — also known as “rawdogging it” in the parlance — doesn’t usually work out very well for reasons I previously wrote about."
Amazing. Also interesting to compare lawyers to condoms.
In terms of incentives for doing a good job, that's a complicated answer. Zoom out first to consider why any government employee with ironclad job security would be incentivized to do their job at all, let alone do their job well. I'm of the mind that you'll get better performance from the private market but I can't deny that government employees still manage to do a decent enough job in most instances. For PDs specifically, I gather that the folks who are willing to endure the comparatively long hours and low pay working for an agency are doing it because they believe in the work. There's also an incentive to earn a good reputation among your peers.
It's not clear how criminal prosecution would work in an ancap world, or even if it would exist. The most cogent descriptions envision entities akin to private insurance companies providing security (police) and dispute resolution (courts) as a sort of package deal. Closest parallel then would be how disputes are resolved by insurance companies, either internally (two drivers with the same insurance) or externally (each driver has different insurance), and how customers get assigned an agent to investigate their claims.
These "war stories" posts are so up my alley. Years of consuming law related media, then following actual court cases, this "in the trenches" view is so great for adding texture and reality to how this type of law actually plays out.
The interesting thing I hadn't really digested before, but makes sense after reading it, is the "flowchart prosecutorial approach" you outlined. With predictable inputs and outputs based on whatever circustances there were for the cases. The thing that surprised me was the "lowest common denominator" justice approach of not allowing differing pleas for similar circumstances. This strikes me as somehow more just, but also less individualized to a specific defendant and therefore less just. I'd love to read more on this topic and it's implications.
I wouldn't consider it a lowest common denominator approach though, think of it as rubber-banded within the same general area as other cases with "similar circumstances". There's still room for the attorneys to hash out individual circumstances if there are any that are relevant.
I was once one of the panicked googlers after a night out in Bend. I had a good job at the time, so don't think I would've been able to get a pd. I went with the most affordable attorney I could find in the county, as I was in the "no priors, low teens, compliant with officer" plead into diversion camp. Although, I think I had an aggravator if "reckless driving" counts. Which my lawyer got dropped.
The lawyer cost was reasonable (I think?). And it was nice to have that safety blanket. However the diversion paperwork was pretty straight forward. Which made me curious to how screwed or not would I have been without a lawyer? I imagine the biggest thing is getting the reckless dropped.
We used "aggravator" to describe how the DUI was worse than your typical stop on the side of the highway after some lane-weaving. Most often this meant a collision, refusal to blow into the machine, or some serious antagonism.
I can't say how your jurisdiction operated, but DUIs are so common and ubiquitous that I would seriously doubt your outcome would have been that different. Dropping charges is a very common thing. That said, I'm glad your lawyer helped you navigate that web and without too much of a hit to your wallet.
Within the time period for the Rule Against Perpetuities, there was good money to be made doing private criminal defense. Drug and white collar cases paid very well. Murders rarely paid. Win drug cases and you got more drug cases. You know what that meant. My motto was nobody gets away Scott Free.
It's changed both in quantity and quality. Criminals with money find their lawyer by referral. People who find a lawyer on the internet are not prime clients.
In my town, at least, the introduction of Uber and Lyft did wonders to reduce the incidence of DWIs, because the taxi companies were expensive, unreliable, and gave wretched service.
I don't drink, but I also don't know how many times I argued with the taxi dispatcher, who was obviously ESL, over my address("You want South Fifth Street?" "No, I said North Fifth Street!" "Ok, I send South....") told I would have to wait an hour for a taxi in balmy January in North Dakota, then called 90 minutes later to find that my taxi had been canceled for no apparent reason and without bothering to call me.
An hour and a half later and colder, and faced with the prospect of walking five miles home in 20 below, I can see why people decided to take their chances behind the wheel.
I haven't explored the idea in depth but I heard of a proposal that aims to reduce drunk driving through zoning. The idea is that places that serve alcohol would only be allowed in areas and hours that have frequent public transit. It would be an obvious political non-starter in many places but at least it's better than letting everyone loose and hoping for the best.
Has the labor shortage and accompanying shortage of Ubers had any negative effect on this trend?
I only use them when I have an unfixable flat on my bike, but it's become a nightmare. I live in mid-size East SF Bay town, so supply shouldn't be ultra low. But when they do finally show up after like 20 minutes they bitch and moan about my $5000 bike damaging their car (not actually a crazy concern considering the alloy pedals and metal pins, but I don't clue them in), and then I have to make small talk when I'm bummed about my bike and having to end my ride. I simply can't get Uber XL (which I'd prefer considering the bike) except on like Saturday. Uber Eats is a bit more reliable, but not a ton.
Why would calling yourself a public defender over a private attorney help with your Tinder bio? Isn’t the stereotype that PDs are all broke while private lawyers are rolling in cash?
Fantastic stuff. I would read a whole book like this. Always a pleasure to learn about the little details and rituals of these complex, historical, massively materially significant, and tbh mostly opaque (to me, an outsider, despite having many lawyer family/friends) processes and organizations.
One angle I enjoy thinking about is how similar patterns also exist in "private" organizations, but with some notable differences. Don't have specifics now but may add some later.
When I was an investigator for a private firm I was always surprised at how many DUI cases I got, mostly because there isn't much to investigate. You just check the stop location for uneven pavement and maybe FOIA the arresting officer, that's about it. Of course it later came out that the cops had been miscalibrating their Breathalyzers and a few dozen cases got dismissed, so you never know! Anyways, always enjoy these peeks behind the curtain--not many PDs talk openly about the mundane realities of criminal defense, so it's always nice to see that side acknowledged. Not every day can be springing a guy from death row, after all. And if you ever need a P.I. in LA, hit me up.
"Choosing to navigate the legal field without an attorney — also known as “rawdogging it” in the parlance — doesn’t usually work out very well for reasons I previously wrote about."
Amazing. Also interesting to compare lawyers to condoms.
I said "Is it??" out loud to nobody and then saw the footnote lol
I had never checked a footnote so quickly and come back satisfied.
Interesting and fun as always
I'm ashamed I've never wondered about this, but how are public defenders incentivized to do their job well? Does your revenue depend on the sentences?
No, absolutely not. There was a minor scandal in Louisiana about 10 years ago where defendants were required to pay a $35 fee towards public defense but only if they were convicted. The PD funding in that state is dire enough that the Public Defender Board sued 23 New Orleans judges who did not collect the $35 fee but this was a rare and unusual dispute. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/louisianas-public-defender-fees-are-poor-fiscal-and-legal-policies
In terms of incentives for doing a good job, that's a complicated answer. Zoom out first to consider why any government employee with ironclad job security would be incentivized to do their job at all, let alone do their job well. I'm of the mind that you'll get better performance from the private market but I can't deny that government employees still manage to do a decent enough job in most instances. For PDs specifically, I gather that the folks who are willing to endure the comparatively long hours and low pay working for an agency are doing it because they believe in the work. There's also an incentive to earn a good reputation among your peers.
Right, makes sense - the usual non-financial rewards.
And I'm curious, do you have an idea what the equivalent of public defenders would be in an ancap utopia?
It's not clear how criminal prosecution would work in an ancap world, or even if it would exist. The most cogent descriptions envision entities akin to private insurance companies providing security (police) and dispute resolution (courts) as a sort of package deal. Closest parallel then would be how disputes are resolved by insurance companies, either internally (two drivers with the same insurance) or externally (each driver has different insurance), and how customers get assigned an agent to investigate their claims.
These "war stories" posts are so up my alley. Years of consuming law related media, then following actual court cases, this "in the trenches" view is so great for adding texture and reality to how this type of law actually plays out.
The interesting thing I hadn't really digested before, but makes sense after reading it, is the "flowchart prosecutorial approach" you outlined. With predictable inputs and outputs based on whatever circustances there were for the cases. The thing that surprised me was the "lowest common denominator" justice approach of not allowing differing pleas for similar circumstances. This strikes me as somehow more just, but also less individualized to a specific defendant and therefore less just. I'd love to read more on this topic and it's implications.
Thanks for a very enjoyable piece!
I wouldn't consider it a lowest common denominator approach though, think of it as rubber-banded within the same general area as other cases with "similar circumstances". There's still room for the attorneys to hash out individual circumstances if there are any that are relevant.
I was once one of the panicked googlers after a night out in Bend. I had a good job at the time, so don't think I would've been able to get a pd. I went with the most affordable attorney I could find in the county, as I was in the "no priors, low teens, compliant with officer" plead into diversion camp. Although, I think I had an aggravator if "reckless driving" counts. Which my lawyer got dropped.
The lawyer cost was reasonable (I think?). And it was nice to have that safety blanket. However the diversion paperwork was pretty straight forward. Which made me curious to how screwed or not would I have been without a lawyer? I imagine the biggest thing is getting the reckless dropped.
We used "aggravator" to describe how the DUI was worse than your typical stop on the side of the highway after some lane-weaving. Most often this meant a collision, refusal to blow into the machine, or some serious antagonism.
I can't say how your jurisdiction operated, but DUIs are so common and ubiquitous that I would seriously doubt your outcome would have been that different. Dropping charges is a very common thing. That said, I'm glad your lawyer helped you navigate that web and without too much of a hit to your wallet.
Within the time period for the Rule Against Perpetuities, there was good money to be made doing private criminal defense. Drug and white collar cases paid very well. Murders rarely paid. Win drug cases and you got more drug cases. You know what that meant. My motto was nobody gets away Scott Free.
Good times. But "rawdogging"? Eww.
Has the private market changed that much? I figure it mostly shifted towards firms that prioritized SEO.
And hey now, if that's your reaction to my vocabulary then it tells me I chose properly.
It's changed both in quantity and quality. Criminals with money find their lawyer by referral. People who find a lawyer on the internet are not prime clients.
In my town, at least, the introduction of Uber and Lyft did wonders to reduce the incidence of DWIs, because the taxi companies were expensive, unreliable, and gave wretched service.
I don't drink, but I also don't know how many times I argued with the taxi dispatcher, who was obviously ESL, over my address("You want South Fifth Street?" "No, I said North Fifth Street!" "Ok, I send South....") told I would have to wait an hour for a taxi in balmy January in North Dakota, then called 90 minutes later to find that my taxi had been canceled for no apparent reason and without bothering to call me.
An hour and a half later and colder, and faced with the prospect of walking five miles home in 20 below, I can see why people decided to take their chances behind the wheel.
Yes! People forget how much of a nightmare hailing a taxi used to be. I don't know how reliable the findings are but a Berkeley study found a 6% reduction in alcohol-related fatalities wherever Uber/Lyft were introduced: https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/study-ride-sharing-apps-led-to-6-drop-in-alcohol-related-traffic-fatalities/
I haven't explored the idea in depth but I heard of a proposal that aims to reduce drunk driving through zoning. The idea is that places that serve alcohol would only be allowed in areas and hours that have frequent public transit. It would be an obvious political non-starter in many places but at least it's better than letting everyone loose and hoping for the best.
Has the labor shortage and accompanying shortage of Ubers had any negative effect on this trend?
I only use them when I have an unfixable flat on my bike, but it's become a nightmare. I live in mid-size East SF Bay town, so supply shouldn't be ultra low. But when they do finally show up after like 20 minutes they bitch and moan about my $5000 bike damaging their car (not actually a crazy concern considering the alloy pedals and metal pins, but I don't clue them in), and then I have to make small talk when I'm bummed about my bike and having to end my ride. I simply can't get Uber XL (which I'd prefer considering the bike) except on like Saturday. Uber Eats is a bit more reliable, but not a ton.
Great piece! I love your entertaining and informative writing style.
Why would calling yourself a public defender over a private attorney help with your Tinder bio? Isn’t the stereotype that PDs are all broke while private lawyers are rolling in cash?
depends which pond you're fishing in