Crime, "Chemistry" and Conformity
Blooomberg.com has an article up about the Abramoff case that concludes with these words:
.... "Prosecutors and defense attorneys often start out talking in hypothetical terms. For instance, a prosecutor might say he'd be willing to shorten jail time only if the person involved could implicate a high-level government official.
"The kinds of talks occurring between Abramoff's lawyers and the U.S. attorney's offices at this point ``could be everything from just total silent stare-down hostility to a pretty active conversation, and maybe an attempt to resolve this even with some kind of plea,'' said John Q. Barrett, a former prosecutor in the Iran-Contra case who teaches law at St. John's University in New York.
`Chemistry'
``It turns on chemistry, or lack thereof, that's developed in the investigation between the prosecutors and lawyers,'' Barrett said.
"Abramoff may be unwilling to cooperate. Or prosecutors may find that he has nothing solid enough to offer to make a reduction in jail time worthwhile, lawyers said.
"By now, Abramoff may be a big enough catch himself, Wallance said.
``He's a primary target,'' he said. ``The prosecutor makes a name for himself just by convicting Abramoff.''
I've been in law long enough to know that Barrett is correct, and "chemistry" will have a huge impact on the outcome of the case, and upon the nature and quality of the justice that gets done, or doesn't. So as a defendant, you'd want to make sure you have an attorney who can develop "good chemistry" with prosecutors. That you might therefore look for someone the same race, gender, possibly religion, and with the same educational background as the prosecutors would not be at all surprising. And so you'd probably hire a white male.