Ethics

A few months ago, the ABA Journal had a cover issue about Abraham Lincoln that included a number of anecdotes about Lincoln as a lawyer.  I submitted the following letter, which was not published:

    To judge by the highly acclaimed biography, Lincoln, by Harvard Professor David Herbert Donald, Abraham Lincoln would not be sympathetic with today?s effort to replace zealous representation with ?professionalism.?

    Lincoln was deferential to the court ? unless, that is, Rambo tactics were in the interest of his client.  In a murder case, for example, Lincoln tried to show that his client?s victim had previously said to other people that he would beat up the defendant.  However, the judge excluded the evidence on the ground that there was nothing to show that the defendant had ever known about the threats before he stabbed the victim to death.

    Lincoln?s zealous, or overzealous, response to the court?s ruling would have offended today?s proponents of civility.  He ?angrily? protested the exclusion of the evidence, telling the judge that he ?had never heard of such law,? and he inaccurately denounced the court?s ruling as ?absurd? and ?without precedent in the broad world.?  According to his partner, William Herndon, Lincoln spoke ?fiercely? and ?contemptuously? to the judge.  Cowed by Lincoln?s ?withering attack,? the judge backed down and admitted the evidence. 

    As a result of Lincoln?s successful Rambo tactics in response to that critical ruling, and another important adverse ruling by the judge, the jury acquitted the defendant, and a killer walked free.  (Donald at 150)