MJJForum Exclusive! Interview with Attorney Robert Sanger
Mood:
a-ok
Topic: Main News
Friday, 15 July 2005
The acquittal of entertainer Michael Jackson on charges of child molestation immediately terminated the court imposed protective order that bound all parties involved in the case to unmitigated silence. The public finally got their long-awaited chance to hear from attorneys from both sides, who seemed more than anxious to address the world regarding their side of the case and also share their feelings about the jury, the media, and the former defendant. One person who remained conspicuously absent through it all was local Santa Barbara attorney and defense co-counsel Robert Sanger.
Determined to figure out why this was, this news writer requested an email interview with Mr. Sanger and hit the jackpot! The veteran lawyer was flattered by the request, but was initially hesitant to commit. However, because of the loyalty and support of Mr. Jackson's fans and MJJForum to his client and the defense team, he considered answering some questions, as long as they did not get into any specifics of the case.
This is coming to you exclusively from MJJForum.
Making it clear that he did not want to be disrespectful towards the decision of others to speak with the media, write books, or anything else of that nature, Mr. Sanger explained why it was that he had not spoken more than a few words about the case to network or print media despite numerous requests to do so.
"It is my position that lawyers generally should not promote themselves at the expense of their clients," Mr. Sanger offered. "Generally, lawyers appearing on talk shows, writing books and the like after an acquittal really prolong the client's misery and simply recast the awful allegations into the limelight."
Mr. Sanger added that he prefers to practice criminal defense not only vigorously but also discreetly.
"I have represented Mr. Jackson off and on for the last 12 years and continue to do so at the present," the attorney stated. "I have not tried to cash in on that fact so far and do not want to start now. Michael, like my other clients, should be able to go on with his life and his career and, hopefully, put lawyers and lawsuits behind him."
MJJF: What inspired you to become a criminal defense attorney?
SANGER: I saw a lot of injustice growing up as many of us did in the 1950's. When college decision-time came around in high school, I decided I wanted to be a criminal defense lawyer. It just seemed like the right thing to do.
At U.C.L.A. Law School I emphasized criminal law and legal philosophy during my studies. Once I passed the bar and opened my own practice in Santa Barbara, 31 years ago, I focused on criminal defense and civil rights cases. And, here we are!
MJJF: Have you ever considered practicing law in a big city such as Los Angeles?
SANGER: I started working in Los Angeles and was happy to have a chance to move to Santa Barbara. We have a small ranch in this area. My children have grown up here and I am quite content living and having my office where we are.
Nevertheless, I routinely handle cases in Los Angeles, both in the state courts and in the federal district court. I also have cases in other state and federal courts around [California] and, occasionally in other states and federal districts.
MJJF: If you hadn't gone into law, what would you have been doing?
SANGER: Who knows? I may have become a philosophy professor.
MJJF: Do you do any teaching of law?
SANGER: I was briefly an adjunct professor of law at the Santa Barbara College of Law, teach at criminal defense lawyer seminars and have guest lectured at colleges. I actually enjoy writing and teaching but it looks like trying cases is my calling for the immediate future.
MJJF: Would you recommend the profession to young people?
SANGER: There are too many lawyers but there are not too many good lawyers. I highly recommend the practice of law, particularly criminal defense and civil rights, for anyone who has a deep commitment to help others. If you have this commitment, it will always be a rewarding profession. I still enjoy coming into the office in the morning and getting ready for the next adventure. There are few professions, and few practice areas in this profession, where people can still say that after 31 years.
MJJF: How difficult is it to try cases in a relatively small community where you find yourself in courtrooms with the same people all the time?
SANGER: This is an insightful question - I do enjoy practicing in the local courts as well. However, I never want to feel that I am part of the "good-ole-boy’s" network. If you are going to be an effective criminal defense lawyer, you have to be prepared to stand and fight for the dignity of your client without regard to real or imagined friendships.
I do not socialize with the district attorneys or judges. We find among our best friends colleagues in the greater civil rights and criminal defense community. So, when I go to court, we see familiar faces but we are there to do the serious business of defending our clients.
MJJF: How do you maintain a professional attitude when you feel your client may not be getting a fair trial?
SANGER: Committed criminal defense lawyers have to be prepared on a daily basis to fight unfairness. This is not a part of the profession for a person who is faint of heart. You have to struggle everyday for the basic dignity of your clients. Simple things like insisting that a client in custody be allowed to sit at the counsel table with you or have handcuffs removed often involves protracted litigation.
The key is to never let the district attorney, the judge or the bailiffs get away with treating your client without respect. Sometimes pre-trial writs to the appellate courts are necessary - attempting to get the appellate court to tell the trial judge, "You can’t do that." However, if you take a vigorous approach during law and motion and pre-trial proceedings, you are much more likely to have a fairer trial.
Of course, no trial is perfect and not all of them are even close to fair. You have to do your best in the worst of them to enlist the jury on the side of fairness and the rule of law. You often have to try to pit the jury against the heavy-handed prosecution and the complicit judge, if that is the case.
Sometimes, despite all best efforts, the jury convicts. For that reason, throughout all law and motion, pre-trial proceedings and the trial itself, you have to have an eye on making a complete record for appeal. This means filing comprehensive written points and authorities and making proffers on the record of what the evidence would show if the judge would let you introduce it. Appeals are successful in a small number of criminal cases but are much more likely to succeed if good issues are carefully preserved on the written record.
MJJF: One would imagine that it would be difficult to let go of a trial at the end of the day to maintain a normal family life at home. How are you able to separate work from home? Or is there no distinction?
SANGER: I am probably a lot better at this now than when I started. However, it is important to be prepared and organized and then to be able to say, "I am off duty" - even if it is 11:00 at night. You will still occasionally wake up with what seems at the moment to be a brilliant thought. But, while actually in trial, you have to get some solid sleep and some exercise or you are not going to be sharp in court in the morning.
MJJF: How has it been working with Mr. Jackson as a client? Do you believe he has been mischaracterized as a person?
SANGER: Michael Jackson is a kind, gentle and intelligent man. In addition to being a musical genius, he is extremely well read and conversant on topics and to depths that most people would not imagine. Yes, he has been grossly mischaracterized as a person.
MJJF: How did/do you feel about the mainstream media and the manner by which they covered Mr. Jackson's case? Did you pay attention to any of them (print, broadcast, otherwise)?
SANGER: In general, the mainstream media has become much more prone to reporting things that otherwise would only have been reported in the National Enquirer. I am concerned about the lessening of professionalism in the so-called "mainstream" media.
MJJF: What do you say to those who accuse defense attorneys of being dishonest characters who represent the guilty and get their clients acquitted of crimes they "actually" committed? Are they in any way correct in their assessment?
SANGER: Our job is to stand up for the dignity of our clients and demand that they be accorded respect by the system.
The system has plenty of actors who believe the client is guilty and want to see him or her convicted and sentenced. When you walk into court, there is the prosecutor, trying to convict your client. Next to the prosecutor is the investigating officer who has a similar desire. On the bench is a judge who was a prosecutor - that is almost always how they get there. Then you have the bailiff who hurt his knee or would be out there arresting people he thinks are just like your client. Finally, you have the court reporter who goes to lunch with all the others. So, you are there, the only person who will demand that the client be treated with respect.
As a practical matter, most cases are resolved before trial. Sometimes the client is really innocent. There are dismissals of cases imprudently filed and there are motions granted. There are also trials where the innocent client is acquitted. The defense lawyer’s role is not disputed.
But, yes, there are also cases where the client is in fact guilty of the conduct for which he is arrested and charged. Sometimes there are plea bargains but, yes, sometimes there are motions granted or acquittals after a jury trial. And the role of the defense lawyer is still a noble one.
It is not up to one defense lawyer to judge the client or the case. Our system of justice is such that all those people who want to convict the client - the people in the courtroom mentioned above and all the others involved in the investigation or prosecution - still have to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, those in the system count on having a vigorous defense to provide the check on their own power, which, in turn, should prevent wrongful convictions. Our system only works, to the extent it does, if there is someone who will stand up for the dignity of the accused and demand respect.
MJJF: Since verdict day, some sources, predictably, have said that the verdict in Mr. Jackson's favor was due only to his ability to "buy" the best defense. This idea has been often raised in cases with defendants having similar resources. Could you explain to us the facts and fallacies of such accusations?
SANGER: I cannot discuss this as it pertains to this case. However, in general, the prosecution has far more resources and far more power than even the best-funded defense. Law enforcement has the power of the badge, ready access to confidential data and a network of willing fellow officers in every city, county, state and country who will gladly assist.
MJJF: The public at large basically has the idea that those who serve as district attorneys are to serve the public by seeking the truth. In Mr. Jackson's case, it appeared that the DA sought only to win, regardless of facts not fitting the given scenarios. In your experience, is this an isolated incident or is this more common than we realize, just not usually visible?
SANGER: Again, I do not wish to comment on this case. There is substantial law that establishes that a prosecutor has a duty to seek the truth and do justice, not simply to win. It is part of the constant battle of criminal defense to counter prosecutors who put winning first. Again, I do a lot of work in capital defense. It is amazing how many times prosecutors have been proven not only wrong but have been proven to have ignored or hidden evidence that exonerates the person they are prosecuting and, often, points to the real criminal. It is just an unfortunate facet of human nature that the desire to win the contest overrides objective thought.
MJJF: The idea of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of Tom Sneddon has been raised in our forums. Do you feel anything done by the DA's office in Mr. Jackson's case could be classified in that light? Is it possible that this is a pattern in this particular DA office? Do you, as a defense attorney, feel that prosecutorial immunity has been abused? If so, what could be done to remedy this?
SANGER: I do not think it would be appropriate to comment on this case.
MJJF: Many of us at MJJForum, including myself, considered your motions to be the high point of the numerous documents released by the court on their website. They were clear, concise, and logical! Was the composition of these motions all your handiwork or is credit shared with others?
SANGER: Thank you for the kind words. Steve Dunkle, an associate lawyer at Sanger & Swysen, worked tirelessly on this case. He is a great researcher, a gifted writer and has a wonderful sense of humor. He and I collaborated on all of the writing our firm did in this case. My partner, Catherine Swysen, and associate Aaron Heisler also contributed despite the press of their own case loads.
Also, early on in the case (and in other matters over the years for Mr. Jackson), we had the privilege to work with Steve Cochran of Katten Muchin in Los Angeles. He is a stellar lawyer who I have also worked with in other substantial cases not related to Mr. Jackson. It was a shame he could not continue on through the Jackson trial but he always kept in touch and continued to offer encouragement to our cause.
MJJF: Thank you, Mr. Sanger, for being so generous and candid with your responses. We appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to speak exclusively with us!
SANGER: I appreciate your concern for Mr. Jackson and I trust that you will use this information in his best interests.
Spoken like a true protector.
There you have it straight from Mr. Robert Sanger. His dedication to his profession, civil rights, and his clients is admirable and can only be lauded. Mr. Michael Jackson is indeed fortunate to have had such a champion in his corner for the last 12 years.
We at MJJForum would like to again extend our sincerest gratitude to Mr. Sanger for all that he has done and continues to do on behalf of Mr. Jackson.
Interview conducted by Obiechena for MJJForum (speakout@elitemail.org). Additional contributions by MJJBunny, Sapphire, and Wolf.
sad
A recent decision by the California Supreme Court to allow the Michael Jackson case to stand as a recedent on trial secrecy has been harshly criticised by media lawyers.
surprised
blue
LONDON (Reuters) - Michael Jackson went to hospital suffering from dehydration and weight loss after jurors acquitted the singer of child molestation last month, his lawyer said on Tuesday. 
hug me
In Berlin Thursday, Joseph Jackson told reporters that Michael is afraid to be seen in public in the United States, where death threats have been received. He said his son wore a bullet-proof vest when he emerged from court in California last month. 
mischievious
Majority of money goes to sheriff's deputies posted at courthouse
happy
celebratory
irritated
Civil case accuses the pop star of sexual assault
Created: Wednesday, 20 July 2005
lucky
don't ask
special
Created: Saturday, 09 July 2005
By Bruce Britt
cool
'Very, very private' visit as guest of king's son
Without God, my children, my family and you, my fans, I could not have made it through. Your love, support and loyalty made it all possible.