When Fant, Lamm's attorney, refused to violate his ethical duty in order to correct his client's wrongful conviction, Whatley barks at him, "Screw the system! A man's life is at stake!" At the end of the episode, when Whatley admits that there is something admirable about Fant's dedication to his ethical code, he says, "If I were ever in trouble, I'd want a lawyer like that," to which Dr. Talmadge asks dryly, "What, one who'll keep quiet while an innocent man goes to prison?"
I'm sure the ironic retort was supposed to be amusing to some shallow common denominator of viewers, in the context of the episode. What was supposed to be a rare and admirable quality in a lawyer-- total commitment to ethical obligations--resulted in the lawyer screwing over his innocent client so his other, guilty client could go free! Ha ha! The only thing worse than a bad lawyer is a "good" one!
But if you happen to be a fan of "The West Wing", the irony takes on an added dimension. Then you might recall seeing Richard Schiff (the actor portraying Talmadge) have the following exchange with a colleague in the White House:
TOBY (Schiff): Hang on a second Sam, you give into terrorist demands and that's the ballgame!
SAM: I understand the principle but there are real lives at stake!
TOBY: Ah, it's real easy to stick to principles when nothing's at stake, Sam!
If you locked those two characters in a glass cage together, you might see Richard Schiff punching himself out.
It does seem that Washington, D.C. has never heard of conflict counsel, since Fant, the ethics guru, must have taken Lamm's case despite having a conflicting obligation to Grossman (the actual killer). I could ignore that plot oversight for the purpose of setting up the ethical dilemma. But if Hudgins set up the dilemma just so he could mock lawyers who *don't* abandon their ethics, then I have to say, as a law student and as someone raised to care about ethics, that Hudgins was being a blithering idiot.
Maybe something will come up in a later episode that will explain why Talmadge thinks ethical lawyers should go to hell, and that even though he's the 'mentor' character, his views *aren't* those of the writer. Until then, Hudgins has just said that lawyers need to know when ethics matter and when they don't. And the only favor he's doing us there is by writing TV shows instead of practicing law.
I'm sure the ironic retort was supposed to be amusing to some shallow common denominator of viewers, in the context of the episode. What was supposed to be a rare and admirable quality in a lawyer-- total commitment to ethical obligations--resulted in the lawyer screwing over his innocent client so his other, guilty client could go free! Ha ha! The only thing worse than a bad lawyer is a "good" one!
But if you happen to be a fan of "The West Wing", the irony takes on an added dimension. Then you might recall seeing Richard Schiff (the actor portraying Talmadge) have the following exchange with a colleague in the White House:
TOBY (Schiff): Hang on a second Sam, you give into terrorist demands and that's the ballgame!
SAM: I understand the principle but there are real lives at stake!
TOBY: Ah, it's real easy to stick to principles when nothing's at stake, Sam!
If you locked those two characters in a glass cage together, you might see Richard Schiff punching himself out.
It does seem that Washington, D.C. has never heard of conflict counsel, since Fant, the ethics guru, must have taken Lamm's case despite having a conflicting obligation to Grossman (the actual killer). I could ignore that plot oversight for the purpose of setting up the ethical dilemma. But if Hudgins set up the dilemma just so he could mock lawyers who *don't* abandon their ethics, then I have to say, as a law student and as someone raised to care about ethics, that Hudgins was being a blithering idiot.
Maybe something will come up in a later episode that will explain why Talmadge thinks ethical lawyers should go to hell, and that even though he's the 'mentor' character, his views *aren't* those of the writer. Until then, Hudgins has just said that lawyers need to know when ethics matter and when they don't. And the only favor he's doing us there is by writing TV shows instead of practicing law.
