73 The Alabama Lawyer 284 (2012). Lawyers, Ethics and Trial Publicity.

• Author: By J. Anthony McLain

Alabama Bar Journal

2012.

73 The Alabama Lawyer 284 (2012).

Lawyers, Ethics and Trial Publicity

Lawyers, Ethics and Trial PublicityBy J. Anthony McLainThe first paragraph of the preamble of the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct states that ". . .a lawyer is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice." Lawyers occupy a unique position in our system of justice. It is well recognized that lawyers' responsibilities extend not only to clients but to the public, the legal system and the legal profession.

In Alabama, regulation of lawyers is within the sole province of the Supreme Court of Alabama. Recognizing this plenary authority, the court adopted the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. These rules govern the actions of lawyers licensed to practice law in the State of Alabama.

The Rules of Professional Conduct are de minimis standards for a lawyer's conduct. The Rules of Professional Conduct are subject to interpretation and are augmented by relevant case law and scholarly treatises addressing lawyer conduct. How lawyers should conduct themselves during a trial was recently distilled in an opinion authored by United States District Judge Myron Thompson of the Middle District of Alabama.

Judge Thompson drew the responsibility of presiding over the public-corruption trials wherein seven individuals were charged with conspiring to enact a bill which would have authorized a constitutional amendment allowing the public to decide whether to legalize electronic bingo in Alabama. Prior to any trial, two of the defendants pleaded guilty.

The first trial resulted in the jury finding two defendants not guilty on all counts. As to the remaining seven defendants, the jury found them not guilty on certain counts but was unable to reach a verdict on the remaining counts. Therefore, the matters were scheduled for a second trial.

To minimize external influence of the jurors, Judge Thompson required the jurors, as well as the parties and their counsel, to enter the federal courthouse in an area physically separated from the media. Still, the legal proceedings were so highly publicized that Twitter feeds were established documenting the ongoing trial proceedings. Additionally, lawyers for both sides engaged in...