Defense Attorneys are instructed by their codes of professional responsibility and told by professors, legal scholars, and mentors that they as lawyers, as guardians of the law, play a vital role in the preservation of society, that they have an obligation to adhere to the highest standards of ethical and moral conduct, and that in their words and deeds they must promote respect for the law and their profession. They must deal candidly with others, and they should use their education, skills, and training to do public good. Finally, “they are instructed to be zealous ethical advocates on behalf of their clients” (Casey, 2002).
At times, there is some moral ethical conflict because these roles do not always work in harmony. The zealous ethical advocate often speaks and acts in ways that to many are morally questionable, less than candid, and do not promote respect for the law in the eyes of the public. I believe the legal profession has done a poor job of giving guidance to its members on how to resolve the tension among these sometimes-ethical roles. And they have done a miserable job in explaining their role to the public. They have avoided dealing with difficult ethical issues by using generic words in their disciplinary rules and codes of responsibility and not dealing with the underlying problems.
They act as if litigation is simply a “no holds barred” (Tauber, 1994) game and all you need to do is follow the rules to be morally and ethically pure. This was most dramatically and forcefully stated by Lord Brougham in the 19th century when defending Britain's Queen Caroline, who faced an attempt by her husband, King George IV, to obtain a divorce by charging her with adultery, thus ruining her name and putting at risk her fortune and.......
