I love working with attorneys. To be more specific, I love working with attorneys who understand the many ways that their local public law librarian can provide them and their clients with better access to justice. The following story is a real-life example.
Most of my work is with civil cases, but every now and then I get a chance to work on a criminal case. In this instance, the attorney was defending a local school teacher who had been charged with “misconduct in office.”
I commented to the attorney that that sounded like an odd charge for a teacher. The attorney replied, “Exactly. That is what I need to prove. Would you help me with the research?”
I will leave out the details of the case, but in my opinion the attorney’s client should have been charged with kidnapping, not “misconduct in office.” I suspect that the State’s Attorney’s office did not think they could get a conviction on kidnapping, so they tried the other charge instead.
Is a teacher, in the words of the law, a “public official or officer?” The result of my research indicated that no, a teacher is not.
Public officials are people who are elected, or who take an oath, or whose positions may require a confirmation process. Their positions are usually temporary, like a judge, an alderman, or the head of an executive department. In a school system, I would argue, the superintendent is a public official. Maybe — but this is a stretch — a principal could also be considered a public official.
But not a teacher, at least according to what I could find.
The trial took place a few weeks after I had done my research for the attorney. After the state had presented its case, during a phase that I call “half-time,” the defense can move for a directed verdict or a judgment of acquittal. This almost a pro forma action. The defense will almost always ask the judge to rule that the evidence presented by the state is insufficient to sustain a conviction.
Directed verdicts are rarely granted, but in the case the judge agreed to hear the defense’s arguments in chambers.
Of course I was not in chambers with the judge and the attorneys, but later the attorney told me about what happened during the discussion. Simply put, the judge did not buy the state’s argument that the teacher was a public official. The attorney told me that the evidence I had found had made the argument a “slam dunk.”
Case dismissed.
Of course this was great news for the defense attorney, and I am sure his client was elated. But how did I feel, knowing that a teacher who tricked a high school girl into a field trip to the beach would not be going to jail?
I am not sure. The teacher was fired, and it is unlikely he will ever teach again. Did he deserve a criminal conviction? Personally, I would say yes, but not for some tenuous charge like “misconduct in office.” In my opinion, it is unfortunate that the state did not have the evidence to charge him with a real crime, but to try substituting a charge that was unlikely to stand up to serious scrutiny just to find a way — any way — to get a criminal conviction was just wrong.
And by the way, I would absolutely offer the same services to prosecuting attorneys too. I can’t help wondering whether this case might have turned out differently if they had.
That being said, the answer is yes — I can live with this outcome, because my job as a law librarian is to provide everyone with equal and impartial access to justice.
My First Law Library 