The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
AUSA trial ability is HIGHLY OVERRATED
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 23rd, 2017 10:00 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel government wins cases because they have extraordinarily strong evidence, not because of courtroom ability. i LOL at partners in biglaw who tout "7 successful trials as AUSA!" to advertise their trial ability b/c it's fraudlies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688120) |
Date: February 23rd, 2017 10:57 PM Author: Deranged Home partially cr; partially flame. the fact that they've first-chaired 7 jury trials gives them more experience than most biglaw partners. trial ability is largely a function of experience. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688513) |
 |
Date: February 23rd, 2017 10:59 PM Author: Khaki Cracking Hissy Fit Native cr almost everything is a function of experience. when the avg person has almost no experience and you have tons and tons of it you are going to be better than them regardless of any kind of natural ability. just in the sense that you feel comfortable walking clients through it and know what to expect alone is yuge (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688525) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:01 PM Author: Deranged Home cr. also, i should add: biglaw partners arent generally the type of people who have innate trial skills. some do. but the skill set to make biglaw partner barely correlates to that of a great trial lawyer. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688546) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:05 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel not generally, but there are always charismatic associates who have spent years doing public speaking and oral advocacy activities. you can tell even during CLEs -- sometimes nobodies vastly outclass the more well known "trial counsel" partners when it comes to charisma and presentation style. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688572) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:08 PM Author: Deranged Home as i said below, charismatic associates often dont last that long in biglaw bc they're good at charisma and presentation, and not so good at checking commas. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688593) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:08 PM Author: Khaki Cracking Hissy Fit Native that's true but trial is a lot about procedural BS and other really informal shit that you need to be familiar with (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688595) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:03 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel i agree that there is something to be said for experience. But the RAW TALENT of a top associate who did tons of mock trial, moot court, debate, could EASILY make the associate more effective in court. (check out the studies on how overrated experience is in other contexts). people tout ausa experience as if it makes them significantly better than average, but it's a fraudlie. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688557) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:07 PM Author: Deranged Home several comments:
1) lol @ mock trial, moot court, and debate equating raw talent. most people who have lots of experience doing that shit are unlikeable douchebags who would be terrible trial lawyers.
2) biglaw associates who do have raw talent for trial skills often will get weeded out of biglaw before they ever have a chance to shine as a trial lawyer. they'll either hate biglaw, or not be good at it. it's rare that someone is a natural trial lawyer, and a great comma checker.
3) experience matters tremendously in trials, where just pretending like you know what you're doing is half the battle |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:10 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel 1: fair, i meant people who achieved high success at those activities (amta all-american, multiple wins in law school moot court, top gun winners (google baylor law top gun mock trial)). these people are genuinely good speakers.
|
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:36 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot I just limped into my 6th year. I used to be a solid public speaker but haven't don't it in a long time. I'm highly regarded at my firm for my ability to check commas and for having only minimal aspergers. Where do I get this moot court, mock trial, and debate experience that you speak of. I really think I could do better than most of the lit partners at my firm if I could just get some experience and know what the fuck I was doing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688773) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:39 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel college and law school (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688795) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:44 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot Lol. Thanks bro. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688838) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:41 PM Author: Deranged Home NITA (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688810) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:48 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot Ya I just bought a Nita book. I wish I could watch a few civil fraud trials from start to finish. Also I wish I still remembeeed the rules of evidence like I did in law school and when I used to take more depositions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688870) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 6:56 AM Author: 180 Ocher Juggernaut Dragon Let's not forget pre-selection. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689686) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:00 PM Author: Grizzly sinister shitlib Losing a trial as an AUSA must be embarrassing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688537) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:02 PM Author: Deranged Home the only time the govt seems to lose is in big public witch hunt cases like barry bonds or martha stewart or some ceo tycoon (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688550) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 7:31 AM Author: Racy antidepressant drug feces They don't prosecute cases they are likely to lose. As poster below says the people who don't take the deal are crazies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689748) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:05 PM Author: Electric Bearded Stage Pozpig "Trial ability" is flame anyways. Your facts determine the outcome of your case, not your lawyering ability. The exception may be jury trials full of proles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688571) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:07 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel some would counter and say that "lawyering ability" includes developing the facts. let's acknowledge that's true and limit our talk to "courtroom ability" defined as charisma and effectiveness as an oral advocate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688587) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:10 PM Author: Deranged Home not credited at all.
ALL jury trials are full of proles.
ive done several patent jury trials, and im sure this is the case with any other biglaw lit case. juries dont understand and of this bullshit. it's all which lawyer they like more. |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 6:58 AM Author: 180 Ocher Juggernaut Dragon Patent jury trials are so fucking ridiculous. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689688) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:10 PM Author: Khaki Cracking Hissy Fit Native Odd case that the best trial lawyers who get insane jury verdicts are almost always charismatic & great speakers? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688606) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:14 PM Author: Deranged Home (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688623) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 7:33 AM Author: Racy antidepressant drug feces you obviously haven't met any jurors. You need decent facts to win, but you can easily lose with good facts if the jury doesn't understand or like your client (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689753) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:14 PM Author: histrionic dysfunction Cases with overwhelming evidence settle. If not, then defense counsel sucked, or the defendant was irrational, or both.
AUSA's are successful because judges refuse to hold them to heightened ethical standards governing prosecutorial conduct. Even when they commit egregious Brady violations, most cuck judges refuse to even directly name the government attorneys in their opinions.
|
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:15 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel "If not, then defense counsel sucked, or the defendant was irrational, or both."
are you familiar with federal criminal practice? irrational defendants are the only ones who go to trial. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:19 PM Author: Electric Bearded Stage Pozpig Yeah because the plea deal is like 15 years of prison for some white collar shit when the max sentence is 17 yrs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688651) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:31 PM Author: Deranged Home cr, or major criminals facing multiple life sentences, where the plea deal is 20 or 25. if you're 40, might as well roll the dice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688734) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:20 PM Author: Deranged Home nah, sometimes the ones who go to trial are the ones who are rolling the dice bc they're totally fucked either way and any plea they're offered is going to give them a ton of time and ruin the bulk of their adult life. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688653) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:20 PM Author: Electric Bearded Stage Pozpig (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688656) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:16 PM Author: Deranged Home 100% cr. in one fed criminal appeal i argued, a prominent COA judge tore into the AUSA for doing something really fucking sketchy at trial. written opinion (which affirmed on lack of prejudice) didnt even mention the misconduct at all. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688634) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 7:38 AM Author: 180 Ocher Juggernaut Dragon Congrats bro (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689767) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 8:19 AM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot Did you let him know that you're a poaster? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689858) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 1:38 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot I'll take that as a no. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32691766) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 1:38 PM Author: Deranged Home (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32691768) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:16 PM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor AUSA trial experience isn't overrated because it's not very highly valued. Biglaw firms only hire AUSAs from SDNY/EDNY/NDIL/NDCA/CDCA and a few others. Obviously the "trial experience" in those districts is no more legit than anywhere else, where biglaw firms don't hire from.
They hire from those districts because those AUSAs have connections with how those offices do their investigations, the judges in those districts, and other AUSAs still at the office, and biglaw can sell this to clients as crucially relevant insider experience.
Their experience is being used to flame clients to get business. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:18 PM Author: Deranged Home this is all true. but the "trial experience" is also used to flame clients -- not just to sell the insider connections -- but to sell the trial experience itself as part of their "deep bench" of trial-ready former AUSAs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688645) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:20 PM Author: Electric Bearded Stage Pozpig We've got a full roster of 5 star recruits (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688654) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:22 PM Author: Deranged Home did you hear covington mfh just signed andrew rubinstein, who quarterbacked the civil frauds division in the edny? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688660) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:24 PM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor Sure but it's not the main thing used to flame clients otherwise they could just hire some AUSA from Wyoming or some shit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688669) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:35 PM Author: Deranged Home ausas from are country prob dont have biglaw-level resumes that biglaw snobs want clients to see. directional state u law review wont cut it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688765) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:45 PM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor I agree, they're selling resumes not trial experience. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688842) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:33 PM Author: histrionic dysfunction Not entirely wrong, but AUSAs from those districts are also more desirable because they handle much more sophisticated white collar crime, complex fraud, prosecute under federal securities and finance laws, etc. That sort of thing in SDNY truly is different than rancher in Wyoming in cahoots with some Cherokee nation bro's running a low-level tax evasion scheme. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688750) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:43 PM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor It's really not that different, actually, if you've ever been involved in a white collar case. They build the whole thing on emails that are like "this stock is headed up and nobody outside the company knows, pls wire me 100K for this advice!"
SDNY doesn't make sophisticated cases. There's a reason you didn't see a single RMBS prosecution. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:52 PM Author: histrionic dysfunction (guy in that worked in flyover country with a huge chip on his shoulder)
Uhhhh, bigger cases get filed in NYC/DC/CHI because that is literally where the targets and/or companies that committed the bad acts are located. Have you worked in both types of jurisdictions to compare?
RMBS didn't happen because the legal theories were SPS, attenuated, and non-existant. Which is why everyone was pumping and dumping them.
|
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:54 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel (guy working in sdny/edny trying to defend his own ego) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688917) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 7:23 AM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor Uhhhh no as rakoff has pointed out the SNDY spends the vast majority of its time on insider trading cases because they're easy as fuck:
"While I want to stress again that I have no inside information, as a former chief of that unit I would venture to guess that the cases involving the financial crisis were parceled out to assistant US attorneys who were also responsible for insider-trading cases. Which do you think an assistant would devote most of her attention to: an insider-trading case that was already nearly ready to go to indictment and that might lead to a high-visibility trial, or a financial crisis case that was just getting started, would take years to complete, and had no guarantee of even leading to an indictment? Of course, she would put her energy into the insider-trading case, and if she was lucky, it would go to trial, she would win, and, in some cases, she would then take a job with a large law firm. And in the process, the financial fraud case would get lost in the shuffle."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/01/09/financial-crisis-why-no-executive-prosecutions/ |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:43 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot Cr. I clerked for a district court in a border district. The border district was like Groundhog Day. Every criminal case was smuggling dope or humans across the border. AUSAs in the district would fight over the occasional child porn and rape case just to break out of the routine. I interviewed at the sdny usao and they were like "ya you only have to do rape and child porn for your first 6 months. Then you go after madoff and bin laden. Different world. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688835) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:47 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel "Then you go after madoff and bin laden. "
lol subtle flame |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:50 PM Author: useless stirring pocket flask fortuitous meteor cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688886) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:50 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot I interviewed with dudes on those cases. I'm sure they did more basic shit too. The point is that they weren't doing their 38th illegal reenty case that year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688887) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:51 PM Author: Slate cumskin chapel why didn't you get the jerb (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688896) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:52 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot I'm a prole. Legit shitty law school. Good clerkships and firm. My only ties are to states with boring usaos with no exit options. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688902) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:42 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend Look,any honest lawyer, whether criminal defense or prosecution, acknowledges that the government has a huge advantage. The process favors them, the cards are stacked in their favor. No great lawyer gains his rep as a prosecutor. Period. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688823) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:46 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot On the other hand, if you lose as a prosecutor lol at you. If you lose as a defense lawyer that's what everyone expected anyway and some hatable guy goes to jail. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688849) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:48 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend Exactly (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688869) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:52 PM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot I'd feel more pressure as a prosecutor. It's like when we were on jv and got to go play the varsity. If you lose who gives a fuck. But if you knock the fuck out of one of the varsity bros you're the man. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688899) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:56 PM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend The defense attorney actually has someone's liberty on the line. That's pressure,man. Prosecutors can get rid of shitty cases by dismissal or pleasure. Fuck them, no sympathy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688933) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2017 11:58 PM Author: Deranged Home isnt there only pressure if the prox has a horrible case? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688940) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 12:00 AM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend No, because even if your client is fucked you have to preserve error or face a possible grievance or malpractice claim. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688947) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 12:03 AM Author: Pungent Brethren Spot Ya but the dude is usually detestable and the facts are usually stacked against the guy and pretty much all defendants claim there was some ineffective assistance and pretty much all courts realized they're full of shit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688966) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 12:06 AM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend I'm not talking iac. I'm talking protecting your record in a way a prosecutor doesn't even have to worry about. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688988) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 12:03 AM Author: Deranged Home if it's harmless error / IAC but no prejudice, you're not going to be in trouble, will you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688969) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 12:07 AM Author: bat-shit-crazy fragrant shrine organic girlfriend Probably not. Unless you're the defense lawyer in that old commercial where the crimbro blows your house up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32688995) |
|
Date: March 8th, 2017 6:17 PM Author: Aromatic associate university (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32785013) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 4:30 AM Author: black exciting ticket booth depressive Nearly all prosecutors, not just AUSAs, confuse their institutional advantages for skill. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689632) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2017 7:13 AM Author: diverse mildly autistic voyeur kitty (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3534736&forum_id=2#32689709) |