For those inclined to have a negative opinion of George Zimmerman, this was something of a banner day. Already armed, Zimmerman was portrayed by his attorneys as under duress and perhaps mentally unstable, and opening up communications with none other than Sean Hannity, which in this moment of Culture War Crazy is perhaps just slightly better than choosing John Derbyshire to be his new spokesman.
But I have to say, what were his lawyers thinking exactly?
I don’t have a full understanding of lawyers’ professional and ethical obligations in a situation like this. But I can see where they may have been within their rights and perhaps even obligated to terminate their representation. He was freelancing with the media, incommunicado, trying to talk directly with the prosecutor in the case without legal counsel.
But there’s a big difference between ending your representation of your client and going on national TV and describing him like an out of control freak.
I’d be really curious what other lawyers make of this situation — particularly those involved in criminal and/or high-profile representation.
Were they simply not thinking through the repercussions of such a high-profile announcement? Were they just seeking the limelight for themselves? Were they trying to wash their hands of an extremely polarizing and fairly unpopular client? I’m really not sure what to make of it. I’m curious to hear your thoughts.
