Justice at Trial: Courtroom Battles and Groundbreaking Cases

Justice at Trial is part-biography and part-account of the cases in which the author was involved during a remarkable career.

Jim Brosnahan started as a federal prosecutor in the early 1960s and then later acted as a defence attorney. He also handled civil cases. His caseload involved defending and prosecuting many public figures, and arguing a case before the Supreme Court. I enjoy reading about the US system to compare and contrast; and at one point Brosnahan does the same, writing that he felt like an English barrister on the train to Oxford with a brief prepared by a leading solicitor!

The reader learns about life on the US west coast, the relationship between state and federal systems, and the local bar, which seems collegiate and good natured.

Brosnahan was born in Massachusetts in the 1920s. His working life spans the era of Kennedy family dominance through to the Iran-Contra scandal during the Reagan administration. Brosnahan was involved in litigation arising from JFK’s policy to promote the establishment of more small banks, which was not a great success. It saw local businessmen helping themselves to cash deposits with insufficient regulation. What could go wrong?

It is interesting to read how the long shadow of the Great Depression stretched far beyond the 1930s. Clients were being prosecuted in the 1970s for allegedly breaking a law that banned cheap liquor sales.

During the author’s days as a prosecutor, the system usually ran smoothly because most defendants pleaded guilty. This suddenly stopped and everyone wanted a trial. Brosnahan asked a jailer why this was happening and was told that one of the men in custody, an artificial inseminator of cows, was advising everyone to plead not guilty. The judge dealt with his case and life went back to normal.

Brosnahan also represented people on the margins of society, including Native Americans and migrants. The chapter on migrants crossing the Mexican border perhaps has lessons for how we tackle these issues in the UK.

Jury trials in the US are used for more criminal and civil cases than here, and prosecutors have more of a role in determining sentence, even the death penalty. Jury selection is also a much more significant part of the process. It seems routine for lawyers to chat to juries after the case is concluded. The fused profession seems to work well.

This is an excellent autobiography which is very positive about the profession and the American dream.

David Pickup is a partner at Pickup & Scott Solicitors, Aylesbury