• by George Simpson , Featured Contributor, March 3, 2004

You have heard the government's case against my client. It turns largely on the word of a young man who made a deal to testify in exchange for leniency for his own crimes. I realize that all of our kids have smoked pot once in a while, and probably done some X at a party or two. But just because this had absolutely no effect on our kids doesn't mean it hasn't turned this young man into a raving lunatic. Just because he is presentable, articulate, credible, and composed doesn't mean he isn't seething inside with psychedelic thoughts.

So it all comes down to his word against my client's. Well, not really her word, since she didn't take the stand, but you know what I mean. And don't forget, the feds have already withdrawn the most damaging charge against..oh, sorry, your honor--it just slipped out. Please ignore that last remark, ladies and gentlemen.

The reason the government pressed this case--aside from the fact that my client used to be a stockbroker and should be intimately familiar with what constitutes insider trading and what doesn't--is that she is a high-profile, successful businesswoman, and everyone knows that makes her a juicy target for career advancement for Justice Department prosecutors.

The underlying issue at hand, ladies and gentlemen, is whether you should find someone guilty just because they have spent their entire career amassing enormous wealth, and stepping over the bodies of those who helped them achieve their success. It is not a crime to be an abusive, demeaning, thoughtless tyrant.

What concerns me is that all of us at one time or another has worked for someone like my client. Someone who embarrassed us in front of our colleagues, or who overreacted and dressed us down for a relatively minor offense that wasn't our fault to begin with. Someone who gave us pep talks about being part of a "team" or a "family," but then treated us like the underclass. Someone who was essentially passive-aggressive, warming up to us when it was to their advantage--then, in a heartbeat, savaging us with a cruel damnation of our professionalism.

You would think that being rich and famous would be compensation enough to heal wounds to the ego from years prior--but no, this kind of insecure overachiever gets off on putting us down simply because they can, and there isn't much we can do but quit our jobs. Yes, there have been other highly successful women who have treated their employees, vendors, and colleagues with respect and dignity, but let's not hold my client to that difficult standard. After all, she was born in New Jersey.

Ladies and gentlemen, my client's fate is in your hands. You can find her innocent and send a message to the world that rank indeed has its privileges, and one of them is cutting a few corners on the law here and there. And that it is okay to use that rank and wealth to intimidate and embarrass the less powerful. Or you can find her guilty and extend my retainer for another couple of years, so we can appeal and keep harping on what a "novel" case the Justice department has made.

Either way, I'm in the money.