For a fascinating, inside look at the criminal justice system and the work of one of America's most prominent trial attorneys, check out this interview with ames J. Brosnahan, a veteran of more than 50 years of experience in both civil and criminal trial work.

During his notable career, Brosnahan regularly undertook complex cases that were about to go to trial. He has tried, to conclusion, 150 cases that have ranged from anti-trust to wire fraud and from patent litigation to white collar crime and murder. Some of those cases made national headlines, including those that helped provide important First Amendment free speech protections.

Brosnahan is named among the top 30 trial lawyers in the United States, according to the Legal 500 US. A lion of the trial bar, Brosnahan is one of the most respected and recognized trial lawyers in the United States. Recently, he completed a book on notable trials from his career, "Justice at Trial: Courtroom Battles and Groundbreaking Cases," now available at Amazon and other booksellers.

The interview was conducted by Bob Gatty, host of Lean to the Left and co-host of the Justice Counts podcast, and Justice Counts host, legal thriller author Mark M. Bello. The episode also will stream on Justice Counts June 5.


Here are some questions we discussed with Brosnahan:

MARK: Welcome Jim—it’s an honor to have you on the podcast. Before we talk about your writing, I’d like to talk about Professor Chemerinsky’s forward. High praise for your memoir from the famous law professor. There is a lot packed into those two pages, but I was struck by two comments he makes. I’d like your reaction to them:
1. Practicing law requires hard work and attention to detail-many lawyers work hard. But it also requires creativity-Chemerinsky considers you and your team very “clever,” the term he uses. How much of your success is related to hard work and how much to creativity? For young lawyers out there, after learning what they need to know to pass the bar, how do they develop these creative skills the professor talks about?
2. Professor Chemerinsky talks about a topic near and dear to my heart. At that is, essentially, the bad rap lawyers get. He points to you as an example of how an ethical lawyer and decent guy, (you) can also be highly successful. That being a successful lawyer requires “bad behavior” which is patently false. We can chew gum and walk—can you please talk about being successful and ethical at the same time?

BOB: The book reveals that you were diagnosed with rheumatic fever and a possible heart problem at age 3, confined to bed until you were six. Your connection to the outside world was a radio with Jack Benny and a window that looked out onto a driveway where you could see kids playing. Do you remember those days, and do you think they played a role in shaping the adult you became?

MARK: Like Chemerinsky, my favorite legal quote is “Justice, Justice, Shalt Thou Pursue.” Having read your book, alongside might be: “Sometimes, doing your best is your only reward.” I love that lesson for young lawyers.

BOB: Tell our listeners about the Secody Murder Trial-you had only been a lawyer for 18 months and you have this major murder trial involving the native American community. Tough case for a young guy.

MARK: As a side note, I was struck by your voir dire in that case and want to hear more. How does a trial lawyer get a potential juror to admit bias on voir dire?BOB: In the book, you indicate that you were influenced by Cecil Poole, Melvin Beli, and other prominent trial lawyers. You worked under Poole, who was the first African American US Attorney in the United States. Obviously, mentoring was important in your career. Is it still?

BOB: In 1966, you switch sides after how long as a prosecutor? Tell us about the transition from prosecutor to criminal defense and civil plaintiff attorney?

MARK: One of those cases involved representing two young black activists in the Oakland California poverty movement. Tell us about the case. What were they accused of? Why were they prosecuted? And what was the outcome?

BOB: I’m an old newspaper guy. In 1968, at the age of 34, you handled a 1st Amendment case that literally would decide the fate of daily papers in America. Or, was it really an anti-trust case? There was a similar issue in Detroit when the News and the Free Press entered into a joint operating agreement. Tell us about your case and the outcome.

MARK: In 1978, you take another 1st Amendment case, this one centering around the movie Born Innocent, starring Linda Blair of “The Exorcist” fame. Interesting issue in that case. The plaintiff attorney argued “People who see movies are inspired to act out what they see,” and argued for censorship. Lots of publicity in this one. Tell the story of an attempt to prove what you refer to in the book as “negligent imitation.”

BOB: You were a prosecutor—prosecutors have a lot of power in making decision about whether to prosecute or not prosecute, what you call in the book “The Power to Ruin Lives.” How did you deal with the power and what do you recommend to young prosecutors just starting out?

MARK: I’ve often said that if the government really wants to go after and get someone, they can and will. One of the most interesting cases in the book for me was Steve Psinakis case. Ronald Reagan is often cited as an example of a so-called “good” Republican president. While he may have been an effective president, he was far from a good guy. My favorite quote in the chapter? “President Reagan wanted a conviction of a US citizen as a favor to a corrupt, foreign dictator.” The year is 1986, I believe. Tell our listeners the story, please?

MARK: Lots of great quotes in the book. I can’t seem to get away from them. “Specialization, so prevalent today, can limit a lawyer unnecessarily.” But isn’t that advice in conflict with “Jack of all trades, master of none?” What do you tell a young lawyer today about specialization?

BOB: Another quote from the book: “Preparation for trial requires a complete immersion into other people’s lives while at the same time trying to preserve an objective view of the case.” How does a trial lawyer do that?

MARK: Another quote I like in the book is “Trial lawyers are essential to enrich democratic reforms and social progress.” Why do you believe that? Many people would say “get over yourself.” What do you say?

BOB: Last quote: You say: “I have always thought of the United States Supreme Court as the legal conscience of our society.” Do you still feel that way with today’s court?

MARK: At the request of Lawrence Walsh, the special prosecutor investigating the Iran-Contra Affair, you agreed to handle the prosecution of Caspar Weinberger, the US Secretary of Defense under Reagan and Bush one. Before you could try the case, President Bush pardoned Weinberger, an event with caused you “post-pardon depression.” So, how did you really feel?

BOB: Were you able to strike a healthy work-life balance? What did that look like? What would you recommend to young lawyers today?

MARK: How would you compare civility among lawyers today compared to during your early years of practice?

BOB: If you could travel back in time and give your 25-year-old self some advice about career and life, what would it be? Any regrets?

MARK: Let’s talk about judges. The judge is against you. The rulings aren’t going your way, and you are feeling a hostile vibe from the bench. What do you do?

MARK: The USA PATRIOT Act, mass surveillance of Americans by the federal government, and the transformation of the FBI into an counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and cybersecurity agency are all things that happened in the last 21 years or so. As a lawyer and an American who cares about civil liberties, do you think these changes have brought some harm as well as enhanced security?

BOB: We hope your memoir will be a bestseller. Where can people find it and what’s next on the horizon for James Brosnahan?