I stood waiting patiently in the hallway outside of his office, rocking to a beat no one but I could feel, desperately attempting to stop myself from all out air guitar. Yet when the clock struct three I stopped, a clam settling as I announced my presence. His office door was decorated with comedic one piece comics, a hint of who he was perhaps? We grinned pleasantly at each other, reaching our destination we settled down for the big questions I was going to ask.
I began with asking “how did you become interested in Law?” He responded ” I was initially interested in politics, I studied economy and politics and realized that many Canadian politicians are lawyers.” I proceeded “what area of law did you practice, and how did you practice?” “I was an on court lawyer, criminal crimes, civil law suites and administrative law. I was a Advocacy lawyer more simply. I studied at the University of Alberta, during which I taught social studies in elementary and high school.”
It interested me how bright and enthusiastic he spoke of his profession, and I could see he had a true love of the practice, which inspired my next question “what was you favorite part of your practice?”. He grinned bright and happy, “Mt favorite was the court action, it was stimulating, like a performance to a big audience, I enjoyed the arguments. Or like teaching, if I go back to practice I want to go to court.”
Indeed he was happy to explain what he favored, but what of those he worked with? I asked next “would you say there is a culture or attraction of certain personality’s to the practice?” He did not hesitate to respond “oh definitely. In my experience there are people cutout for different areas of Law. On court lawyers are more out going and engaged for arguing and defending. Off court appear more introverted, more inclined to remain off court. There are different personality’s for the criminal field, if I spoke to a criminal lawyer I can tell what area they are in. Culture wise, you develop a mind set, as my wife gets annoyed with me “cross examining her” when I challenge her an argument. It is that going in to Law school if you do not have the mind set, then it will be molded into you by the time you leave.”
Following afterwards with a smirk at the information I inquired “what did you find the most challenging in the practice?” He thought for a moment before the answer became clear to him, hesitating he responded. “It’s funny, people ask ‘isn’t it difficult to defend the guilty’, no that’s the easiest, the most challenging is to defend someone you believe is innocent but have insignificant evidence. Problematic, memories are distorted, how do you convince them they are lying when they believe it is true? Memory is not a photograph, it is difficult to challenge someone who’s memory is faulty. I wake up late in the night in a sweat worrying about it.”
It is the most depth I had from him, and it startled me. I progressed to the next question unwilling to let him linger over it anymore then he did before then. Quickly so as to not stagnate the interview I continued.
“Would you say there is a philosophy to your practice?” He paused again to assess the question before smiling and saying “Do the best you can for the Cilent, and do your best everyday.”
The interview ended on a lighter note and as we separated to head our own ways I still couldn’t get the song out of my head.