to view the Lawdragon's - Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP

500Lawdragon Q & A with:Gerald ShargelBy john ryanWho would you hire if caught up in acomplex criminal case – murder, racketeering, bribery,any type of fraud – facing the prospect of spending therest of your life, or too much of it, in prison? Take thatquestion to New Yorkers familiar with the city’s legalelite, and Gerald Shargel’s name might be the mostcommon response.The trial lawyer’s trial lawyer – who in the earlyyears was known more as an appellate star (see the1972 Supreme Court case Giglio vs. U.S.) – alwaysseems to find himself in the news, and now on film.Shargel guided Dave Letterman blackmailer JoeHalderman to a guilty plea, and he did the same fordisgraced Dreier LLP head Marc Dreier, which earnedShargel a supporting role in the documentaryUnraveled. Of course, he is best known for defendingmobsters like Hell’s Kitchen’s James Coonan and theGottis of the Gambino crime family. In one caseagainst John Gotti Sr., U.S. District Judge Leo Glasserreferred to Shargel and partner Bruce Cutler as “housecounsel” for the Gottis and removed them from thecase; Shargel himself was the target of a multi-yearfederal investigation into his relationship with the mob– no charges were brought.That colorful history sometimes obscures the diversityof his consistently successful criminal defense practice;Shargel generally does not discriminate against certaintypes of defendants as long as the stakes are high.LAWDRAGon: In the documentary Unraveled, MarcDreier seemed torn between accepting what he did andtrying to minimize his crimes. Did you sense a certainamount of denial on his part?GERALD SHARGEL: Well, he’s not in denial about his predicament.He’s accepted the reality that he’s serving a20-year prison term as well as anyone could expect, andin a certain sense, he’s in a state of grace. He realizedfrom the moment he was arrested – I think it’s clear inthe film – that life as he knew it was over, or at leastover for a very long time. The film was shot over 60days, and I think that by the end he was fully remorsefuland accepting of responsibility for what he did.LD: With your cases defending Mafia figures, some ofyour fellow lawyers have wondered why you would handlethose types of cases given that you could remainbusy without them.GS: I don’t apologize for any of that. I’m a criminaldefense lawyer. That means I represent people chargedwith serious crimes and do my level best to raise reasonabledoubt, and to see that they are acquitted. Itdoesn’t always work. But I don’t look down my nose atany particular kind of case. Even in the last few years,I’ve represented a number of people that the governmentcalls mobsters.LD: You’ve been quoted before as saying you like “theaction.” What do you mean by that?GS: I like the action of high-profile cases. I’ve been fortunateto have a disproportionate number of high-profilecases. You know, walking into a packed courtroom, orwalking into a courtroom where another room has aclosed-circuit feed because the first room has filled up,to cross examine somebody under those circumstances– well, if you don’t like that, you don’t want to be a triallawyer. I like the public attention, the scrutiny; I like itwhen the press section is full. I think any trial lawyerwould welcome that. It’s what I live for.LD: Have you ever had any second thoughts about themix of cases? After all, in a wiretapped conversation,John Gotti threatened to kill you.GS: I never believed that he meant it. I was in the processof trying to win an acquittal for him. He was anoperatic person. I actually think that matrimonial lawyersare more at risk. This is not a practice for the thinskinned,but after 42 years I am still chugging along.LD: How about the federal government’s investigationof you? That must have been incredibly frustrating andnerve-wracking and threatening to your practice.GS: I would have preferred that it never happened. Butgoing back to what I said, it is not a practice for thethin skinned. If I look back at the trajectory of mypractice, the bar in the graph goes up during thoseyears. The adverse publicity did not stop my practicefrom growing.LD: Has your courtroom style changed over the years?GS: Trial lawyers are like folk singers: They don’t copyother styles that came before, but they are influencedby them. I had a lot of influences from older lawyerswho practiced in a different era. For a while I wasprobably more dramatic than I needed to be. I thinkover the years that’s quieted down. My approach to trialsis not kicking and screaming and calling the governmentthe Evil Empire. My approach is, “Let’s all reasontogether,” and I try to persuade the jury I have amore reasonable interpretation of the evidence.Sometimes you are more effective with a softerapproach. But if a situation calls for sarcasm, I’ll be assarcastic as anyone else. See the full Q&A at www.lawdragon.com/lawyer-limelights/gerald-shargel.L A W D R A G O N 78 I s s u e 13 Photo by: Laura Barisonzi