Client Interviewing in Criminal Cases

As a lawyer -- and I handled civil matters, not criminal ones, for most of my legal career -- there are really two (or more) things you're talking about. One is the initial meeting and the other is every other meeting after that.

For an initial consultation, it's open-ended questions. Why are you here? What happened? What date? Etc. Then getting into more direct questions, e. g. did you own the car? Etc.

You do not exist to put words in anyone's mouth. But you do need to know what happened. One thing I found very useful was just following my natural curiousity. E. g. Say it was an auto accident. Then you want to know: how many cars were involved? Who was driving? Where did it happen? What were the weather conditions? Then once you've established what happened, were there injuries? If so, to what body parts? Was there medical treatment? If so, where? Etc.

The lawyer should ask probing questions but at the same time, when it comes to criminal matters, the lawyer is looking for the facts but not necessarily a confession. A confession changes the dynamics. If a criminal has confessed, the ethical thing is for the lawyer to push for the client to plead guilty, and to continue to be a zealous advocate but within that context, e. g. there is going to be a punishment so the lawyer's role is to minimize said consequences. If there is no confession, but it appears very clear that the client did the deed, the lawyer need not push for an admission but it's generally good practice for the attorney to give the client every opportunity to come clean, e. g. is there something you wish to tell me? If the client is lying about being innocent, and there is independent corroboration that the client is very likely guilty, ethics usually dictate that the attorney try one last time to get the client to come clean and then walk away (quit the case) if that doesn't happen.

Was that the information you were looking for?

Following what jespah said, the one question you don't ask your client is: "did you do it?" Instead, ask "what did the police arrest you for?" or "on what charges did the state indict you?" Also, ask about the details of the arrest: in the US, it is important to find out if your client was read his Miranda rights at the time of the arrest (I don't know if Australia has something comparable). If the police entered the client's home or seized evidence, find out if they had a search warrant. You also need to know if your client spoke to the police or a prosecutor after the arrest and, if so, what your client said.

If you're charging by the hour, don't waste the client's money with chit-chat.

The first rule in criminal law is: get paid first.

hey guys! thanks!!


from the (stupidly easy) facts scenario we've been given it's looking quite straight forward. It's pretty obvious that the things that I need to get out of "my client" are his defence (which will be self defence - he only hit the other guy because the other guy raised a tyre iron over his head, after pulling over infront of my guys car in a road rage style incident), the names of the other witnesses that the police have conveniently forgotten to include (because we know there were other people there), what he said to the police when interviewd (if anything - we have a pharse similar to the miranda over here), and also the simply obvious things like his name, address, DOB and occupation (which we need for typing up a witness statement) and also the usual check if he's got other convictions, or if he's free on bail/parole at the minute.

so yes - the whole task is a 15 minutes initial interview with a brand new client.

thanks heaps for your input guys....