A lawyer sits in the corner of an interrogation room eating pizza. A suspect sits across from a detective, answering questions. The lawyer does not interrupt. The lawyer does not object. The lawyer does not advise his client to stop talking because the lawyer is not there to defend the suspect. The lawyer is there to watch.

In this JCS-inspired psychological breakdown, I analyze the interrogation of a suspect whose lawyer was present but refused to help. The suspect had confessed to his lawyer in confidence. The lawyer did not report the confession—attorney-client privilege prevented it. But the lawyer also did not prevent his client from confessing again, on tape, to the police. The lawyer sat in silence, eating pizza, while his client dug his own grave.

The interrogation is a study in ethical ambiguity. The lawyer did nothing illegal. He did not violate any ethical rules. But he also did nothing to protect his client from himself. The suspect was convicted. The lawyer went back to his practice. The pizza place went out of business.

Turn down the lights, put on your headphones, and press play because sometimes the worst enemy in the room is not the detective asking questions. It is the lawyer eating pizza.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/red-tree-crime--6847553/support.