SPEAKER_00 0:00

Welcome to Beat the Prosecution, presented by Northern Virginia Criminal Defense and DOI lawyer Jonathan Katz, where we regularly present you with information and ideas for beating your prosecution as best as possible. Nothing on any of our media sources, such as our podcast or website, is legal advice. John Katz only provides legal advice to current clients or for individuals who have arranged a consultation. And now your host, John Katz.

SPEAKER_01 0:32

Hello, everybody. This is John Katz to beat the prosecution. I'm a criminal defense and DUI defense lawyer here in Fairfax, Northern Virginia. I am delighted on two counts today. One is about our guest. His name is Patrick Barone, there in Michigan. He is a DWI defense lawyer. He is a fellow graduate of the Trial Awards College. He is our third guest who both attended the Trial Laurence College and has been very active with the National College for DUI Defense because I asked him before we started, do you have secrets that perhaps our two previous guests, Andrew Mitchelov and Kim Benjamin, do not have? And he said, well, he knows maybe uh some additional things to talk about. And I'm also delighted to tell those of you who are listening on audio podcast when we have an intro and outro, we have a new announcer. His name is Simon Remington, and he is my webmaster. And those of you who want a webmaster, check him out. He is at radicalwebs. I think it's at radicalwebs.com. With that, let's see. What do we have that really stands out about Patrick's resume? He's over there in Birmingham, Michigan, and uh he's been doing a lot of stuff with DWI, and he does stuff not in DWI as well. So, Patrick, please tell everybody what is your practice focus about and to what extent is it uh DWI and beyond DWI? Or what do they call it there in Michigan? DWI, whatever they call it there.

SPEAKER_02 2:04

They call it OWI for operating while intoxicated. And the firm, Barone Defense Firm, handles all matters of criminal cases, including DUI, which is our major focus. The other two major focuses would be sex crimes and assault cases, usually involving firearms. We do a lot of firearms litigation, firearms law. That would be the three major areas that we practice in.

SPEAKER_01 2:33

I want to talk about all three. When did you get involved with the trial or as college and why? And what has your been you're involved with them? And what got you involved with the National College for DUI Defense and what have you been doing with them as well?

SPEAKER_02 2:48

Well, the DUI College predates the TLC stuff. So I'll talk about that first, just so it's chronological. I think I first joined NCDD in 1998, 99, thereabouts. And I became a sustaining member shortly after that. I did that as part of my quest to, well, the truth of it is, John, I wanted to be known as one of the top DUI lawyers in the country. And I knew if I wanted to do that, a pathway to doing that would be the DUI college. So I became a very zealous participant in the DUI college and attended virtually everything that they offered, lots of stuff they didn't offer. Really, my primary focus was on exactly what anybody who wanted to specialize and focus in this area of law should be on, which is gas chromatography for blood testing, right? Spectroscopy to a lesser extent for drug testing, which is becoming, as you know, more common, infrared spectroscopy for breath testing, and then standardized field sobriety tests. In addition to that, it's all the general trial skills like cross-examination, et cetera. But those would be the primary focuses. So I went to tons of seminars. I was going to a seminar probably at least once, if not twice a month, everywhere in the country, um, attending everything that NCDD offered, being very active on their uh their listserv, both in reading and consuming the material as well as offering my own perspectives on it. And after about five years, so now we're about 2006-2007, I started to believe that I was receiving a little bit less ROI on the time that I was spending attending the seminars because um they frequently cover the same material, which is not a criticism of them at all. Every time I go, I always get new stuff. So that's not really it. Someone like me, I'm always looking for something new. And I was realizing that that something new might be found elsewhere. And I remember distinctly being in court around 2007, and a lawyer that I respected came up to me and suggested that I go to tri lawyer college. And I knew about it.

SPEAKER_01 5:13

There you go.

SPEAKER_02 5:14

I knew about it, but I had never really delved into it very much. But I knew that there was another lawyer, not the one that was speaking to me at this moment, but another lawyer who attended NC or the Tri Lawyer College and came back and was just killing it in the courtroom. I mean, he was getting not guilty, he's like it was going out of style. So I'm like, there's got to be something there. So I checked into it and I realized that it required a one-month commitment. And the lawyer that referred me to it uh said, you know, there's a different way if you're interested. And that different way is they call it the seven-step method. Now, John, you probably know all of this has sort of changed since then. This is more than 20. Well, it's about 20 years ago at this point.

SPEAKER_01 5:59

Well, I know about both. I went in 1995 for the second summer.

SPEAKER_02 6:03

Right. Okay, so things continue to change and evolve, but this is the way it was back then. And I looked at the website. If I wanted to graduate from the trial lawyer college, by the seven-step method, I had to take this thing called intro to psychodrama first. I'm like, okay, no idea what psychodrama is. I know I want to graduate, become a graduate. I'm not going to do this otherwise. So I went to this place called uh, I think it was called Sleeping Lady, if I'm not mistaken, in Levinsworth, um Washington, in the mountains of Washington State. Beautiful location, beautiful resort area. And that's where the psychodrama was. And it was took place over a four-day period, as as I'm sure you know, their um weekend or their segment um seminars are by they're always by four days, uh, over like a usually a Thursday to a Sunday. And um, I came back from that experience just blown away by psychodrama. My psychodrama, my psychodramatist was John Nolte. I don't believe he's with the trial college anymore, but he was, and and um Caitlin Larimer, I believe, was the secondary one, but I did my psychodrama with John uh Nolte. So I came back from that and I talked to my wife, who is a PhD, she's a clinical psychologist, and I said, Look, I really think that you should try to get some training with John Katz. Or John Katz, with John Katz, maybe with you too, with John Nolty. I said, I think he would really connect with this guy. He's a PhD like you are, and I think you would really enjoy the training. It took some time for me to cajole her to do it. We had two young girls at the time, but she finally decided she would do it. And she went and she came back and she was blown away by it as well. Wow. So the two of us then made the decision to become trained as first trained as practitioners and then trained as trainers. So I'll I'll talk more about that if you want me to.

SPEAKER_01 8:13

What's the name? What's your wife's name?

SPEAKER_02 8:15

Her name is Elizabeth Corby, Dr. Elizabeth Corby. Got it. C-O-R-B-Y.

SPEAKER_01 8:20

I am interested in you talking more about this.

SPEAKER_02 8:23

Okay. Well, um, so as you know, and probably has been talked about on your podcast previously, psychodrama is primarily a form of group therapy that uses dramatic means to accomplish therapeutic ends. It's it's an amazingly effective type of deep therapy. It's not for the faint of heart, it's not for everyone, but for those who are willing to be vulnerable enough to actually submit to the process, it can be incredibly transformative. It was for me, it has been for the people that I uh that I work with in psychodrama because my wife and I actually run a bi-weekly psychodrama um therapy session. It's a two and a half hour bi-weekly session. There, it's populated exclusively by her patients, and I'm a guest director for that. So I actually am involved in helping to provide therapy or helping to provide psychodrama for therapeutic means, but I also do it for a local trial college. It's called the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan, C DAM. They have a summer trial college and they've adopted these methods as well. And that's another thing that we can talk about. But as far as the psychodrama itself, getting certified is a very, very intensive process. It took me literally 10 years of intensive study to reach uh certification as a practitioner.

SPEAKER_01 9:54

With which organization?

SPEAKER_02 9:57

Well, there's really only one organization that you can get certification from, and that's the American Board of Psychodrama Examiners. They're the ones that offer the certification examination on a yearly basis, and they also are the ones that offer the psychodramatists who are the um, I guess you would say the observers for the psychodrama in the um psychodrama practicum that you have to actually participate in as well. So it's a one-year, it's a excuse me, a one-day written exam. And then if you pass that, then you can actually schedule uh the practicum, and that involves a three-hour psychodrama session where you have someone from the American board come in and observe you doing it. And if they pass you and you've passed the written exam, then you can become certified. But before you can sit for the exam, it requires, if I can remember, it's been a while now. I think it's 780 hours of training. And then in addition to that, I believe there's 60 supervised sessions of psychodrama. They have to be at least an hour each. Um, and then uh, as I said, you have to sit for the written exam as well as the uh the practicum. So getting those number of hours requires a lot of time and a fair amount of commitment. And of course, you have to study the material in order to pass the exam. But learning psychodrama is really done by an apprenticeship model. You can't go to a university or to an institution and learn it, um, at least not for certification purposes. You have to learn from a certified practitioner who is also a trainer, and that's the second part.

SPEAKER_01 11:39

So who did you do that with?

SPEAKER_02 11:41

I my primary trainer for the uh certificate as a practitioner was Donna Little. She's out of the Toronto Center. Um, she and Ann Hale, I think, well, actually, Ann Hale and another individual um founded the Toronto Center. Ann Hale has passed away, unfortunately, about two years ago. Uh, but she was very instrumental in developing the concept of sociometry. Sociometry is an is an adjunct of psychodrama. So it in fact I'm certified as a psychodramatist, sociometrist, and group psychotherapist. Those are the three things that you are certified in. So um Donna Little was my primary trainer. And then when I went for my training as a uh for as a trainer, then I was using Ann Hale as my primary trainer for that part of it. Um that took an additional four years, and that can't be done in less than four years, no matter who you are. One of the reasons it took me eight years to become certified as a practitioner, the first certification, is because, in addition to the hard skills that I already mentioned, it also requires that you take five graduate level psychology classes. So you have to determine where you can take those and then submit your plan to the board. And if they approve it, you can take those five classes. Doing all of that and juggling it along with a very busy law practice was quite a feat. And that's part of the reason why it took 10 years. It was hard to coordinate everything, but there's a lot of things to do in order to actually obtain that certification.

SPEAKER_01 13:23

Well, that is a commitment. So are you practicing now full-time as a lawyer and then doing some psychotherapy on the side?

SPEAKER_02 13:33

Well, I the answer is yes, that's exactly what I'm doing. But I use psychodrama or the psychodramatic skill set in virtually everything that I do. Certainly I use it when I'm interacting with clients. And when I say clients, I'm referring to criminal defense clients. I use it for training purposes in my law firm. Everybody in my firm is trained in psychodrama. We're in the process that, well, we just hired a new associate. She's going to start after the um summer, I guess you would say the fall holiday after Labor Day. Um, she just took the bar and uh she'll be getting some training. We're offering through the Michigan Association of OWI lawyers an intro to psychodrama one-day session, my wife and I. And then the next day we'll be taking that material and applying it to an OWI case. So that's going to be a two-day seminar that we're doing here in Michigan. And my newest associate, um, Havana Crusia will be attending that. That'll be one of the first seminars I think that she attends. But that kind of gives you an idea of the importance that we place on it. Um, in addition to that, my wife and I do uh also run therapy-based psychodrama workshops on a periodic basis throughout the year. And as I indicated, I also do the bi-weekly therapy group session with her.

SPEAKER_01 14:55

So, how do you apply the psychodrama to your criminal defense practice? It's one thing to help our clients uh prepare for testifying, but so many of them don't. So, uh, how do you use the psychodrama for the clients who will testify or might testify and those who are probably not going to testify?

SPEAKER_02 15:15

I think using the psychodrama, and I know, John, you're familiar with this very much, and maybe your listeners are as well, those who have listened to the prior uh podcast on this topic, but um in the trilogy college, they call it the listening exercise. The listening exercise is as you know, is where you're listening closely to somebody tell a story, and then you make statements in first-person present tense to help them um understand at a deeper level the story that they're telling. In psychodrama, that that technique or that method is called doubling. And doubling is really um the psychodramatist making a therapeutic um hypothesis or stating a therapeutic hypothesis. Um, and when you do that, you're attempting to state the inner thought life or the inner emotional life of the person that you're listening to to help them better understand the emotions that they're feeling, the story that they're telling. So when I'm listening to a client tell their story about what happened, um, it's natural for me to make those kinds of statements. I don't think of it as doubling. It's just, like I said, it just sort of comes natural to me. The other day I was getting off the elevator with a client of mine, and we were talking about his case, and I explained to him, having talked to him so many times over so many different opportunities that during the case, the time that his case was uh was pending, um, what it must feel like to be him. And when I said that, I was thinking about literally reversing roles with him and thinking, if I was this client, what would I be thinking and feeling at this moment to help me really better understand what his story was? And when I said that to him, he he just said, Patrick, I couldn't have said that better myself. That's exactly how I feel. And so why is that important? Well, it's important because I'm developing an important connection with the client, but more than that, it's helping me understand how I'm going to present this case in front of the decision maker, the prosecutor, or the judge. Now I have a better understanding of what it was like for him. So I can tell a more compelling story, I create a more compelling narrative. That's just one example, but that's sort of at the very beginning. Um, as far as litigation, I can talk about how I would use it more specifically in litigation and in trial preparation and trial practice as well. But without even talking about those, I can state that I use it for all of those things because, as you know, it can help us be better at what we do. I guess that's the easiest, simplest way to say it.

SPEAKER_01 18:06

Well, yeah, that I mean that's right. It helps us develop ourselves. And um, and and certainly I do agree very much, even if the client's not gonna testify, it can help very much. And of course, we never know if the client's gonna testify. I mean, uh we we we need to have their testimony prepared in case they give us a humdinger during trial and say, I'm gonna testify no matter how much you advise them. No, assert your right to remain silent. And your silence is not held against you.

SPEAKER_02 18:33

That's very true. And and in our state, it's important uh that the court determine that it's the client's decision, not the attorney's decision. So what I typically do after the prosecutor has rest, has rested, is I'll ask and have been taken out. I'll ask the judge, I'll ask the judge to take the jury out of the room. Um, and of course, the judge kind of knows what's going on. Either I'm gonna make a directed verdict motion or something like that. So the jury will be taken out of the room, and then I'll I'll indicate to the judge, may I have a dear my client? And then I will ask the client a series of questions to have the client make the the statement affirmatively to the judge that it's their decision not to testify. It's not my decision. They're basing it on my advice, but it's their decision alone. Um, and as you said, you never really know until it happens whether or not they're gonna take the stand and testify. Something can happen in trial to make that decision that you thought you made previously uh different. You might decide yourself, you know what, based on what I just heard, you're taking the stand. Obviously, it's always their decision. They can say no, thank you. Right. But you can say, here's why I think you should take the stand, and then you're at least you've prepared them. And yes, absolutely, psychodrama is essential in helping prepare them to be able to meaningfully testify on the stand. And it's a lot harder than any of us imagine it'll be.

SPEAKER_01 20:02

Now, have you already told me what my audience uh maybe didn't hear with my previous two guests who went to the trial or as college and also been very active in with the NCDD? Or do you have more uh to add than that?

SPEAKER_02 20:18

Well, uh I I don't know for certain whether I've covered all of it or not, but let me let me kind of give you an idea of at least the way that I might look at that distinction as to what they may do and what I may do in the in the approach that I take. And I'll use the trial lawyer college here in Michigan as an example. Um, there are lawyers at the trial college that I think can teach things like cross-examination, for example, can teach that skill better than I can. Um, I don't profess to be the best teacher of cross-examination, but what I have that they don't have is the psychodrama training. So, what I'm able to do when I'm working with someone else in a cross-examination workshop, for example, is to um use my psychodramatic skills at the most opportune time to help the lawyer who's attempting to learn cross-examination think about it in a di in a different way. So, for example, and I know that the lawyers that you've spoken with would probably do this, um, but they would and I would possibly um interrupt what's happening. The cross-examination maybe is not going the way that I that I think this lawyer is capable of of being at their best. So I might stop it and and depending on what I'm seeing, I might offer them an opportunity to explore psychodramatically what's happening. And there's all different ways that we can do that. So the here here's here's how I would I would think of it. And I think of every Time that I'm working with in a lawyer, just like this is I was work as if I was working with a therapeutic client. So the first thing is you know, in a psychodrama, if you're actually going to be the protagonist, that's the person whose story is being told, if you're going to do a psychodrama, then it often starts with what's called a walk and talk, or it starts with an interview of the director. And the director wants to get an idea of exactly what it is that you want to work on, right? Well, I want to work on this time that I was trying to say something to my daughter, or I was, I felt hurt by something my dad said, and I want to have a talk with them. Maybe that's what I mean who knows what it would be, but maybe that's what it would be. And I so of course I need to establish a contract with you. Like, what is it that you want to accomplish to establish? What is your goal in this drama? And you might say, Well, I want to hear my daughter, I want to hear my father apologize to me. They never apologize to me. Okay, well, that's our goal. So now I have an idea of exactly what it is that you want to accomplish in the psychodrama. If I'm working with a lawyer and I'm doing cross-examination, I would do exactly the same thing. But I would start with maybe putting them in the mirror position. So I might bring in a student and ask them to, as best as they can, act just like they saw the lawyer that I'm working with act and do the cross-examination. And they'll not mimic because it sounds like they're being uh pejorative, but they will reflect back in the best of their ability what they just observed the lawyer doing. And I'll have the lawyer look at that. Now they're in what's called the mirror position, they're watching themselves in the role of cross-examiner in the courtroom. And they'll say, Well, what I'm seeing here is X, Y, or Z. I don't really like the way this is going because I don't think I'm coming across likable, or I'm coming across as too aggressive, or the I can see that the jury's not whatever it might be, right? So I'll say to them, Well, what do you want to change? Well, I would want to change this so that I can become more connected with the jury. Right now I think I'm alienating them. Okay, so now I've got a contract with them, right? So I might then there's so many different ways that this could go, and it's in the moment because the the director, which is the role that I would be in in the psychodrama, has to be the most spontaneous person in the room. So I have to observe what's happening and spontaneously help the lawyer determine how to best accomplish their goal, right? So without getting into the minutiae of how this might go hypothetically, what I'm trying to express here is that the level of training and experience that I have in psychodrama and using it as a therapeutic tool outside the courtroom is very unique among lawyers. So that's the thing that differs between me and really any other lawyer that I know of, is that I actually am acting as a therapist using psychodrama, which means that I can use that skill when I'm working with lawyers, teaching them trial skills. So when you're in the trial lawyer college, there's always, well, not always, but there's frequently a psychodramatist in the room, and they will they will help maybe facilitate what's happening. But they're not gonna, they don't have the trial skills, they don't have the lawyer skills.

SPEAKER_01 25:23

Right.

SPEAKER_02 25:39

So that's something that is, I think, unique and different than other guests that you've had.

SPEAKER_01 25:44

Okay, now let's take a real world example here. Um, I asked you before we got on about um if in Michigan there's a requirement for doing breath testing for the uh breath test operator to inspect the person's mouth, the inside of the mouth, to see if there are any foreign substances there, like tobacco, also known as dip, food, doing um liquid. Because you don't want to be uh tested for mouth alcohol but deep lung alcohol. And I think you told me there's not a requirement to inspect the inside of the mouth. Is that true?

SPEAKER_02 26:21

Correct. Well, yes and no. I mean, there's no specific enumerated rule that says that the operator must inspect, but they do have to make a determination, so it's a little bit different.

SPEAKER_01 26:33

Okay. So when you have the video of what's going on on the street or at the uh breath testing room, do you sometimes see the uh resting police officer or the breath test operator actually inspecting the mouth? Yes. Okay, and then do you have an argument to make about giving uh less weight to the breath test results if there is not an inspection of the mouth?

SPEAKER_02 26:58

Yes, we do. Although in Michigan, uh and again, I know that this is common throughout the United States, more so or less so, depending on what state you're in. But in Michigan, I will tell you that it is extraordinarily difficult to get a breath test suppressed on that basis. Generally, the judge would instead indicate after hearing a motion and listening to testimony, and you've heard this how many times from a judge, Mr. Barone, that goes to weight, not admissibility. Exactly. I gotta argue this to the jury. So can I argue it to the jury? Absolutely. Now, I think this is where you're going with this. Correct me if I'm wrong. Now the question becomes how can I most effectively convey that to the jury? And how can more specifically, how could I use a psychodramatic tool to do that? Yes. Okay. Well, there are again creativity comes into play here because there are a multitude of ways that that could be done. One way that you've heard probably other guests speak of would be to um reverse roles with the breath test device and then create a could be a closing argument, it could be part of a statement at some point in front of the jury, maybe even part of an opening statement, where you're speaking in first person present tense in the role of the breath test device.

SPEAKER_01 28:34

Yes.

SPEAKER_02 28:36

Okay. Now, why would you do that? Well, first of all, it creates interest because the jury is going to be thinking, what's this about? This is interesting. I didn't expect this to happen in this trial. What's this what's this lawyer doing? So that curiosity creates interest, which will then increase their attention, which is critical, right? Keep their attention, especially in today's world of very short attention spans. The second thing that it allows you to do is to introduce the importance of the lack of the determination that something's in the mouth by speaking in first person, present tense as the instrument, because the instrument knows about knows more about itself than anybody. So we can think about oh well, um, the fact that the operator didn't do this means that the test that I produce might be unreliable. And I'm very proud of the results that I produce. And I want to make sure that if I produce a result, that this jury can believe that result. And I'm worried that if this officer doesn't follow his training, that my that that my that that my credibility and my reputation is actually going to be on the line because this officer made a mistake. That that's one way that it could be done, right? Right now, if I'm a prosecutor, I might object. Do you want me to talk about why it's not what what my response would be? I said you said listen to this. Well, my response would be, and this is important, right? As lawyers, we need to be able to, especially if it's an opening statement, we have to be able to articulate how the evidence will actually support the statements that we're making. We can't testify an opening statement, we can't say things that will not be supported by the testimony. So what I'm basically um what I'm basically stating is that I will have an expert who will be able to support the statements that I'm making, and or that I will be cross-examining their experts to produce this testimony in support of whatever it is that I'm saying. That's gonna satisfy most judges. Now, for closing argument, the rule is different. I have to make my closing argument based on the evidence that's been received, but I have a lot more freedom and leeway to go outside that box. And I'm gonna use every every avenue to do that. So if I'm speaking in closing argument, I have much more liberty to be extemporaneous and to expand on what the record actually shows in speaking as the breath test operator in first-person present tense. So that's one example.

SPEAKER_01 31:29

Right. Okay, so have you just said everything about the way you respond to when prosecutors object to uh first person opening opening and closing?

SPEAKER_02 31:39

That has been sufficient for me in the past. The smile on your face suggests that there's other ways to approach it.

SPEAKER_01 31:46

Well, no, the the the the smile on my face, the way I smile at judges when they offer the roadblock. And I remember what Steve Rentz said, which was uh, you know, a challenging judge is like a boulder in the middle of the road. You can either drive around the boulder or get yourself a hernia trying to move it. And uh then when we accept the judges they are, then they're more likely to change. Maybe they'll change today, maybe in uh a few lifetimes in the future.

SPEAKER_02 32:15

Yeah, that's you know, that's it's a very and we're gonna I'm gonna digress here a little bit, but I think this is an important thing to talk about, particularly for younger lawyers who maybe have not thought about this in this way yet in their careers. But um, you know, uh, because you've been practicing at least as long as I have, and I've been doing this for three and a half decades, um the way that I interact with judges and the way that judges, more importantly, interact with me is substantially different now than it was when I was a young new lawyer. Uh, that in and of itself is interesting, but part of the reason that that's true is because I have worked for three and a half decades on developing a reputation, and part of that reputation involves me. Um I guess you could say um not making frivolous arguments, being careful about the arguments that I make in court so that they know I'm not gonna waste their time. And also them seeing what I'm doing in the thought leadership community, and them actually being aware of my expertise in such a way that they're going to be less likely to challenge me. So the message for young lawyers, because and this still happens, and it drives me nuts, as I'm sure it does you too, but um certainly happened when I was a young lawyer. If there's a question that the judge needs an answer to, 99 times out of 100, the prosecutor looks at the prosecutor for that answer.

SPEAKER_01 33:51

And I'm like, crazy.

SPEAKER_02 33:53

No, judge, there's two lawyers in this courtroom, you know, why are you deferring to this person? Well, um, that happens less and less. And the way that you make it happen as a lawyer is by working really hard on your craft and then making it known that you have developed your skills by um becoming a thought leader in your community. And that accomplishes a variety of things. It's great for marketing, but it's also great for your reputation, and most of all, it's great for your clients because you're able to uh achieve better results for them simply because the judges are more willing to work with you in the courtroom rather than be that bolder that you have to get around. Not that that's not going to happen. There's some judges that no matter what you do, uh they're they're gonna be obstinate because they're the type of judge that sees themselves still as a prosecutor, and their role there is to help the prosecutor get a conviction, and that means being uh uh, you know, a um uh a roadblock for you. But uh I think I've I've noticed less and less that that happens now in my career, and I think that's a result of a lot of hard work up to this point, and it's the type of work that any lawyer can do. And I commend any lawyer listening to do that work because it's gonna pay dividends for them.

SPEAKER_01 35:12

Absolutely. Now you say you've dealt with assault involving weapons. Uh, have you given yourself a chance to fire a lot of them yourself uh so you can learn about them that way?

SPEAKER_02 35:25

Yes, that I have. And something that I'm sure you don't know about me because I don't think I've said that much about it in the past. Um, it was actually my my I guess if I said my love for it would sound not quite right, but it's really my love for the Second Amendment that led to me eventually changing my career path from medicine to law because I originally come from a family of doctors, and I originally had intended to be a surgeon. So I have a medical uh degree. My undergraduate is a Bachelor of Science degree, it was a pre-med degree, and that had been my my intention. But um later on in my coursework in undergrad, I became very interested in matters of politics, and I don't mean politics like I wanted to run for office as much as I'm learning more about um how politics works, and in my opinion, sometimes doesn't work so well in our country. And um I really started to read the Constitution and see what was there and try to understand what the Second Amendment really meant, why it was there. And I I became a strong believer in the importance of the Second Amendment. I mean, it's the Second Amendment for a reason. Uh it the First Amendment, I suppose if you want to try to say one is more important than the other, uh, certainly free speech is essential to a free a free democracy. But, you know, uh I think the Second Amendment is is equally important. And it was that love of the Second Amendment that uh actually led to me um changing career paths and deciding to become uh a constitutional warrior, which is what we do as criminal defense attorneys.

SPEAKER_01 37:10

Well, that means you've uh fired guns a lot more than I have. I did I I shot single shot, uh what do they call those things? I forget what with the size of the, but but just single shot rifles in summer camp. And then about two years ago, two or three years ago, um my legal assistant's um uh mom's husband had a huge array of firearms, and he he invited me and my son to go out shooting. And it was two things, you know, that that was great to to get an experience doing that, but also underline how scary these uh these weapons are when trained in the wrong direction. And I'm a strong advocate of the Second Amendment as well, both on criminal defense and civil liberties grounds. And also if we water down the second amendment, we're watering down the rest of the amendments anyway.

SPEAKER_02 38:01

Well, I agree with that. And I have in Michigan we call a concealed permit uh CPL. I have a concealed permit. Um, and in order to get a concealed permit in Michigan, you have to take classes and get a license, so to speak. Uh, and I've I've fired many, many firearms, many, many rounds and many firearms, but I I'm a terrible shot. And I recognize and respect uh what it is to actually carry a firearm. So even though I uh I could, I'm certainly licensed to, I almost never carry because I I respect what I don't know. And I think that most people, I probably shouldn't paint with too broad of a brush. Um many people who carry weapons um probably are placing themselves in more danger than they would if they didn't have the weapon in their possession, frankly. Um, but you know, that's a personal choice. And I'm not advocating in favor of any limitations on that. I'm simply stating my belief and my respect for firearms as you've already expressed, because um certainly in the wrong hands, they can be very dangerous. And, you know, I'm I'm willing to admit that I probably am the wrong hands to be carrying a firearm.

SPEAKER_01 39:18

Well, what are one or two of the successes you've had with firearms defense, including uh the extent to which your own knowledge and experience with uh using firearms has helped you out with that?

SPEAKER_02 39:30

Um well, simply, you know, simply, as you've said already, handling firearms, knowing how they operate, knowing the limitations, um, knowing the benefits and advantages, that all helps you understand the case material better. And it certainly helps me understand my clients who might find themselves in that predicament better. Uh, you know, those those who are on either side of the debate being very much in favor of concealed carry and the right to own and and uh there being no limitations, and those who believe that uh citizens should not be able to own firearms at all, whichever side you're on, those people um feel very strongly about that opinion. And there's good reason to feel strongly on either side of the debate, frankly. And the people who I'm typically representing are usually the ones that are on the side of freedom as far as the rights to be able to possess and use firearms and to carry them. Um, and that's a certain mindset, and it's it's important to be able to understand that mindset to be able to fully represent someone who's in that position. And I recently came across this is completely unrelated, and yet I think it's very much related. I recently came across a quote, and this relates to um, believe it or not, Eastern spirituality. And it the quote r refers to um thinking metaphorically about other people and them walking the labyrinth of their life. And when you are thinking about that other person and wanting to judge them for whatever their decision or predicament might be, to just remind yourself that if you were to walk the same labyrinth of their life and have every challenge and every trauma and every decision that they've had at every point and every turn of that labyrinth, chances are you would come to the same place as they have come. And it's hard for us to actually understand that, but when you do understand it, it helps you realize that it serves no purpose to be judgmental over what your client may have done, whether it be a driving or a sex crime or uh or a um firearms violation where maybe an injury or death even has occurred. Uh, it unless you've actually walked in their shoes, it's impossible to know what that moment was like. And that's where psychodrama comes in and is extremely valuable because it helps you actually walk in those shoes. Um, but you know, another way to say it is there's not a sin known to man that I'm not capable of committing myself. And I honestly believe that that to be true. Exactly. Thankfully, I have the discipline and I have the wherewithal uh to not to not commit, hopefully, most of them, but you know, nevertheless, uh certainly we're all capable of it. And believing that I think is is part of being enlightened and really being able to be effective, an effective advocate.

SPEAKER_01 42:47

Can you give an example or two of a turning point that you had with a judge who seemed like he was just going to continue to be a prosecutor on robes the whole time, or maybe with jury selection where you felt like you were were had landed in a planet where everyone disliked someone who had eyebrows that looked like yours, or or or anything else in the courtroom?

SPEAKER_02 43:13

Um well, the first thing that comes to mind, I'll just I'll just give this to you. And this is where I guess having a a therapist uh psychologist slash psychodramatist wife comes into play. But I I um there was a judge that I was having a lot of trouble with um at every turn. And this is a judge who is very staunchly anti-drunk driving. And um I felt very much like when I was in her courtroom, um like like um, well, I guess to put it sort of almost euphemistically, that she was not willing to allow me to be an effective advocate in her courtroom. So I started to really. Be troubled by that because I had a lot of cases in her courtroom and I couldn't avoid this judge. And I needed to be able to get good responses for good results from my client. So I started to explore that first by talking to my wife about it. And part of what I had been working on in psychodrama, you talked about it's important to sort of know yourself and work on yourself. Certainly that's something that Jerry Spence talked about. He referred to it as working on the horse, not the saddle. But, you know, the idea is to recognize what, to put it in common terminology, what your triggers are, like what is causing you to respond or behave in a particular way. And I came to learn, and it shouldn't have been as difficult as it was, but I came to learn that I have some big issues with authority. And the fact that I have had issues with authority meant that I was not being an effective advocate for my client. It would cause me, for example, to get angry when the police would do something that I viewed as being in violation of their training or in violation of my client's rights. I would get angry with the officer. And there's times for righteous indignation and times for anger. But as you know, if you're angry with the officer and the jury's not understanding why you're angry, you're going to lose that case. You're going to lose the jury and then you're going to lose the case. Well, the same really is true with the judge. So I had to explore first like what was my trigger with this judge. And that was my issue with uh with authority and with anger. But it went a little bit deeper with that. So I actually did a psychodrama with my wife directing it. I did this in a psychodramatic therapy group. And I had enrolled people as different parts, you know, prosecutor. I had enrolled someone to be this judge. And then I reversed roles with the judge. And I was, when I was in the role of that judge, I came to some very interesting um conclusions, interpretations of why she was responding the way that she was with me. And once I reached that level of understanding, it caused me to be able to walk into her courtroom and almost be a different person in front of her. And since that time, I have worked hard on um, I guess you could almost say repairing our relationship. And now I feel very confident when I'm in her courtroom. And I feel like uh I'm respected and listened to in a way that I never had been before. And it's because I did the work first to understand myself and secondly to understand her, that I was able to reach that that level of advocacy, really, from for myself and as well as for my clients.

SPEAKER_01 46:47

So, what shifted with the judge when you were doing all this change?

SPEAKER_02 46:52

Um, I could sense that I suppose, you know, the way the way to explain it in simplistic terms would be if someone comes at you in an aggressive posture, it's almost certain that you're going to respond to them at an equal or greater level, right? So if if I was if I'm walking into that courtroom and I have a chip on my shoulder and I'm not even necessarily aware of it, that can be observed and and interpreted by people and maybe they're not even aware that it's happening. And they may not be. They probably aren't, but it's there, it's there, it's there in the room. So that has to be taken out of the room so that it no longer is impairing the connection that could otherwise take place. So in psychodrama psychodrama, maybe you've experienced this, but one of the things that we do in psychodrama is concretize things. So we might concretize that tension or concretize that um that feeling, that thing that I'm calling issue with authority. And what I mean by that is I will um I will enroll something to be that thing. So I can enroll a person to be the uh the issue with authority, or I can enroll an object to be the issue of authority, and then I can actually reverse roles with it and see what message it might have for me, but I can also literally remove it from the room. And it sounds probably corny to someone who's never done this. I'm sure it doesn't to you, but to someone who's never done it, so it sounds like hocus pocus or some kind of weird thing. But I'm just telling you that it creates a different way of looking at it or feeling it in your body that is now outside the courtroom, and now you can interact without it present. And just practicing that in a safe place, like in a psychodrama with trained people, uh, can assist you in experiencing what that's like. And then you can actually, it's like role training. You're taking on a new role. That new role is someone who doesn't have an issue with authority, right? So now you can start to inhabit that role and behave that way. Other people can observe it and can respond accordingly, whether they're aware of it or not. It's a long way of answering your question, but it's it's the answer that I think is is most elucidating.

SPEAKER_01 49:21

Well, it's helpful. I'm wondering if you're gonna give an example or two about this particular judge. I mean, what I can say is I know that when I clear the gunk out of myself and hostility towards someone, then that's uh that removes the barrier from them being uh reaching heights that that are helpful to me, for instance. Uh are you able to you want to give an example of this judge or just gonna remain mom because maybe you're gonna see her again?

SPEAKER_02 49:46

Well, there's no doubt about that. So I don't want to give a specific example, but I I can tell you for I can tell you more specifically, um, I I guess more specifically, although not with any great degree of specificity, that I have been able to accomplish some remarkable results in this judge's courtroom, uh, particularly as it relates to issues of sentencing, which is um something she's known as being, you know, the so-called proverbial hanging judge on these cases. And I've been able to accomplish some remarkable results. And I think it comes from a combination of the things that we've talked about. Um, and it's partly knowing the judge, right? Knowing exactly how to position the sentencing mitigation in a way that's gonna be received well by the judge in an authentic way. Um, but certainly um it's it's partly based on our relationship as well, and the way that that has been, I think, repaired over time.

SPEAKER_01 50:40

Well, once again, I've got a guest who I'd love to talk to for hours and hours more. And I know we're gonna get a chance to meet sometime, but we are about a minute away from closing time. I can go over a minute or two more, but I'd like you to tell everyone what is your URL? Do you hire yourself out as an as a consultant? And what would you like to tell everybody that you haven't already said or maybe want to repeat?

SPEAKER_02 51:06

The URL for my law firm is barone defensefirm.com. Barone spelled, well, you probably have it on your show notes, be like blue aron e barone defensefirm.com. The psychodrama URL is Michigan Psychodrama Center.com. You can find a link there to our October seminar in Grand Rapids, Michigan, that I spoke of earlier on intro to psychodrama and the OWI trial skills. Um, so those are our two resources. One thing we haven't talked about is AI. I have uh become a thought leader on AI in law and particularly criminal law, and I have a Substack which I would like to mention. That's uh Patrick Patrick Barone.substack.com, and the name of it is AI on trial. And I publish approximately weekly on everything that's happening in AI and how to use it in your law practice. As far as my closing remarks, my closing remarks to you are thank you for offering me this opportunity to speak with you and and to speak with your audience. Uh, those who are listening who are lawyers, particularly young lawyers, I hope that you will take to heart what I've said, which is, you know, in order to really be successful at the level that I know you want to be successful in this very difficult business that we're in of defense law, criminal defense law, it's important to learn the skills. Join things like the National Association for Criminal Defense Attorneys, the National College for DUI Defense, the Trial Lawyer College, get the training, and then also think about getting some psychodrama training because it's important to know what your limitations are and to work on those and to be vulnerable enough to be authentic in the courtroom and bring all of that into the courtroom in a way that's actually going to serve your client rather than actually become a disservice to your client.

SPEAKER_01 53:06

Thank you so much, Patrick. Everybody, you've heard from Patrick Barone over there in Birmingham, Michigan. His website is barone defensefirm.com. Check him out further. Sign up for his AI Substack or wherever that is on the internet. This is John Katz, I'm a criminal defense and DUI defense lawyer here in Fairfax, Northern Virginia.

SPEAKER_00 53:28

This is Beat the Prosecution because they're Thank you for listening to this latest episode from Beat the Prosecution. This is a regular podcast giving people a leg up for their criminal defense. Nothing on any of our media sources, such as our podcast or website, is legal advice. John Katz only provides legal advice to current clients or for individuals who have arranged a consultation. We welcome you to contact us via email at info at beatheprosecution.com or by calling our office at 703 383 1100. Or texting us at 571 406 7268.