Trial of the Century (Continued) : What’s truly needed is a higher level of lawyerly decorum

Is it too much to ask of attorneys that they at all times conduct themselves with a professional measure of decorum?

The question arises because of the circus over at the county Criminal Courts Building in Downtown Los Angeles that’s being televised to something like 3 zillion viewers across the globe.

Sometimes the proceedings get out of hand. Yes, it’s good television, no question. But is it good for the legal profession and for public respect for the law?

Of course, cynics and lawyer haters will say, “What do you expect?” In fairness, attorneys naturally play hardball in a case with such enormous stakes: the freedom of a citizen accused of a double murder. (And attorneys’ reputations are no small part of the stakes either.)

Most lawyers do behave admirably and professionally, and that is absolutely the image that is required of the legal profession--especially in proceedings as widely watched as the trial of O. J. Simpson.

But, without naming names, it’s fair to say of this sensational trial that the honorable standard of lawyerly behavior has too often been honored in the breach.

Indeed, on Wednesday there was a courtroom exchange so bitter that it prompted the presiding judge to order an attorney for the prosecution and an attorney for the defense to apologize to one another, which they did on Thursday. The apologies were necessary, but the conduct was not. The judge, Lance A. Ito, also issued an order calling on the lawyers to start behaving themselves.

The fact that this is the most widely viewed trial ever is no reason to suspend the rules of civility and decorum. On the contrary, the intense media scrutiny creates an environment in which it is more vital than ever that those rules be observed.

In one sense, more than the defendant is on trial; in the public mind, the legal profession is being judged, too.