When I heard the man's situation... When you hear about six acts of robbery at 19, you tend to think that you've discovered the biggest criminal in Romania, or at least he could become that over the next years. It was February and he wore wool socks. He had plastic bags over his socks and he wore slippers. Anyone who saw that kid, because he was a kid, would have felt empathy for him. I saw the lawyer as a doctor of destinies.
Because, for that lawyer, that man was simply a document in his briefcase, a fee in his account. In that moment, I felt that the system is ill. You haven't seen what I've seen. My name is Raul. I'm a lawyer, lecturer, married to a lawyer, wed by jurists, with jurist friends. I work, just like you probably do too, 14 to 16 hours in law, so you could probably say that the law represents an important part of my life. And you'd be tempted to think that I've been wanting to do this since birth. Not really. Since I had a background in Computer Science, I started studying law due to a childish ambition, and I only realized in my second year of college that I really like it.
I started thinking about the idea of justice, and I found the lawyer to be its ideal representative. I saw the lawyer as a doctor of destinies. And I would imagine myself as Spectre or as a Harvey Dent, a knight of justice. And that's why I took the bar exam. I really thought that this was the role of the lawyer, until I started to practice this profession. My first experiences, I confess, threw me into a vortex of emotions, experiences, turmoil. Out of all the experiences during my first year of lawyering, one of them stuck with me. And I would like to talk about it today. Imagine this: winter, the first year of lawyering, a court in a Transylvanian village, in Mureș county. Criminal case. I get there. The room is full. I'd never seen so much excitement in that village. I start asking around. What's with all this show? I'm informed that it's an important case. A 19-year-old man who committed six acts of robbery is put on trial. A full courtroom. Plaintiffs, prosecutor, judge, lawyer and other parties interested in the case.
The lawyer in question was a renowned person in the village. Any lawyer thinks he's the best, but he was over the top. When I heard the man's situation, and I think that anyone, even if you know little or lots about the field of law, when you hear about six acts of robbery at 19, you tend to think that you've discovered the biggest criminal of Romania, or at least he could become that over the next years. You haven't seen what I've seen. Seated in the last row... As a reminder, I was an intern. That's where I could find a seat. The boy had ripped jeans. Not by a designer, but by life. It was February and he wore wool socks. He had plastic bags over his socks and he wore slippers. His coat was so dirty that, if you shook it, you could fill two bags with dirt. And his face looked older than the spirit of a hermit. Anyone who saw that kid, because he was a kid, would have felt empathy for him. Unfortunately, he couldn't find any in this case. The case is presented. The lawyer, before the case could be presented, stood up and said: We're going to confess, your Honor.
It's not worth getting ahead of ourselves. The judge is surprised... The prosecutor grins. The case was closed. Although it never happens in a case like this, all the claimants were in the courtroom. It gets to... Before reading the indictment, the parties present in the courtroom are allowed to speak. One of the plaintiffs insists on talking and says the following: Your Honor, I know this child. He's from my village. He doesn't have a mother, his father is a drunk, no one took care of him, they only made fun of him, leave him alone, let him come to me. I'll give him a home, food to eat, I'll take care of him, I'll give him some work to do, and I'll help him build his future. Obviously, the other parties present had no objections. Anyone with a bit of knowledge about the law would've known that this was the perfect moment to ask for a delay, or, at least, for the case to presented last, in order to arrive at a reconciliation. Except for our renowned lawyer, who was too busy looking at his watch, too busy impressing his female coworkers, and wanted to end the case at all cost. Unfortunately, given that there wasn't room for a delay, the act of apprehension was read. Period. A destiny was changed.
Due to the makeup of the case, the only possible result was a prison sentence. Since I'd been in the courtroom, I left shattered. For a long time, I pondered whether I could have intervened to change the outcome of that case. I blamed and accused the lawyer, and I blame him to this day. Why? Because, for that lawyer, that man was simply a document in his briefcase, a fee in his account. For the judges present at that case... Those judges treated that case just like any other.
They lost the man. I think it shouldn't have come to a summoning in court. The reconciliation probably could have occurred during the prosecution. It's not worth getting into the technical details. In that moment, I felt that the system is ill, and I looked to see what symptoms this case exhibited. In my point of view, the symptom was lack of empathy. Analyzing the case, I felt I received the glasses of Howard Stark who gave them to Spider man or the glasses of Free Guy, I started to look through them and to see the law in a slightly different light. I started to see it in 3D. Or at least, I think so. I started to see the purpose of regulation, I saw the means of enforcement, but most importantly I started to see the person in all his struggle, in his cry for help, to be saved by and in society, through law. I'm not challenging the legal judgment pronounced in that case, it was correct. From a judicial point of view. But was this the correct solution for that man, in that context? I strongly believe it wasn't because the education he will receive, and that he probably received from his cellmates, certainly won't be as good as the education he would've received from the good Samaritan who offered to take him in his home and educate him. In conclusion... My years of experience have proven to me that this third dimension of the law suffers a lot. I think we lose ourselves in the first two dimensions.
We're too interested in judging, we're too interested in seeing what is said about regulation, and we have too little interest in placing the human being in the center, man as the creator, and the addressee of the judicial norm, at the heart of the judicial construction. What do I understand by empathy? Precisely these dimensions through which we aim to find the human being. Because, if we concentrate on regulation, we end up over-regulating.
We start to move farther away from the person's condition. And, in that moment, we get farther and farther away, in my opinion, from what the law should represent. And, in that moment, we grow frustrated, and we start accusing someone, obviously. And we accuse professionals, we accuse institutions, we accuse the government, we protest, we go out on the street, we change the government, and we think we've won.
With the new government, we change the judicial architecture, we patch it up the same way we fill gaps in the road, and we think we've won. But, then again, we realize that we haven't solved anything, and we start protesting again, we wish to change constitutions, we hit the building block of the state. That's why... I think that we, as professionals in law, we have the responsibility to retrieve the human being, and place him where he should be: at the heart of judicial construction. How can we do this, in my opinion? We have to discover our authentic principles, our principles and values as a nation. In a different way than the way they are outlined as the basis of the judiciary. And only after we rediscover ourselves, do I think that we can continue building. I, as a lawyer, establish empathy as the foundation of every judicial counseling contract.
As an educator, I try to give these 3D glasses to every student in order to see the most important dimension... As a father, I want my son to be an aid to the boy from the story. Because I firmly believe that, in the end, in a certain context, any one of us can, through one way or the other, be the boy in the story. Thank you!