I represented a very nice young woman who was accused of embezzling money from her employer. She swore she didn't do it, and she seemed quite believable. But then we got records from her bank showing she had deposited money into her checking account in the exact amounts and on the exact dates as the money that had gone missing. She insisted it was just a coincidence, but I recall pointing out to her that whatever alternative explanation she might have would never be believed so we would really have to discuss a plea deal. She got it at that point. I don't remember exactly what we finally agreed to (it was a long time ago); it might have been an Alford plea. Since she had no previous record IIRC she didn't have to go to jail but had to make restitution and was on probation for awhile. The come-to-Jesus talk was difficult but she finally admitted she was guilty.
And there was a friend who had a client in a personal injury case who had a pretty good claim, but she was so personally awful and unpleasant - whiny, entitled, demanding - that a jury would hate her and probably wouldn't award her what her claim was worth, if anything. So my friend came up with a series of posters illustrating what he called "The Doomsday Verdict" - worst case scenario, that she could end up with the jury finding more than 50% negligence on her part, so no recovery, plus she'd owe costs. I still remember those posters. She didn't want to settle but he finally persuaded her.
I don't know if the attorneys for Dolt 45 are having any such conversations yet since most of them seem to be True Believers who represented him in his real estate deals. And I'm guessing Himself would be very hard to persuade. He has to be one of the worst clients ever.
= new reply since forum marked as read
