Ethical Analysis Through Cooper\'s Ethical

ETHICAL ANALYSIS THROUGH COOPER'S

ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING MODEL

Ethical Case History:

David Jones is a married high school superintendent accused of burglarizing the home of a downstairs neighbor, a former friend of Jones with whom Jones had a recent falling out over a loan that ended their friendship. Jones has admitted to you, his lawyer, that he committed the crime because he paid a bill for the neighbor in the amount of $157.50 that the neighbor refused to repay him. Jones was able to enter the neighbor's window undetected because he knew that the neighbor (his former friend) had a regular Monday night poker game out of town. Unbeknownst to Jones, the neighbor stopped playing poker recently and had begun using Monday nights to cheat on his wife, a nurse who worked overnight shifts. They have two children who stay with their aunt on Monday's because that is the day that the neighbor's wife has always allowed him to stay out late playing poker and watching Monday Night Football with his friends who live about one hour away.

In reality, the neighbor actually stopped playing poker on Mondays months ago and actually spends Monday nights in the apartment of another (female) neighbor in his building with whom he has been having a sexual affair. To hide this from his wife, the neighbor gives his brother his car (along with his EZ-Pass) every Monday to use when he (the brother) makes the drive to play poker with their mutual friends. This way, the neighbor always has a convenient excuse for his whereabouts on Mondays, his car is gone at the appropriate time, and his wife (who is a stickler for going over bills and financial statements) believes that the weekly toll charges on his EZ-Pass account reflect her husband's round trip to play poker.

Instead of playing poker, the neighbor drives his car to his brother's house a few blocks away while his wife is still at home preparing for work; then, he walks back to his building through the alleys to avoid being seen by others, and climbs through the window of his paramour after his wife has left for work. Before his wife returns from the hospital, the neighbor returns to his brother's house by foot and then drives his car back home as though he is returning from poker and he smokes a cigar on the way to make sure his clothes smell like they used to when he played poker on Mondays and to get rid of any scent of the girlfriend's perfume. You discovered all this through a witness who knows the neighbor; neither Jones nor the prosecution is aware of that witness or of the neighbor's routine on Mondays.

On the night that Jones climbed through his window to steal the money he was owed, the neighbor returned home and noticed that a roll of quarters on his desk had been opened and that only two were missing. When he checked his drawer, he discovered that exactly eight $20 bills were missing from the $1,000 emergency cash fund that he keeps on hand and that whoever opened the quarters and stole the cash apparently left two single dollars that weren't there before.

He realized that his wife would never have opened the quarters because she keeps a large jar in the kitchen filled with change including dozens of quarters. The neighbor called the police that morning, claiming to have seen Jones climbing out his window the night before after being awakened from his sleep shortly after returning from poker but believed he was dreaming until he discovered that exactly $157.50 had been stolen out of the $1,000 in his drawer. The police interviewed Jones and after he admitted that he had ended his friendship over an unpaid $157 debt, they arrested him believing the neighbor's claim to have seen Jones climb out his window when he thought he was dreaming.

You have determined from interviewing several mutual friends of Jones and the neighbor that Jones was indeed owed the $157, and that Jones did commit the burglary, but you can easily subpoena the EZ-Pass records to prove that Jones' car was an hour out of town at the time he claimed to have been sleeping at home when the burglary occurred. The American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct also allows you to use this witness who provided the information about the neighbor's habits during the discovery process to impeach the credibility of the neighbor as well as to prove that he could not have witnessed Jones at the time in question (Rhode, 2003). If you do so, the neighbor's sexual affair will also be revealed in open court and devastate his family.

Moreover, Jones has authorized you to approach the assistant district attorney and offer to repay the money to the neighbor and plead guilty to a lesser charge and the prosecutor has indicated his willingness to recommend a probated sentence in lieu of incarceration, partly in light of Jones' good record, partly because the neighbor admitted to owing Jones the money that was stolen, and partly because of the prosecutor's general preference of not filling up the local jail with nonviolent offenders in order to have room for more dangerous criminals.