Brennan McKenna & Lawlor, Chtd. - Greenbelt, MD

Michael Lawlor initially advised me that I don’t need to worry about my case details and that his team would do everything in their power to vouch for me. On the contrary, it felt like I was doing more research about my case than my own lawyers. It was especially frustrating to constantly hear extreme exaggerations from Lawlor. When I tried to prompt him to explain certain statements in more detail, he would just talk over me and yell at me. I even felt subjected to racial discrimination, and constantly felt that Lawlor was trying to make me feel inferior to him. What made matters worse is when I finally thought that I had the chance to talk during Zoom meetings, it would abruptly end due to the 45-minute limit for free sessions. It was shocking, and fairly disappointing, to learn that our lawyers seemingly neglected to opt for the full Zoom package despite the importance it serves in facilitating communications between counsel and clients during a pandemic. In any case, there were several instances in which I posed thoughtful questions and made requests for items related to the case and they assured me they would follow up on these matters. However, I had to follow-up with them on these matters in order to receive any kind of response. Looking back, there are items for which I am confident that the lawyers willingly chose to not follow through on despite giving me their word that they would do so. In fact, almost every interaction I had with them was filled with dishonesty or withholding of info at my expense. It culminated with them compelling me to plead guilty to a felony for something that I did not do. In our interactions, I constantly felt dehumanized and never really got the opportunity to express how I felt. I also felt that tried to change the narrative whenever I brought up specific details about my case. I don’t know that I’ve ever encountered an individual who dithers and tries to change the subject as much as Nick. I often wondered whether his behavior was a result of jealousy or racially charged biases. In particular, Nick was the one who helped facilitate the release of my passport to the Government, and yet I did not appreciate his reaction when I was later prompted about my citizenship. In addition, there was at least one instance when I felt that the lawyers did not take the time to sufficiently explain a significant decision they made about my case until it was too late to undo it. I even felt like my lawyers were trying to avoid me during this very critical time in my case. It was not until after the relevant deadline passed that they took the time to speak with me. During this call I felt like they were trying to claim that they already provided what they considered satisfactory reasoning for their course of action, but I strongly felt that was not the case. I actually felt like this was a defense mechanism they employed over and over again to make up for a lack of logic or attention to detail in my case. Based on my experience with these lawyers, I am not at all confident that they would win at trial if given the chance. Michael even told me beforehand that “"the jury is going to vote 100% this way,” which I felt like was an effort to dissuade me from going to trial. This type of exaggeration contributed to my belief that this firm would indeed not succeed in trial because they seemed to already have the mindset that they would lose. In particular, I did not feel that Nick exhibited confidence in front of the Court, which is a trait that seems crucial for a criminal defense attorney. He seemed extremely nervous and fidgety and even noted while speaking that he was repeating himself. I also feel that he did not use his ability to “object” where appropriate, which could have affected the outcome of my case. If I were a prosecutor or a judge, I feel that I would prefer to work with lawyers like this because it would make my day easier, and I can’t help wondering if that’s actually the case.