Tangential MMA News: Ohio Lawyer Representing Fighter Earns Unanimous Decision

*originally published in the Feb '06 issue of Full Contact Fighter*

In this month’s Tangential MMA News, an Ohio defense attorney representing a mixed martial arts fighter opened up a can of whoopass on the prosecution. KOTC (King of the Courtroom) stud Aaron Conrad, a civil and criminal defense attorney from Lancaster, utilized some quick thinking and a Rule of Evidence haymaker that earned him and his client a unanimous decision at the Franklin County Municipal Court.

“My guy was charged with assault,” said Conrad, a Capital University law grad who once represented UFC fighter Wes Sims against the Nevada State Athletic Commission. “It stemmed from when he was leaving a nightclub. Another gentleman began berating my client, and as my client was a known fighter who fought on local shows, the gentleman wanted to make a name for himself by fighting my client.” What happened next? Two punches and it was over. “My client didn’t do too much damage – gave the guy a broken nose and a cracked orbital bone. People there said it was over pretty quick.”

Conrad’s client was charged with assault, and with no plea bargaining offer on the table, it was clear the prosecutor wanted to slug it out before a jury. “With my guy having no priors, what did we really have to lose? The burden was on the State to prove [his guilt].”

And like a UFC light-heavyweight title fight, it was on.

“At trial, [the] prosecutor attempts to question [the] alleged victim about fact that my client is an MMA fighter. I immediately object, ask to approach the bench, and tell the judge that my client’s occupation has no relevance to whether he assaulted the victim. [The] prosecutor becomes very vocal and laughs at my objection, stating that as an MMA fighter my client is more prone to violence and therefore testimony regarding my client’s occupation is definitely relevant. The judge looks at me and says, ‘Well, he has a point? How do you counter that argument, counsel?’ Without hesitation I look back at the judge and say, ‘Your honor, if I bring a client in tomorrow who is charged with reckless operation of a motor vehicle, are you going to agree to dismiss the charges if I show that the client is a NASCAR driver, because obviously as a NASCAR driver, my client could never be a reckless driver? And are you going to extend this logic to a physician who removes feeding tubes from someone in a permanently unconscious state... is that physician more prone to commit murder? I guarantee you the prosecutor can produce no evidence which supports his theory that an MMA fighter is more prone to violence, and therefore evidence that my client is an MMA fighter is not relevant and will serve only to unfairly prejudice the jury.’ The Judge agreed with me and instructed the prosecutor that he was not to ask questions about my client's occupation.”

It took the jury no more than 30 minutes to find the defendant not guilty.

Said Conrad: “There was no doubt in my mind that the judge was going to let the information that my client was a fighter in to evidence. He was leaning towards that. And I’m sure that if I’d have given the prosecution advance notice, he’d have come up with an argument as to why that information was relevant.” But, like an Abu Dhabi grappling champ getting a kickboxer down and hunting for submissions, it was all about strategy. “I assumed the issue might have come up during the trial. What I could have done was attacked it first hand [at the beginning of the proceedings – when motions are made to exclude potentially inappropriate and prejudicial evidence]. But my thoughts were I wasn’t going to give the prosecution advance notice.” Instead, with his objection in mind once the trial was underway, it was all about Conrad approaching the bench with a rock-solid argument that had the prosecutor off-balance and contemplating tapping out.

Ultimately, the judge could have over-ruled Conrad’s objection, and his client’s occupation would have then been ruled as relevant and admissible. “It’s really at the judge’s discretion. That’s what it came down to.” Thankfully, thanks to Conrad’s legal skills and strategy, things played out in his client’s favor.

Next month on Tangential MMA News: an MMA fighter does his taxes!