4.2.12 WC: 191694 the truth. I turn down most celebrity requests, and cases involving celebrity clients form a tiny fraction of my practice over the years, but the few that I do take garner far more publicity than do the many cases involving unknown clients. Is there anything special about famous clients—celebrities? Should “high profile” cases be handled differently from less visible controversies? These are questions I have pondered during my career as a lawyer. Most people see celebrities at a distance — on the screen, stage, television, athletic field, or auditorium. They see them at their best — acting, posing, playing, speaking, being interviewed or participating in charitable causes. I see celebrities close up and at their worst. They come to me when they are in trouble, often deep trouble. Their celebrity is no longer a shield protecting them from the ordinary tribulations that befall most people on a daily basis. When they come to me, their celebrity has been turned into a sword being wielded against them. Celebrities generally live by publicity. When they come to me, they are dying from the publicity and want privacy and anonymity. But they can’t have it, because the very celebrity that brought them fame and fortune now threatens to magnify their problems. I have represented, advised and consulted with dozens of celebrities, ranging from Presidents and Prime Ministers to world famous athletes, actors, writers and financiers. Most have gotten into trouble for one overarching reason: because they were willing to risk what they have limited amounts of in order to obtain more of what they have unlimited amounts of. This may sound self-defeating, if not bizarre—so let me explain. Celebrities share several common characteristics. They have more of something than ordinary people have: great athletes have extraordinary physical skills; good actors have unusual thespian skills; successful politicians have a special charisma; financiers have money and the ability to