What kind of person would molester a child.What kind of person would defend him.Iv'e always heard,birds of a featfer flock together.
2006-07-31 12:59:43 · 25 answers · asked by pops 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I belive the lawyer knows if his client is guitly.If that lawyer knows he is guilty and still tries to win the case.,well,if the shoe fits wear it.
2006-07-31 13:22:27 · update #1
If the lawyer knows he is guilty he is just as much scum.He is trying to put that scum back on the street to commit more crimes on children.If the accused is actuaaly innocent then niether one is scum.A few people above me said you are innocent until proven guilty well they got it backwards you are guilty untill proven innocent in any case the corrupt judicial system comes up with against you.everyone has the right to a lawyer It's the lawyers decision to take the case or not.If he knows the guy is guilty HE IS A LOW DOWN PIECE OF SH*T,for taken the case.And for you idiots that say the public defender has no choice your right he has to take the case but if he knows the molester is guilty he ain't got to put much effort into trying to get him off.
2006-07-31 14:04:56 · answer #1 · answered by Desperado 5 · 7⤊ 2⤋
What if the lawyer is a Public Defender? That would mean HE HAS NO CHOICE. Oh but he is sticking with that Child Molester right. Also you don't molester a child you MOLEST them. The ER is added because you are qualifying the term to the person committing the action. Anyway though a lawyer's job is to defend the person. If they molest children then yeah they are just as bad of scum. If they don't hten they are simply lawyers doing their jobs. Oh and if you hang around geniuses that doesn't make you a genius so birds of a feather don't always stick togther as to that saying. They also associate with other people. Oh and last but not least, a lawyer isn't becoming FRIENDS with the Child Molester. If I found out your BOSS was a child molester would that mean YOU are scum. Come on you have worked for that guy right. You stuck with him. You must be a child molester.
2006-07-31 13:17:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You phrased the question wrong. If a lawyer defends a person accused of being a child molester ...
So, you are not a child molester. Is the attorney who represents you scum? Obviously not, he is trying to protect your rights, to get you a fair trial, where truth will prevail ... ooops
You get convicted.
Is the lawyer who tries to get you a new trial, because of the injustice that occurred the first time around? No, he is simply trying to get justice done!
So, blame the lawyers if you want. Blame those who want to make sure that EVERYONE's rights are protected, so that the innocent are not wrongly convicted. Blame the defense lawyer, when the prosecution can't prove its case (instead of the prosecutor for being unprepared). Blame the defense lawyer, when the police violate a defendant's rights, and evidence is thrown out (far be it to blame the police, who know the rules as well as the lawyers).
But in the end, when it is YOUR rights that are to be protected, who will you call?
2006-07-31 13:08:03 · answer #3 · answered by robert_dod 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So, if you were accused of child molestation and everybody believed you did it, you would agree that no lawyer should represent you either. Doesn't matter whether you did it or not, because either everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty, or they're not. So, by just accusing you of child molestation, you think you should lose your right to counsel. Right?
That's the problem with your argument. The entire criminal justice system only works if there is competent representation on both sides. And we still live in a country (for the moment) where most people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Then there's that pesky constitutional requirement in the 6th Amendment that anyone accused by the government has a right to counsel. I suppose you want to amend the constitution to eliminate that requirement? Or just have the government start ignoring the constitution when they think someone might be guilty.
What kind of person would represent any criminal? One who is committed to maintaining the integrity of the legal system, and seeing that the government doesn't just start locking people up based on pure accusations without any proof.
Oh, I forgot, our government's already doing that. Never mind.
2006-07-31 13:11:34 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there is substantial evidence that the person molested a child then their attorney is just as much a monster as the molester. Or else how could they live with them selves knowing that they sent a child molester back out on the streets to do it again.
2006-07-31 13:07:08 · answer #5 · answered by cat and mouse 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, that doesn't make him a scum too because he was just defending a man, that's his job. It's not like he molested the child.
I mean do you blame the architect for designing a house for the molester?
2006-07-31 13:07:34 · answer #6 · answered by Kazey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What do you call a Million Lawyers tied down to the bottom of the ocean floor drowning to death? A good start. Ofcourse he is scum!
2006-07-31 13:04:44 · answer #7 · answered by a_rajalonghorn 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i became no longer taught to shelter myself and ended up being bullied as a effect so won't be able to advise that as a direction of action. i became raised to understand individuals and became surprised as quickly as I got here upon in college that some human beings curiously advance their little ones to be violent little shits ! besides the undeniable fact that this regrettably a fact of life and you're top to be thinking how terrific to prepare your new child against it. From my attitude, given what surpassed off to me, i visit be telling my toddlers to stand as much as the bullies yet to realize this in a non violent way, in any different case they could be not extra clever than the guy doing the bullying. fairly how they ought to pass approximately this is something I even have not labored out yet. yet i think that basically status as much as somebody verbally would often be adequate. or in keeping with possibility i'm basically naive.
2016-11-03 10:10:42 · answer #8 · answered by overbay 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
c'mon people! what kind of spewed cr@p is that?!?! are you seriously attacking the legal profession?
everyone citizen has the right to legal representation. are you saying that if you were accused of a crime, you don't need an attorney?
don't you know that innocent people can also be charged with crimes and it is up to their attorney to help them prove their innocence?
spend a little time here folks BEFORE you just vomit out cheap answers...
2006-07-31 13:09:22 · answer #9 · answered by le_longgunr 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The lawyer is just doing his job.
The real culprit is the law...or lack thereof of statutes that better deal with this awful act.
2006-07-31 13:06:39 · answer #10 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋