Should a defendent be allowed to defend his own case? Do you think this is a good idea?
2007-01-16 15:11:38 · 15 answers · asked by Nobody Important 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Defendants are allowed to represent themselves but the court will do everything it can to convince the defendant to do otherwise. You have a constitutional right to the best possible defense. If a defendant represents himself, he as a fool for a lawyer.
Zacharias Mousawi (the 19th hijacker of 9/11 defended himself). I'm sure I spelled his name wrong. But I'm not going to take the time to look it up.
The old adage actually is, "A lawyer that represents himself has a fool for a client". It is a reference to the complications that arise between your Fifth Amendment Right not to incriminate yourself, your ability to examine witnesses and evidence, and potential to commit perjury.
I think Zarquawie is probably the typical kind of guy that wants to defend himself. He is a nut job. He was caught because he was enrolled in flying school but told his instructors that he didn't care about taking off or landing. Only flying.
2007-01-16 15:18:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and it's been done more than once. It's not a good idea though, even if the defendant is a lawyer, because he wouldn't be objective enough to be able to present a good case. If he isn't a lawyer then he is really at a disadvantage.
2007-01-16 15:34:35 · answer #2 · answered by Webber 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depending how smart the person is and how much law experience they have, it can be good and less costly to them. In these cases however, a lawyer usually supervises the defendant to make sure they don't totally screw up. But if the defendant is a complete idiot, then I guess that is just one less criminal on the streets. Either way it's a win-win situation.
2007-01-16 15:16:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not, if he/she so wishes it should be allowed. First they should rewrite the laws in English so everyone understand them. Lawyers won't agree with me on this one, they would lose some income, but then again the laws are made by lawyers, for the profit of lawyers, I don't need a lawyer to ask for a postponement and come up with some excuse not to proceed. Another presence in court, another pile of $$ for him. Let the man defend himself, I am sure he has his best interest at heart and it would unclog the court system I bet any money.
2007-01-16 15:22:57 · answer #4 · answered by P.A.M. 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on who the defendant is, what the charges are and what the consequences could be. To defend yourself in a traffic violation is one thing, in a murder trial is anouther. The average person is not capable of defending themself in a court of law effectively. If the defendant is a lawyer, then it might be a good idea, otherwise I woudl say no.
2007-01-16 15:17:21 · answer #5 · answered by daddyspanksalot 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there is the former line that the fellow who defends himself has a fool for a customer (or some thing like that); yet the different fringe of that would want to properly be that someone who doesn't have money to purchase the right type of representation might want to likely do a extra useful job and care extra about his own case than a nil.5-baked, appointed, criminal professional might want to. i imagine human beings should be allowed to characterize themselves, even no matter if it truly is not the wisest ingredient. To the better of my conception, i imagine judges can save an eye fixed of what appears happening and take particular steps if it looks the fellow won't be able to efficiently take care of himself ).
2016-11-24 22:29:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is an old saying that goes "someone who defends himself has a fool for a client". Legally a person can defend themselves. However the intricacies of the law and procedures are such that it would be in his best interest to have a professional.
2007-01-16 15:17:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A person should have the option to exercise that right. However, overall it is a very bad idea because they don't know enough about the law to do so without looking foolish in front of the judge.
2007-01-18 10:08:38 · answer #8 · answered by Ironic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's an old truism that says, "the man who defends himself has a fool for a client". Unless you're talking about traffic court (and sometimes even then), it is unwise to forego legal counsel.
2007-01-16 15:15:33 · answer #9 · answered by Fletch 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes you can do that now. However there is no respect from the bench if you do that. The lawyers and judges have codes and they want you to have an attorney, they think that is the best. So in Rome do as the Roman and this is certainly a branch of that place. Amen
2007-01-16 15:23:01 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋