Please explain: Given two scenerios in which two people with the same background and history commit the same?

Question

crime. How is it that the person with a lawyer would get a less severe sentence than the one without a lawyer? It follows, that when a rich person can afford a good lawyer, then than person will get a lesser punishment than a poor person with a cheap lawyer.

Answer 1

I agree the system is screwed up , I just don't commit any crimes to make sure I am not a victim

Answer 2

Your question brings up a good point, in theory, but does not accurately depict the issue at hand.

First, in criminal cases, anyone who is actually sentenced to serve time in jail/prison is entitled to a lawyer. So rarely do you deal with someone without a lawyer being given a harsh sentence, unless that person represents himself.

Second, the quality of your lawyer can impact the sentence one receives. Is Tom Meserau a better lawyer than your average public defender? Certainly. And does that create inequity in the justice system? Absolutely. Though I don't know how to fix this problem.

Justice should be individual. No two people or situations are ever exactly alike. And it is unfortunate that indigent defendants do not always have a high quality attorney who is able to explore those differences and achieve the best possible result for the client.

Answer 3

That shouldn't happen, but it does. One might say the fundamental principle of justice is that equals should be treated equally. It just doesn't always happen. The law is a strange and foreign world to most people. Lawyers help them navigate that world. The better the lawyer, the better he navigates. Think of it like this: your lawyer is a ship captain steering you from Point A (indictment) to Point B (sentencing). If there are two identical ships, does the captain make a difference in how you get from A to B? Of course. That's why we should make sure that everyone has access to good lawyers -- that is, access to the best ship captains out there. Nowadays, you can get out of law school with absolutely no experience and get a job for a corporate law firm at $150,000 to $200,000 per year (including bonuses). A public defender or a legal aid attorney (representing poor people in evictions, divorces, etc.) probably makes $35,000 to $50,000 per year, even in the big cities. Is it any wonder so many people, including good people, go to the firms?

You're right; it follows from your (true) premise that a rich person can get off with a lesser punishment than a poor person. But if people always gripe about taxes (for example, to fund the legal aid organizations), how will we fund the poor people's lawyers? Obviously, they're poor, so they won't be able to pay. Now what?

It's an age-old problem.

Answer 4

Because much of the trial is tactical issues -- what evidence to present, how to discredit the prosecution witnesses, how and when to make the correct legal objections to improper testimony, how to get certain evidence admitted or excluded under applicable law.

Just like the better solider wins a battle, or the better athlete wins a sporting competition -- it's not just about being there, it's about knowing what to do when, and what to avoid.

And while a more expensive lawyer is often more experienced, pricey lawyers are not automatically better than cheaper lawyers. One of the best lawyers I know in the San Diego area regularly bills out at about half of what many other attorneys do, and she has more experience and better training. So, money is not always the final factor.

But quality and skill do matter.

Answer 5

Yes the system is a little complex, but lawyers are hired to defend and present a better case. And I am guessing that the other guys lawyer did a pretty good job.