There is a great conflict of interests there. The profession says defend the murderer or rapist with the best defense possible, even if it is a lie and even if you know he did it. Can you pick and choose and choose only those people you really feel in your heart are innocent? Or do you justify it like they do on "The Practice" by saying they keep the system going and without the system, the innocent wouldn't get justice? That's a cop out to me.
2007-08-21 08:04:30 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Sorry "ya dunya" I should have broadened it to any religious person.
2007-08-21 09:07:15 · update #1
But defense lawyers do lie. If you know your client isn't insane and you have him plead insanity because that is his best defense then you are partaking in the lie you encouraged your client to tell. If you are defending someone you know is guilty then your whole defense is a pretense and a lie. Am I wrong about that?
2007-08-21 09:09:51 · update #2
To Mary's Oblate - lol you are absolutely right. I am getting all this from television. I don't know for sure. That's sort of why I'm asking this.
2007-08-21 09:19:36 · update #3
((((((((Sandy))))))))) Love to you sis.
2007-08-21 09:20:07 · update #4
I have never known any defense lawyer who ever asked his client "Did you do it?" There are three lawyers in my family, and two of them are defense lawyers. They are required by the canon of ethics to provide their clients with zealous representation, and they do. They just don't always "win".
2007-08-21 08:14:15 · answer #1 · answered by RIFF 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In an adversarial justice system, it is necessary for both the crown (or government) to have legal representation in their accusation, and for the defendant to be able to defend themselves.
Look beyond the case by case scenario, and instead ask, what would it be if the accusation alone was enough to jail you? People could (and did) ruin one another with false accusations prior to the Magna Carta when this kind of thing could happen.
A defence lawyer performs a valuable service to society.
- They keep the prosecution honest. Knowing they have to face a legal opponent, they mind their Ps and Qs, collect their evidence honestly, and don't lie to the judge, because anything they say can and will be challenged.
- They don't just defend the guilty - most oftentimes, with the guilty they advise them of the rights they retain, and offer the valuable societal service of talking the defendant into taking a plea, saving both the crown and the victims resources and grief.
- They do defend the innocent: if you were innocent and yet accused of a crime, I'd lay out good money in Vegas you'd have no problems with a Christian defense lawyer!
Yes from time to time, being a trial lawyer means having to take a case where the guy you're defending may not be what he's told you he is, and even worse, you may suspect it to be so. But even you could be wrong! Here in Canada, we've had so many cases of "sure thing" defendants who later turned out to be completely innocent, such as David Milgaard.
"Innocent til proven guilty" is not a slogan, and it is not a political statement. It is a fundamental truth and right of our judicial system, and it would mean nothing without those willing to put themselves in service of it.
2007-08-21 08:21:22 · answer #2 · answered by evolver 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is no conflict there at all. Everyone deserves the right to a legal defense, everyone. A defense lawyer defends his client whether the client committed the crime or not. And not all the people accused of crimes actually committed them. There are a number of cases where people have been wrongly convicted and this was proven with DNA evidence. A defense attorney is there to keep this from happening and also keeping the prosecutor in check so that they do not convict people where there is insufficient evidence, even if the person is really guilty.
2007-08-21 08:15:03 · answer #3 · answered by William D 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think having defense lawyers is needed at one time or another by many, many people. The wrong is when a defense lawyer senses his client is guilty of a serious crime and continues to represent them. However, keep in mind that some at one time has done serious crime only to turn their lives around later. I have seen teens do this several times and felt joy they had the second chance. My experience of lawyers that I personally have seen in action or spoke with often tries to get thier client to admit and take a plead. I have also seen ones that gave only a small effort in defending them since they believed the client was guilty. Often in society what was intended for good is abused by the bad. Yet, I would rather have this then none at all. Also keep in mind many attorneys have been fooled by their client into believing they are innocent, these lawyers become a cynic and refuse to take a stand one way or another. They leave it to the court and just do their jobs. Like doctors they see so much pain they learn to turn the other eye to survive the business of working with people.
2007-08-21 08:19:41 · answer #4 · answered by . 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
you are way off base when you say that the legal profession requires defense counsel to defend a murderer or rapist.
In American Jurisprudence, there is a presumption of innocence.
If a client confidentially reveals his guilt to defense counsel, the attorney has a legal obligation to make sure that the accused's legal rights are protected. The US constitution guarantees that the accused is not required to testify against himself. Also, counsel should advise the defendant the consequences of pleading guilty. Finally, defense counsel should see that the sentence is not overly harsh and that mitigating factors are considered in determining the sentence.
Stop getting your ideas from television.
The adversial system is the best way to assure that innocent defendants are not wrongly convicted.
2007-08-21 08:19:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, no defense lawyer in a practice is bound to any case, defense lawyers in the public sector can be forced to defend someone by a judge. A lawyer has the duty of defending their client the best way they no how, they aren't permitted to lie (we know they do but it is unethical) and if they know a client is guilty it is their job to encourage them to plead guilty and then fight for the best sentence in accordance to the law. Jesus will be defending a host of guilty people who do not deserve Heaven, I don't think he judges ethical defense lawyers more so than anyone else.
2007-08-21 08:12:52 · answer #6 · answered by Scott B 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Truly the predicament for sure. I can see how a genuine believer would struggle in this field of work. Where your conscience send up warning flags regarding a certain person or matter that you know deep in your spirit is in error, yet because it is your " job" you may be placed in a position to defend this very matter or person that you know the Lord in you disapproves of.
I do not know how a brother or sister will continue on. If they do and continuely defend those that are wrong then they risk having their consciences seared and loosing its function to discern between right and wrong in them. THIS is the saddest thing, because if our conscience looses its ability then this cuts off any fellowship in Life and Light with God which further cuts us off from receiving a direct touch and sense from the Lord in all areas of our lives.
Lets pray that the Lord can rescue some of our brothers and sisters to choose a more neutral, less spiritually searing avenue of Lawyering.
We all need to be on our guards. Lawyers obviously have it hard but we too need to practice living in the Spirit to be honest hard workers who do not just work for those who can see us but moreso for the Lord Who looks in at our hearts.
Very good thought provoking Question Kayne:)
keep abiding sister
urs sis
sandy
2007-08-21 08:24:00 · answer #7 · answered by Broken Alabaster Flask 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A lawyer is not required to lie, and truthfully, to only give you the best defense possible. If you are guilty, they merely look for loopholes, or excuses. They aren't allowed to confirm or deny your actions, nor are they required to lie to help you.
Now, that doesn't mean the "good" ones don't lie, but it is entirely possible to be a religious person and a lawyer at the same time.
2007-08-21 08:13:13 · answer #8 · answered by Armless Joe, Bipedal Foe 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A lawyer may not lie in court. They can defend someone who they know is guilty but they can't claim that they are guilty. They can just try to get them the best "deal" that they can.
2007-08-21 08:10:32 · answer #9 · answered by Alan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
God is imaginary.
If there weren't educated and impartial defense attorneys, the real judge would be the defense attorney. That isn't right. We don't necessarily have the tools to carry out perfect justice, which is sad, but this is how we are trying to do it. If you have a better idea I think you should share it. I would consider these defense attorneys who know their defendants to be guilty as true heroes. They are painfully straining their emotions for a greater good...how is that a cop out?
2007-08-21 08:15:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋