doesn't make sense for the federal government to pursue an innocent man (mike vick), if you are innocent (mike vick). maybe a witch hunt but the feds have something or they wouldn't persue it. start at the top, BALCO, and they did. crap is rolling down hill barry, look out!
2007-12-07 06:31:04 · 9 answers · asked by randy m 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Try again, the question makes no sense. Yes, I know about Michael Vick and his torturing of animals, but the question "why have bigtime lawers if not guilty barry" doesn't make sense to me.
2007-12-07 06:35:16 · answer #1 · answered by anna 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If I were accused of a crime, any crime, or if I was a defendant named in a civil lawsuit and I had the money available to me to pay for the best atttorneys money could buy you can bet I would have those pricey lawyers. Every person has a constitutional right, in a criminal proceeding, to be represented by legal counsel. The poor get a public defender which is why they often wind up on death row more than those who can get pricey lawyers. It only makes sense to lawyer up with the best possible lawyers available to you. You would probably do the same thing, whether you were innocent or guilty.
2007-12-07 15:30:06 · answer #2 · answered by alomew_rocks 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While I agree with your basic premise, the US still has this little thing called the presumption of innocence. And every person accused of a crime has the right to a lawyer.
Besides, you want to talk about innocent men involved in a witch hunt, talk to the Duke Lacross players.
For what it's worth, I don't have a position about Barry and his guilt or innocence.
2007-12-07 14:36:52 · answer #3 · answered by Justin H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WOW!!! Ignoranace has hit a whole new level, you are comparing someone who killed dogs to someone who may or may not have lied to a grand jury.
Why the high priced Lawyers? The Feds have the best they could get and if I were being charged with something I did not do I would want the best I could get to defend me and prove my innocennce.
He may be guilty as sin but until it is proven our legal system gives him a presumption of innocence!
2007-12-07 14:38:02 · answer #4 · answered by bdough15 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't understand a word of your question: Michael Vick isn't innocent. He pleaded guilty. That means he's not innocent.
As for Barry, he got high priced lawyers because he's got endorsement deals, records, etcetera which all involve a lot of money. THAT is what he needs lawyers for.
2007-12-07 14:35:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
lets just stick with the whole barry deal here. he needs big shot lawyers because his entire career he hide thinking he was so much better than everyone on this planet. he needs them because he knows he is guilty he thinks just cause he passed a couple pee tests he is invincible to the us government. well it dont matter if your black or white, living paycheck to paycheck or make 18,000,000+ a year, they gonna get you barry, i just hope you like bubba!
2007-12-08 03:15:23 · answer #6 · answered by Ian B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are indicted and can afford the money, you always want the best possible people representing you. It makes no difference if you are innocent or guilty.
2007-12-07 14:38:35 · answer #7 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
lol...if feds are as bright as you ,then barry has it made!
2007-12-07 16:05:42 · answer #8 · answered by mojo569 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
stupid question.
2007-12-07 15:02:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋