Defense Attorneys, have you ever represented a client that you knew was a colossal POS?

Its the way the system works.

Well you're a colossal piece of immoral fricking shite in the first place so how why would it bother you.

quote:

---

Knew? Nope, but I represented plenty of people I was fairly certain were. No juggling needed. It’s the State’s burden to prove their case. Why would it be immoral to make sure they do so?

---

You don't see the morality question of using legal loop holes to let guilty men walk free into our society?

Your justification is it's the states responsibility and you know the men are guilty and pieces of shite but you get to make a lot of money right? Who cares about victims and their families, have you seen the newest iPhone?

I understand everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I just also have a conscience and pity those who have traded their soul for a dollar. I hope it's worth it.

I dont know a lawyer who wasn't a colossal POS.

quote:

---

You don't see the morality question of using legal loop holes to let guilty men walk free into our society?

---

It's a very specific system and "loop holes" don't really exist. You're probably thinking of examples of the state breaking those rules and it being proven and labeling it a "loop hole"

quote:

---

Your justification is it's the states responsibility and you know the men are guilty and pieces of shite but you get to make a lot of money right? Who cares about victims and their families, have you seen the newest iPhone?

---

If the system isn't maintained, innocent people become more likely to face false convictions or shoddy investigations/prosecutions

I see it in all the jurisdictions with judges slanted to side with the state more often than they should.

quote:

---

So, you'd have no qualms in defending someone like Kermit Gosnell, because "it's the state's job"

---

What is your proposed alternative system/reality, exactly?

How exactly do you determine who gets no defense? I'm assuming a trial isn't necessary then either because if they can't defend themselves, then what's the point of a trial? What if the state acts illegally in the investigation or prosecution?

quote:

---

quote:If you do understand this - but also think it’s wrong to defend them - then what is your solution? Truth and justice is my solution Don't do the wrong thing just because you can

---

that’s not a solution. Thats spitting rhetoric with no plan

To respond to OP

Judging criminal clients is typically easy

The real tough area is judging family law clients. That's when you really get into disguised psychopathy and pathological personality disorders.

They all have, constantly. I know its a job spelled out in The Constitution, but working to get people who have a history of 27 arrests over 30 years suspended sentences and probation either leads to .massive abilities to rationalize or selects for those who have dubious morals.

One can say guilt is the burden of the state, but so many actively try to undermine and cast doubt with far flung shite that they know a stupid juror might buy.

In my experience it’s usually the lawyers that are colossal pieces of shite…..