Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes there are - but that point is irrelevant to the topic at hand - which is the right of criminal defendants to have an adequate defense and for defendants who cannot afford to pay for their own attorneys, to have ones appointed for them by the public.
Yes there are - but that point is irrelevant to the topic at hand - which is the right of criminal defendants to have an adequate defense and for defendants who cannot afford to pay for their own attorneys, to have ones appointed for them by the public.
Yes, indeed, the attorney which was appointed to this case, has a good reputation and is very experienced. AND she is still an employee of the Office of the Fed Public Defender. That Public Defender appoints an attorney in his/her office to be the lead attorney in each case, as was done here.
You know "my" taxpayer money funds the Fed PROSECUTORS too, and I'm not complaining. Federal and State public defenders get less funding than state and fed prosecutors. If YOU want to try to make a difference in defense funding, then run for political office and try to do that. In the meantime, it is what it is, and I fully support my taxes funding defense.......after all, WHAT ELSE so directly thwarts an OVER-POWERFUL STATE?
"Average citizens" do get legal teams, especially in capital cases. The number of people required to represent a case depends upon the complexity and the degree of felony.
which is the right of criminal defendants to have an adequate defense and for defendants who cannot afford to pay for their own attorneys, to have ones appointed for them by the public.
key word: adequate
There can be no public case that complicated, that warrants that
kind of price tag. It is simply judicial abuse; legal theft of public monies.
We live in a nation of laws where people have the right to require the government to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Unless they are convicted of a crime by the court of public opinion, for which their case was heard by CNN and Anderson Cooper, and summarily shot dead in the street by an army of thugs dressed like Nazi SS on Steroids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
If Tsarnaev has or does plead not guilty, then that is what will be done.
He's already confessed ... haven't you kept up with the latest news?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
If you were accused of a crime, would you dismiss the assignation of public defenders to you as overkill - and agree that summary execution should take place?
That reminds me of the old southern method of justice, as the the Sheriff brings in his man, and sets him in front of the judge (who happens to be the Sheriffs brother-in-law), and they say to him ... "Boy, this is America. We're gonna give you a good lawyer, and conduct a fair trial, and THEN we'll hang you".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Hint - we don't live in North Korea.
Hint to you .... OPEN YOUR EYES.
Hello .. we are from the government ... we love you and are here to help. Now, if you would be so kind as to PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD NOW .... we might not shoot you in the face with this assault weapon loaded with internationally outlawed ammunition.
Rights? We'll tell you what rights you have. Miranda? You have the right to shut up, and if you want to remain able to speak, you'd better OBEY your commands. Now, take your clothes off ... ALL OF IT ... SHUT UP AND DO IT!!!
Welcome to America, whose motto, the land of the free and home of the brave shall not be tarnished by the fact that we have more people incarcerated in our prisons than any other nation on the planet. But we treat them good ... trust us ... we don't lie.
Anyone whose defense requires a defense team and can't pay for it is able to have a public defense team assigned to their case.
If by team you mean two lawyers then you are on solid ground because that is the limit required in capital cases state or federal when it comes to court appointed attorneys.
Unless they are convicted of a crime by the court of public opinion...
Considering that folks insist on the right of every citizen to have everything from a AR-15 to a Barrett chambered in .50 cal I'm not surprised or unhappy that the police have fighting chance to enforce the law.
There can be no public case that complicated, that warrants that
kind of price tag. It is simply judicial abuse; legal theft of public monies.
These price tags you're quoting, is that the cost to try the case or the cost for the DEFENSE ONLY? There are TWO sides in these cases, the prosecution and defense, and BOTH are funded by taxpayer money.
"Adequate" is not the standard for representation in any case. Did you know that cases can get overturned over something call Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.....IAC?
OBVIOUSLY you have no experience or education regarding our justice system or you wouldn't make such absurd claims.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
