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.
People fighting to keep criminals out of jail, by any means neccesary, wether it be on legal technicalities or telling clients to shut their trap right as they're about to spill their guts. Lawyers are unethical scum.
Obviously, you do not support our Constitution, Bill of Rights or system of government, nor our national values. Fine. Which country will you relocate to where you will will have it better? Me, I'm an American. And proud of it.
If you are making the argument that "money buys a good defense", but that some denfendants can't afford one, I would agree. That only means that county governments need to spend less on social entitlement programs and more on public funds for indigent defendants. Think about it - the people on welfare are needy because of their own choices - but the people who need an adequate defense need such a thing because the government has charged them with a crime. We should ensure that everyone receives a fair trial and in the case of a criminal defendant, an adequate defense - which is why I want to become an attorney.
Unless you're in law school right now, you're getting a little long in the tooth to start a new career in the law.
It is true that scruples can be lacking with both the defense and prosecution as noted above. With regard to profit making in criminal cases, I posted that neither side should be allowed by law to profit from anything relating to the outcome of a criminal case. That being said, if one is in a tight spot and knows they are guilty, yep the best thing for them to do is find a good lawyer who in essence will do anything to make the bucks, even if the attorney believes that their potential client is guilty. I suppose that would make the terms "good" and "bad" attorney interchangeable depending on whether you are the guilty client trying to elude the law or the unfortunate victim. It's not always about the evidence, it's about who plays the game better and to what lengths they will go to prevail, irregardless of guilt or innocence.
Have you ever heard of something called the Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Rules of Civil Procedure?
Have you ever noticed that jury verdicts are always guilty or not guilty.....never innocent?
There are lots of people in the system who represent the rights of the victims. They are called victim advocates.
Lawyers are like firearms, can be used for good but the potential for abuse is huge.
Lawyers have created a legal language only they can comprehend. We need them to tell us what they wrote in legal documents and legislation because we can never understand a legal document. You know the legal doc you sign when you go to the doctor or dentist just try to figure out what the implications of simple documents mean.
I always write on those legal docs, 'will sign pending legal review'. they expect us to sign legal contracts without knowing what we are signing.
A judge files a 7 mill$$ lawsuit against a dry cleaner and puts them out of business even though they win.
Lawyers suing the feds constantly on the wording in regulations and legislation.
Legalese is the official language of the the USA, not "English".
We all know of disgusting legal shenanigans that the lawyers will claim are the exception. they are the rule.
No, some of the greatest men in our history were lawyers. John Adams, for instance, who had the distinct pleasure of defending the British soldiers on trial for the Boston massacre.
There are blood sucking lawyers, but many are good honest people just trying to make the justice system work.
People fighting to keep criminals out of jail, by any means neccesary, wether it be on legal technicalities or telling clients to shut their trap right as they're about to spill their guts. Lawyers are unethical scum.
Sounds like someone got screwed over by an attorney and is butthurt about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn
Well, you'd have to cite a specific case to make a specific judgment. If the lawyer subverts justice by hiding evidence, pressuring witnesses, or tendering bribes to jurors, that conduct is illegal, and of course it is immoral.
Oj comes to mind. Seriously, I don't care what 12 average joes think, I still think he was guilty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
If you are making the argument that "money buys a good defense", but that some denfendants can't afford one, I would agree. That only means that county governments need to spend less on social entitlement programs and more on public funds for indigent defendants. Think about it - the people on welfare are needy because of their own choices - but the people who need an adequate defense need such a thing because the government has charged them with a crime. We should ensure that everyone receives a fair trial and in the case of a criminal defendant, an adequate defense - which is why I want to become an attorney.
Oh I agree fully. I have seen it before in local court. One dude goes before the judge on a semi serious charge and gets a year sentence, and if he either pays a HUGE amount in fines or does 30 days in jail then the year will go away, otherwise he has a year of probation.
And the reverse is some other dude does something more severe than the 1st guy, but he has a lawyer, and only gets 6 months, time served and a small fine and done, if that much.
Problem with lawyers and the legal profession is that what is often in the best interest of the client is not in the best interest of an attorney.
Guess whose interests are going to suffer?
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.