Poll: Would you ever be a defense lawyer?

[Gurk]

So, I just got home from spending another day in court for the murder trial of my family member that was killed by her husband.

The verdict and/or sentencing should be tomorrow.
I was confident the murderer would be found guilty for Murder, but now I'm having seconds thoughts.
Today each side gave their summary. The prosecutor (our side) only talked about the facts, and the evidence that was found on the scene which clearly point to murder.

However, the defense played on sympathy, included theories and assumptions and were talking about things that weren't brought up as evidence previously in the trial.

We all thought the jury would have come up with a verdict before the end of the day. However, now they're 'going around in circles' according to the judge which makes me think they're not seeing through the defense sides utter nonsense.

I've got a bad feeling that he may only get manslaughter...what a slap in the face that would be.

So my point is, would you ever be a defense lawyer? Sure, it can pay up to 4k a week, but could you really get to sleep at night knowing you've been defending someone that brutally took another persons life?

Could you detach yourself?
I don't want this to cause arguments or whatnot, I'm just curious.

Here's an article for the murder,

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8233032/man-kills-sets-fire-to-wife-court-hears

EDIT: Just found out they're getting paid 4k PER DAY. If I had a family to look after, hell yes I'd do it!

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

I'm sure I could learn to keep the business side of things from affecting other aspects of my life. You forget that, in some cases, there's very little the defence can do against overwhelming evidence.

I hope they get an appropriate sentence. I can't imagine how infuriating something lesser would be.

 

[T8B95]

Damn. Sorry for your loss mate. Know it doesn't mean much coming from a nameless voice on the Internet, but still...

Yeah, I'd probably be a defense lawyer. Help out with people who are actually innocent.

However, I'm currently going to school to be a prosecuter, so...

 

[Gorden Springel]

If I believed the accused was innocent. I probably wouldn't be a very good defense lawyer TBH, don't think I could defend someone I know is guilty.

 

[Simple Bluff]

I was actually considering becoming a lawyer for a while, but I didn't go ahead with it because I felt i wouldn't be that particularly good at it. The morality didn't really bother me to be honest - I just don't have a lot of presence. So to answer your question, yeah, I probobly could.

"If you're ever hired to defend someone, don't ask if they actually commited the crime - in case they tell you"
- (can't remeber, probobly anonymous)

 

[Gurk]

I suppose, helping the falsely accused would be a nice feeling.
Obviously I'm very biased with my opinion.

Thinking away from this though, someone has to do the dirty work. I'm sure it wouldn't be everyone's first preference of work.

The defense lawyers, well, one of them actually seemed like he really didn't want to be there.
He was also the one that twisted the words of witnesses around.
Spose it's all part of the job.
:S!

 

[Eldarion]

I'm sure I could learn to keep the business side of things from affecting other aspects of my life. You forget that, in some cases, there's very little the defence can do against overwhelming evidence.

I hope they get an appropriate sentence. I can't imagine how infuriating something lesser would be.

Thats cause overwhelming evidence usually means they are guilty, just saying.

Defense lawyers have to represent their clients rights no matter what, I could never do that if all the signs say he is guilty.

 

[Sarge034]

Not a chance in hell. I can't stand it when guilty people walk.... I could never be a part of that shit.

 

[maxriderules]

I definitely couldn't be a lawyer. I just can't keep my feelings separate from my work, and I literally couldn't defend someone if I thought that he was guilty.


Just my $0.02

 

[Tomo Stryker]

The thing is (and I might be wrong about this), being a lawyer allows you to pick and choose your cases. So if a man covered in blood and gore stepped into my office and asked me to defend him I would promptly turn him down and call the police.

Being a lawyer isn't exactly a bad thing, not all lawyer sold their soul. Just certain lawyer have given a terrible example to the public. I'm thinking of becoming a lawyer possibly in the future, if I can go far enough into debt to go to law school.

 

[Kortney]

So my point is, would you ever be a defense lawyer? Sure, it can pay up to 4k a week, but could you really get to sleep at night knowing you've been defending someone that brutally took another persons life?

Everyone has the right to a fair trial and to adequate legal representation. However I couldn't do it - I couldn't be a lawyer full stop.

By the way, I'm incredibly sorry for your loss. I know how it feels.

 

[Gigano]

Sure, the right for the accused to defend himself in a court of criminal law is one of the basic pillars of any justice system, and I'd have nothing against filling such position.

If you can't separate your feelings from your work, then very few parts within subject of law are suitable for you anyway, since pretty much all of it revolve around conflict and thus usually someone's misery.

It would take better skills as an orator than I possess though, so it's probably not something I'd pursue even if criminal law was my main field of interest.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I spent 4 years getting my Law & Criminology degree, and while I perfectly understand that the system we have at the moment is the best we have (in the UK anyway), I couldn't, in good conscience, be a lawyer myself.

Everyone deserves representation, even the 'guilty' ones. There have been too many times where a 'guilty' man was wrongly accused. Miscarriages of justice are never pretty.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

The thing is (and I might be wrong about this), being a lawyer allows you to pick and choose your cases.

I'm not sure if it's the same all around the world, but in many countries, since an accused has an inalienable right to have a defense lawyer speaking on his behalf (that's a pretty old practice, dating back from the Inquisition), every registered attorney can be appointed by the court to serve as defense, if the defendant doesn't have their own.

OT: I wouldn't want to be a defense lawyer. It's mainly the responsibility, but also things like "keeping a perfect record" and so on, which mean that to make one of them fabulous careers, you'd really have to do things like go out of your way to defend rapists and such.

 

[Sanglyon]

I wouldn't mind being a defense attorney, even for a guilty man.
In my opinion, the goal of a defense attorney is not to set his client free, it's to ensure he gets fairly judged by presenting every element in his favor to balance the element against him from the prosecutor.

Of course, if the accused is innocent, the goal is to get him judged as such and set free. But, in the case of a guilty man, the goal is to avoid abusive sentence. Your case is extreme, and you're a party in it, so you might not find any sentence is to extreme, but the whole point of justice is to avoid those emotionnal bias and personnal implications.

But I'd probably not be a succesfull one, then, because who only wants to be get a fair sentence when they can get free with an attorney with "different work ethics"?

 

[Sonicron]

First of all, being a defense lawyer doesn't necessarily mean working on criminal cases.

Second, if I had the inclination for it and the patience to drill book after book of little details into my head, then... yes, sure I'd be a defense lawyer. I have no trouble lying when I need to, or spinning an issue to defend a criminal.
Denny Crane said it best: "It's good to hate clients. Allows us to overcharge and still sleep at night."

That said... my condolences for your loss. I know from experience, losing a beloved family member is an awful, awful thing.

 

[comadorcrack]

It sucks. but everyone deserves a chance to be defended equally. And like I've always said. I'd rather let a 1000 guilty men free then condemn one innocent man.

 

[Volkov]

I wouldn't be a lawyer at all.

That said, the very nature of american justice systems basically goes on the assumption that facts are entirely secondary to emotions and opinions of unqualified morons (i.e., most of the population from which juries are picked). This can work both for and against defenders. The case of Samim Anghaie (http://www.gainesville.com/article/20110225/ARTICLES/110229622) is a clear-cut case of a jury full of completely unqualified morons convicting a completely innocent man (nice old american racism played role as well, of course). So yeah, the justice system, like most other civics of the country, is very poorly designed, works poorly, and you got a taste of it today, OP. My condolences. Pray that it doesn't hurt you significantly more seriously (i.e. a false conviction against an innocent family member).

 

[Sanglyon]

The thing is (and I might be wrong about this), being a lawyer allows you to pick and choose your cases. So if a man covered in blood and gore stepped into my office and asked me to defend him I would promptly turn him down and call the police.

Which is a good thing for him, because a defense attorney that judge someone guilty from a mere sight without bothering to find what happened, aka on circumstancial evidences, is a bad attorney.
Ever seen "The Green Mile"?