[ SECRET POST #3256 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3256 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[The Man From U.N.C.L.E.]


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
[Ace Attorney]


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 010 secrets from Secret Submission Post #465.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: controversial/confrontational/hostile/bitter opinions

[feotakahari]

That's the thing--your client getting the outcome they desire shouldn't be a "victory"! In theory, the purpose of a prosecutor is to present the strongest honest case. If the defendant isn't convicted, that's because the case wasn't strong enough, not necessarily because the prosecutor did anything "wrong," and it's natural for prosecutors to fail sometimes if the wrong person is accused. Defense shouldn't be any different--the best evidence you've got that the client is innocent, or the best defense of the client's character and actions to minimize the sentence. Making it about "winning" goes against the idea that prosecutors and defense attorneys are just part of an equal system.

Re: controversial/confrontational/hostile/bitter opinions

[dethtoll]

I'd argue that the fault here is thinking that we have an equal system to begin with.

Re: controversial/confrontational/hostile/bitter opinions

[philstar22]

Prosecutor and defense jobs are different. Prosecutor's job is to the truth. The represent the system. In theory, if the defendant is not guilty, a not guilty verdict is a victory for the prosecutor. In reality, prosecutors forget this and think winning is their goal.

Defense is different. The defense attorney's job is to represent and defend the defendant to the best of their ability. They represent the defendant.

I think there are some tactics, like blaming the victim, that should be off limits. But in general, it is the defense attorney's job to do the best they can to win. Sometimes that does mean pleading down. But part of the ethics code that attorneys have to swear to uphold is to represent their clients. The world the rules use is "zealously."

There are several sad realities to the system. One is that it is often those with the most money who aren't convicted because they can afford better attorneys. The other is that in many states, judges who are supposed to be neutral consider themselves a part of a system with the prosecutors and police and give preferential treatment to prosecutors.

So while I think there are some defense attorneys that employ immoral tactics, in general I'm on the side that says prosecutors are a thousand times worse, at least in the US.

Re: controversial/confrontational/hostile/bitter opinions

[(Anonymous)]

This is exactly how I feel! I sometimes think DAs have forgotten that the purpose of a criminal trial is to find out the truth; they act as if it's a ritual "to bring closure to the victims and their survivors" and its outcome should be a foregone conclusion.

Re: controversial/confrontational/hostile/bitter opinions

[philstar22]

Yup. DAs don't represent victims, they represent the government. The civil system is there for the victims. That's why there are often both criminal and civil trials for the same thing. But DAs forget that. And they also often start caring more about their percentage of victories (and often job bonuses depend on that) so they'll keep going on a case even where there is no evidence or where the evidence points to innocence.