Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2016-07-05 06:42 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2016-07-05 06:42 pm
[ SECRET POST #3471 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3471 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
[It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia]
__________________________________________________
03.
[Brooklyn Nine-Nine]
__________________________________________________
04.
[1931: Scheherazade at the Library of Pergamum]
__________________________________________________
05.
[outlander, ontd-sassenach]
__________________________________________________
06.
(Voltron: Legendary Defender)
__________________________________________________
07.
[Michael Kamen]
__________________________________________________
08.
[Captain America (MCU), Daredevil (MCU), Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, and Bleach]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 27 secrets from Secret Submission Post #496.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
Re: So trump is a literal child rapist. TW Rape. Child Abuse.
It's not the same, though. You said:
an ethical defense attorney would focus not on acquitting someone who is guilty
Unfortunately for you, that is exactly what an ethical defense attorney does. Acquittal is your ultimate goal, whether the client is guilty or not. That's your job.
Sometimes, the evidence is on the prosecution's side, but the jury isn't. In those cases, an ethical defense attorney would not advise their client to plead out. Why definitely get your client prison time when there's a good chance they'll be acquitted? Any attorney who did advise a plea when there's a very good chance at acquittal is looking at major consequences for not acting in the client's best interest.
Re: So trump is a literal child rapist. TW Rape. Child Abuse.
Obviously I don't know as much about legal proceedings as you do so I'm not going to argue the points about defense attorneys being required to try to acquit someone who is clearly guilty (though holy shit am I glad I'm not a defense attorney, and I think our system is pretty fucked up if defense attorneys are required to play the jury or seek technicalities to get someone off when the evidence is clear). Fine, so be it.
But I don't really think it's ok to require the defense attorneys actually lie to try to get their client off. If that's true, then holy fuck, it's messed up. Fuck the trauma the plaintiff is going through, fuck justice, you have to lie and cheat to win! Or else you're apparently lawyering wrong and breaking policies. ???
(And going back upthread to what I was originally replying to, do you think after a case is closed it's ok for a defense attorney to laugh at someone they won a case against? I neither know nor honestly really even care whether Hillary Clinton did that, but it seems highly unprofessional and inappropriate for it to happen at all)
Re: So trump is a literal child rapist. TW Rape. Child Abuse.
Yes, that is exactly what defense attorneys are required to do. They aren't victim's advocates; defense attorneys are advocates for the defendant. That's the way our system functions, and it'designed that way because people charged with a crime are entitled to a fair trial. If their defense lawyer is more concerned for the victim than they are for the client they're representing, then the trial isn't fair.
And you can blame the vast majority of these technicalities on shitty police work. If police departments did their jobs by the book and didn't obtain evidence illegally or forget to follow procedure, there wouldn't be an open door for a defense attorney to walk their client out through.
But I don't really think it's ok to require the defense attorneys actually lie to try to get their client off.
No, it's not. You can be disbarred for that shit, too. And nowhere have I suggested that defense lawyers lie and cheat to get clients acquitted, so how you got to that conclusion is beyond me.
And going back upthread to what I was originally replying to, do you think after a case is closed it's ok for a defense attorney to laugh at someone they won a case against?
No. I think it's unprofessional as fuck to for a lawyer -- any lawyer -- to directly discuss their clients' cases in any way. Even after the case is over, attorney-client privilege is still in effect, and should be taken as seriously as if you were still at trial.
Re: So trump is a literal child rapist. TW Rape. Child Abuse.
In a rape case, if it's clear to everyone involved that the defendant is guilty - and that the plaintiff is going through a great deal of trauma - is it required or acceptable for the defense attorney to say to the plaintiff, "my client is innocent and you are lying"?
Yes, it is. That's exactly what a defense attorney does. That's your job; to discredit the prosecution's case in any way you can, by providing reasonable doubt.
That would be lying.
Re: So trump is a literal child rapist. TW Rape. Child Abuse.
Until there is irrefutable evidence of your client's guilt or you are providing an affirmative defense, you are required as a defense attorney to maintain that your client is innocent. Full stop. No exceptions.