Always awesome to see someone who's found his purpose and satisfaction in life. Criminal defense may not be the easiest job all the time, but it certainly has its moments. Defending the client who gets on the wrong side of the law through no fault of his own... that's special.
@ Spellcaster86: Well, you look at the evidence closely, the strength of the evidence -- and any weaknesses you can find -- and then exploit those weaknesses in an effort to negotiate the best possible plea bargain for your client. 95% of cases get settled without going to trial.
Heh heh...I’m no psychiatrist (are you?), but very much doubt that committing crimes give people a “high” - unless it’s joyriding or something. In any case, that’s neither here nor there. I can tell you’ve got preconceived ideas - and if I may say, simplistic ones - on this subject, but you need to understand a few things. First, every case is different. Every defendant is different. You can’t just automatically give every person who is convicted of a crime the maximum sentence. It doesn’t work that way, nor should it. Second, _because_ every case is different, every defendant is entitled to the assistance of counsel in order to present his case effectively to the prosecutors and the courts so that an appropriate punishment can be imposed. There are many issues and variables in every case, and it is a lawyer’s job to advocate for his client and present his case in the best possible light. Third, the government has experienced, highly trained lawyers on its side - shouldn't the defendant have a lawyer on his side, too, in order to at least get a chance at a level playing field? Even our Founding Fathers over two hundred years ago knew that, and wrote the right to the assistance of counsel into our Constitution. And last, as a more practical matter, if you wanted to “throw the book” at every defendant and give them the maximum sentence (not that that would ever be justified), then they would all demand jury trial and bog the system down. Plea bargain actually makes the criminal justice system efficient - meting out fair and appropriate punishments without the massive expense of every case going to trial. And furthermore, in cases where the evidence against the defendant is weak, there’s a chance that a guilty defendant might be acquitted and set free. But if he pleads guilty in return for a lesser sentence, that means he gets a certain punishment, which, if he really is guilty, is better than no punishment at all if he’s acquitted.
My question is how a criminal defense attorney takes client seriously who sticks to an extremely outrageous defense that would never fly with at least a moderately intelligent jury or judge and seriously defend said client with said defense, how do you handle a defense like that?
The decisions as to whether to plead guilty or go to trial, to testify or not, and whether to represent oneself are entirely up to the defendant. Tactical decisions at trial are to be made by the attorney after consultation with his client. A lawyer does not have an ethical duty to advance a defense he believes is untenable even if the client insists.
When you have a lawyer and you go to court and take a plea, what is the lawyer suppose to advice you? My friend went to court and took the plea and the lawyer just up and left and never said anything to him, isn’t that against his rights?
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Always awesome to see someone who's found his purpose and satisfaction in life. Criminal defense may not be the easiest job all the time, but it certainly has its moments. Defending the client who gets on the wrong side of the law through no fault of his own... that's special.
@ Spellcaster86: Well, you look at the evidence closely, the strength of the evidence -- and any weaknesses you can find -- and then exploit those weaknesses in an effort to negotiate the best possible plea bargain for your client. 95% of cases get settled without going to trial.
Heh heh...I’m no psychiatrist (are you?), but very much doubt that committing crimes give people a “high” - unless it’s joyriding or something.
In any case, that’s neither here nor there. I can tell you’ve got preconceived ideas - and if I may say, simplistic ones - on this subject, but you need to understand a few things. First, every case is different. Every defendant is different. You can’t just automatically give every person who is convicted of a crime the maximum sentence. It doesn’t work that way, nor should it.
Second, _because_ every case is different, every defendant is entitled to the assistance of counsel in order to present his case effectively to the prosecutors and the courts so that an appropriate punishment can be imposed. There are many issues and variables in every case, and it is a lawyer’s job to advocate for his client and present his case in the best possible light.
Third, the government has experienced, highly trained lawyers on its side - shouldn't the defendant have a lawyer on his side, too, in order to at least get a chance at a level playing field? Even our Founding Fathers over two hundred years ago knew that, and wrote the right to the assistance of counsel into our Constitution.
And last, as a more practical matter, if you wanted to “throw the book” at every defendant and give them the maximum sentence (not that that would ever be justified), then they would all demand jury trial and bog the system down. Plea bargain actually makes the criminal justice system efficient - meting out fair and appropriate punishments without the massive expense of every case going to trial.
And furthermore, in cases where the evidence against the defendant is weak, there’s a chance that a guilty defendant might be acquitted and set free. But if he pleads guilty in return for a lesser sentence, that means he gets a certain punishment, which, if he really is guilty, is better than no punishment at all if he’s acquitted.
Captain Quirk very well explained!
Better call saul!
lawyrup
Or Phoenix Wright
Interesting interview.
interesting. thank you.
I'm here after play Phoneix Wright Ace Attorney
Same dude
...same
Ace Attorney made me interested in becoming a defense attorney. I’m not sure I want to become one now xd
My question is how a criminal defense attorney takes client seriously who sticks to an extremely outrageous defense that would never fly with at least a moderately intelligent jury or judge and seriously defend said client with said defense, how do you handle a defense like that?
The decisions as to whether to plead guilty or go to trial, to testify or not, and whether to represent oneself are entirely up to the defendant. Tactical decisions at trial are to be made by the attorney after consultation with his client. A lawyer does not have an ethical duty to advance a defense he believes is untenable even if the client insists.
The dislikes are Edgeworth on 6 different accounts
Actually 9 he made 9 lol
When you have a lawyer and you go to court and take a plea, what is the lawyer suppose to advice you? My friend went to court and took the plea and the lawyer just up and left and never said anything to him, isn’t that against his rights?
Amy Chestnut stop asking on social media use your head and contact a lawyer
Phoenix Wright anyone?
snipersev07 i guess everyone is here becos of phoenix lol
Yes
It's very hard to find a criminal attorney that can be trusted.
+Jax Atts That's an unsual statement for a criminal defense lawyer.
political science major good as undergrad before law school?
sure
why
lol at defending people who are known to be guilty with deception
qqzmk