By Lynn Cheney's standards...

[AllieBaba]

No, they aren't. In fact, they are unethical if they know their clients are guilty and hide the fact.

 

[Political Junky]

They deserve a defense. But attorneys are NOT obligated to hoodwink juries and judges. They are supposed to provide a good defense but they are not supposed to hide a criminal's criminal activity from those who pass judgment.

criminal defense attorneys don't ask them if they are innocent or guilty ...they don't want to know.....they don't need to know....it is about the law ..... they can't hide activity....it is against their ethical oath...spend some time with a crimnal defense attorney they will explain it....

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

Bull Shit.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No, they aren't. In fact, they are unethical if they know their clients are guilty and hide the fact.

You're wrong. And there's really nothing else that can be said about it. You are just completely wrong.

No one can "know" that their client is guilty. That's the whole point of Innocent until proven guilty - no one is ever guilty until after the trial. The whole purpose of attorney client privelge is to further those ends - in fact, if they think their clients are guilty, and DON'T hide it, they will be disbarred.

 

[manu1959]

No, they aren't. In fact, they are unethical if they know their clients are guilty and hide the fact.

there is no way to know.....they are innocent until proven guilty.....they are to be defended within the framework of the law.....

 

[manu1959]

They deserve a defense. But attorneys are NOT obligated to hoodwink juries and judges. They are supposed to provide a good defense but they are not supposed to hide a criminal's criminal activity from those who pass judgment.

criminal defense attorneys don't ask them if they are innocent or guilty ...they don't want to know.....they don't need to know....it is about the law ..... they can't hide activity....it is against their ethical oath...spend some time with a crimnal defense attorney they will explain it....

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

you should go read their ethics requirements....i see which one comes before which one....

 

[AllieBaba]

I'm not saying you can't plead your client not guilty when you know he's guilty.

I'm saying criminal defense lawyers can't defend their clients adequately unless they know as much as they can about whatever they're being accused of.

And I'm saying it's unethical for an attorney who knows his client is a monster to provide a defense which will turn that person back out into the population. That's what plea bargains are for, and in order to make plea bargains, attorneys need to know if their clients are guilty or not.

There's nothing more disgusting than attorneys who know better who proclaim publicly that their clients are innocent.

 

[manu1959]

I'm not saying you can't plead your client not guilty when you know he's guilty.

I'm saying criminal defense lawyers can't defend their clients adequately unless they know as much as they can about whatever they're being accused of.

And I'm saying it's unethical for an attorney who knows his client is a monster to provide a defense which will turn that person back out into the population. That's what plea bargains are for, and in order to make plea bargains, attorneys need to know if their clients are guilty or not.

There's nothing more disgusting than attorneys who know better who proclaim publicly that their clients are innocent.

my dad was a criminal defense attorney....he never asked and didn't care....his job was to put on a defense.....he was very good at it....

if the prosecutor can't put forth a good case you want to blame the defense attorney.....

as my dad used to say ...the police don't arrest innocent people.....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'm not saying you can't plead your client not guilty when you know he's guilty.

I'm saying criminal defense lawyers can't defend their clients adequately unless they know as much as they can about whatever they're being accused of.

And I'm saying it's unethical for an attorney who knows his client is a monster to provide a defense which will turn that person back out into the population. That's what plea bargains are for, and in order to make plea bargains, attorneys need to know if their clients are guilty or not.

There's nothing more disgusting than attorneys who know better who proclaim publicly that their clients are innocent.

What you're stating here is your opinion, which you are entitled to. But I'm glad you're not a lawyer, and I'm really glad that no one who is agrees with you.

Your opinion is contrary to the entire purpose of the justice system the founders designed.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED rapist condones rape....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED murderer condones murder....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED pedophile condones pediphilia....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED embezzler condones embezzeling....


Lynn Cheney stands AGAINST our system of justice and the COURAGEOUS and HIGHLY ETHICAL defense attorneys who step up and defend the RIGHTS of ACCUSED criminals.

Hey Cold!.....What's up buddy?

How about we stick to things that really matter. You know things like, oh I don't know, maybe the fact that Obama is screwing things up so bad that AT LEAST the next two generations are completely fucked.

Who cares what Liz Cheney thinks?.......She's not the one ruining this great country by the day.

 

[Article 15]

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED rapist condones rape....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED murderer condones murder....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED pedophile condones pediphilia....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED embezzler condones embezzeling....


Lynn Cheney stands AGAINST our system of justice and the COURAGEOUS and HIGHLY ETHICAL defense attorneys who step up and defend the RIGHTS of ACCUSED criminals.

Hey Cold!.....What's up buddy?

How about we stick to things that really matter. You know things like, oh I don't know, maybe the fact that Obama is screwing things up so bad that AT LEAST the next two generations are completely fucked.

Who cares what Liz Cheney thinks?.......She's not the one ruining this great country by the day.

Seek help for your ODS.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED rapist condones rape....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED murderer condones murder....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED pedophile condones pediphilia....

Anyone who defends an ACCUSED embezzler condones embezzeling....


Lynn Cheney stands AGAINST our system of justice and the COURAGEOUS and HIGHLY ETHICAL defense attorneys who step up and defend the RIGHTS of ACCUSED criminals.

Hey Cold!.....What's up buddy?

How about we stick to things that really matter. You know things like, oh I don't know, maybe the fact that Obama is screwing things up so bad that AT LEAST the next two generations are completely fucked.

Who cares what Liz Cheney thinks?.......She's not the one ruining this great country by the day.

Seek help for your ODS.

Sure, Right after you get help for your your BDS!

 

[Wicked Jester]

criminal defense attorneys don't ask them if they are innocent or guilty ...they don't want to know.....they don't need to know....it is about the law ..... they can't hide activity....it is against their ethical oath...spend some time with a crimnal defense attorney they will explain it....

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

 

[manu1959]

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

if mark had been 100% clean and ethical there would have been no dirt to bury him with.....

that said ..... prosecutors try to win to further their career....cda's simply fight to see if they can win.....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

As much as I hate situations like that, and no matter how personally reprehensible to me it is, I support it - as long as a lawyer doesn't break the law.

The most important thought to me is "What if I get arrested for a crime I didn't commit?" And I'd sure as shit want my lawyer to do EVERYTHING under the law to keep me out of prison.

 

[Wicked Jester]

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

if mark had been 100% clean and ethical there would have been no dirt to bury him with.....

that said ..... prosecutors try to win to further their career....cda's simply fight to see if they can win.....

How was he not 100% clean?

He had a stellar police performance record.

He advised for a screenplay. Was asked to make it down and dirty. I suppose all screenwriters or advisors should have their careers chucked down the toilet also, eh?

Even Robert Shapiro said that what was done to him was completely wrong.

But hey, Karma got both Cochran's and Bailey's unethical asses in the end. And Furhman's makin' bank nowadays. Good for him!....He deserves it.

 

[Wicked Jester]

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

As much as I hate situations like that, and no matter how personally reprehensible to me it is, I support it - as long as a lawyer doesn't break the law.

The most important thought to me is "What if I get arrested for a crime I didn't commit?" And I'd sure as shit want my lawyer to do EVERYTHING under the law to keep me out of prison.

Ya' see, the problem with that whole case was Mr. Lance Ito. He never had control of that courtroom, and he was lovin' the limelight. My brother in law is a Judge. Former DA in the major crimes/high profile division. It's like he says, that evidence should have never been allowed in, and Cochran being the lead attorney should have known that it was wrong.

But in that case, the jury wasn't going to convict him from day one. And that's a fact. That trial should have been moved. OJ's ties with the LA community were just too deep. And of course, the wrong judge was chosen to preside.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Not entirely sure how the topic switched to the OJ trial, but I agree with you, sure.

 

[Wicked Jester]

I haven't seen a thread yet that didn't go off course up here.

But, back on topic. I could give less than a damn what Liz Cheney thinks. She holds no power. I'm more concerned with the BS that's going on in DC. That's what really matters.

 

[boedicca]

There is no difference. Any lawyer is ethically obligated to give the best defense possible.

Actually, no.

A lawyer can refuse to take the case.

 

[Political Junky]

They don't necessarily ask. But they often know. And if they know their client is guilty, duty to justice comes before duty to their clients.

*attack removed. sorry.*

You're completely wrong. Even guilty people deserve representation - and EVERY SINGLE PERSON deserves a lawyer who will fight their very best for them. Even the guilty ones.

I agree, but what about those lawyers who engage in things like destroying peoples careers to get their client off?

You know, like Mark Furhmans career?

Fuhrman revealed himself to be a racist.