Lawyers face dilemma when inmates seek death

[CrimsonWhite]

Interesting piece. I'm glad I don't work on that side of the law.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. - John Delaney faced the toughest moment of his legal career — his condemned client wanted to drop his appeals and die by injection, an act Delaney opposed and had been trained to try to prevent.

"What do you say?" asked Delaney, a public defender in northern Kentucky who represented Marco Allen Chapman.

It's a question that has arisen 131 times since states resumed executions in 1977, and each time it leaves defense lawyers struggling against their training to act in the best interest of their clients and justice.

Lawyers in bind when inmates want death - Crime & courts- msnbc.com

 

[Sunni Man]

Interesting piece. I'm glad I don't work on that side of the law.

I applaud that inmate for doing the right thing!!!!

Wish many more would do likewise

 

[catzmeow]

I think that an attorney should act in accordance with his/her client's wishes.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I think that an attorney should act in accordance with his/her client's wishes.

We do, but only if it does not conflict with our own code of ethics. The problem here is this. Is it ethical to allow a defendant to choose to be put to death without going through every possible avenue to get the sentence overturned? It is an attorney's job to protect his client. Sometimes that is in direct conflict with a clients wishes. As it is the case here.

 

[xsited1]

We do, but only if it does not conflict with our own code of ethics. The problem here is this. Is it ethical to allow a defendant to choose to be put to death without going through every possible avenue to get the sentence overturned? It is an attorney's job to protect his client. Sometimes that is in direct conflict with a clients wishes. As it is the case here.

The client doesn't want to spend a lifetime in prison. I'd say that qualifies as protecting the client.

 

[catzmeow]

Is it ethical to allow a defendant to choose to be put to death without going through every possible avenue to get the sentence overturned? It is an attorney's job to protect his client. Sometimes that is in direct conflict with a clients wishes. As it is the case here.

I disagree. It depends upon how you define the term "protect." The role of the attorney is to represent the client's RIGHTS within the legal system, not necessarily to be a nanny for the client. If the client wishes to die, isn't it within his rights to make that choice?

 

[Skull Pilot]

All the lousy criminal who wants to better the world by dying has to do is fire his lawyer and go pro se.

 

[Abelian Sea]

If the client wishes to die, isn't it within his rights to make that choice?

Sounds like part of an assisted suicide debate.

Do people have the right to choose to die? And if they choose to, how should the professionals whose job it is to act in their interests react?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sounds like part of an assisted suicide debate.

Do people have the right to choose to die? And if they choose to, how should the professionals whose job it is to act in their interests react?

It's not suicide. the guy was convicted and sentenced to death. Is not appealing the decision tantamount to suicide or just an admission of guilt?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I disagree. It depends upon how you define the term "protect." The role of the attorney is to represent the client's RIGHTS within the legal system, not necessarily to be a nanny for the client. If the client wishes to die, isn't it within his rights to make that choice?

It is well within his rights to wish to die. The problem is the premise that the attorney would be helping him die. An attorney has an ethical code to fully advocate for his/her client. It is a balance act. If the attorney's in this case do not fully advocate for their client, then they could face repurcussions from the Bar association that issued their license, no matter the clients wishes.

That said, their is recourse. An attorney can have himself removed from the case if the client doesn't him/her. But as long as the attorney has the case he has to advocate on behalf of his/her client.

 

[Sunni Man]

It is well within his rights to wish to die. The problem is the premise that the attorney would be helping him die. An attorney has an ethical code to fully advocate for his client. It is a balance act. If the attorney's in this case do not fully advocate for their client, then they could face repurcussions from the Bar association that issued their license, no matter the clients wishes.

Attorney = Ethical ?????

 

[Abelian Sea]

Is not appealing the decision tantamount to suicide or just an admission of guilt?

In a case like this, what's the difference?

Analogies to different debates aside, this is still a case of someone making a decision that will clearly lead to his own death. Maybe it's the right decision for this guy, but if it's your job to defend him it still puts you in a pickle.

 

[catzmeow]

Sounds like part of an assisted suicide debate.

Do people have the right to choose to die? And if they choose to, how should the professionals whose job it is to act in their interests react?

If a violent killer who is already sentenced to die wishes to expedite the process, why do attorneys feel they need to get in the middle of that? Isn't it the client's right to choose how he/she will be represented, and how he/she will plead? Unless there is a LEGITIMATE concern about the way the initial case was tried, what is the point of exhausting the appeals process aside from circumventing the law and the client's wishes?

 

[strollingbones]

any person should control their destiny...gary gilmore did...wesley allan todd (?) did...why fight it.

 

[Luissa]

The client doesn't want to spend a lifetime in prison. I'd say that qualifies as protecting the client.

death would letting them off so you are right there!

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is well within his rights to wish to die. The problem is the premise that the attorney would be helping him die. An attorney has an ethical code to fully advocate for his/her client. It is a balance act. If the attorney's in this case do not fully advocate for their client, then they could face repurcussions from the Bar association that issued their license, no matter the clients wishes.

That said, their is recourse. An attorney can have himself removed from the case if the client doesn't him/her. But as long as the attorney has the case he has to advocate on behalf of his/her client.

Let me ask you this. Can you enter a plea on behalf of a client to which he hasn't agreed? Can you, for example, decide that it is in the client's best interests to argue that he was legally insane if he is flatly, foursquare against you doing so? I don't believe so, whether you think that's the best way to "advocate on his behalf" or not.

So why is it different to advocate in favor of a drawn-out appeals process that may or may not produce a different result when he doesn't want one? Is it, ultimately, YOUR decision to make how his case is handled, or is it his? Seems to me your job, both ethically and legally, is to provide him the best legal advice possible, and then let HIM decide what to do with it.