What do you think about (certain) lawyers?

The fact that certain lawyers (not all of them) defend pure evil scum, sometimes even when they KNOW they're guilty, really pisses me off. I think they are evil themselves too and have NO soul at all, trying to acquit these scumbags just for the money.

However, you're innocent until proven guilty, and some would argue that for this reason, EVERYBODY deserves a lawyer.

Still, lawyers who defend (suspected) pedophiles or "people" like that, still give me the creeps and I can't help hating them for it.

Is it normal that I feel this way, and more importantly: what do you think about (certain) lawyers? Should they be allowed to do their (questionable) job?

Voting Results
66% Normal
Based on 32 votes (21 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 4 )
  • Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress

    The problem is... you say "guilty until proven innocent".... but you've already decided their guilty.

    You've completely forgotten that not every accusation is a true one.

    I've seen cases where a parent was accused of molestation... because the child wanted revenge for being told "no, you can't go to that concert -it's on a school night"

    Cases where a wife claimed abuse because her husband wanted a divorce. The investigation to that one proved that the only "abuse" found was that he threw a phone bill at her. Not even a papercut.

    Cases where a girl got laid and then changed her mind so now it was "rape".

    Cases where a girl claimed "sexual harassment" because the boss she was sleeping with broke up with her.

    So before you start bashing lawyers for defending people... remember, sometimes the person really is innocent.

    Hell, even our founding fathers believed in this. One of the loudest voices behind the movement to separate from England belonged to John Adams.

    I mention him because, of all the legal cases he took on as a lawyer, according to his writing, one of the most important cases was ... where he defended British militia accused of murder. He felt that, even though he was against British occupation... their soldiers still deserved a fair trial in court, especially if circumstances showed them to be innocent.

    In fact it wasn't even for the money - he only got paid his retainer fee. And he lost clients for following his convictions.

    something to think about before bashing lawyers for defending people in court

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Jan_Zondernaam

      "So before you start bashing lawyers for defending people... remember, sometimes the person really is innocent."

      Sure, there are moral lawyers too, whose only concern is to do good. I know that. That's why I asked about CERTAIN lawyers, lawyers who are trying to acquit clients, who they KNOW are guilty. I think they're soulless. Should they be allowed to do their (questionable) job?

      Btw, the founding fathers don't really mean anything to me, since I'm Dutch.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress

        Except you've forgotten a few things...

        1) by law - at least the laws here - accused people have the right to have a lawyer.
        2) the accused can fire the lawyer
        3) if the lawyer accepts the case and say... tries to sabotage it, the lawyer can be held accountable for his or her actions. if not punished by law then at least sued by the client - the accused.

        but most importantly... remember what rights you deny the accused because you "know" he or she is guilty... might someday turn into a case where you or someone you care about is the accused.

        or rather... be careful what you wish for because you just might get it

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • GeorgeMcBob

    A lawsuit is like two farmers fighting over a cow: One pulls on the tail, one pulls on the head, and the lawyer sits in the middle milking the cow.

    Comment Hidden ( show )