guilty?

dagamm17's picture

when you comitt a crime more times the most you go to court, and at court you get a lawyer. You become this persons client there supposed to defend you an tell you the best option you have. But when it comes to a trial in a serious case it's diffrent. If you have a lawyer and they know your guilty should they still be allowed to defend you? Most of the time your lawyer knows whats going on, and if they know your guilty shouldn't it be wrong to be able to be defended. If you murder someone and they know your guilty then why should you get defended!! That doesn't seem fair, then agian life isn't fair. None the less it does seem wrong if they know your guilty and they still try to prove you innocent.

sawaboof's picture
Volunteer for the Progressive U Alumni Association

sometimes the defense is not to prove someone's not guilty (when they are), it's to negotiate for a different sentence. Maybe someone killed in self defense and, rather than serving 40 years, they're going to plead guilty and then use the fact that the killing was in self defense to bring that sentence down to 5 years.


read my blogs!

ProU
Not ProU

Some mistakes can't be undone/ it'll never be like it was/ and wishing for it only makes it worse
Rocky Votolato

Member of the Progressive U Alumni Association

First of all, your writing is very hard to read because of the numerous spelling and grammar errors.

I agree with your point. I don't like the thought of my tax money going to pay for criminal defense attorneys while I can't even afford to get a will written.

I love abortion. Read more here:
http://progressiveu.org/044921-i-love-abortion-even-if-it-murder

OxonGlass11's picture

That's a simple distinction of a constitutional government. To simply deny consul to a suspected criminal would be a moral wrong in-and-of itself.

-OxonGlass11

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.