Quote:
Originally Posted by R Leo
My D-i-L's dad is a public defender out west. One year he was here and over cigars on the back porch, I asked: "just how in the hell do you defend someone that you know is guilty?"
His answer was, "Sure, some are guilty but are they guilty of what they are being charged with??"
Lawyer rule #1: Obfuscate clearly.
|
I don't understand his comment or your description of it.
I would expect a public defender to answer your question by saying that the criminal defense attorney defends the Bill of Rights and the presumption of innocence. Even if the defendant is guilty as charged, the criminal defense attorney owes no apology if his or her work prevents the state from proving its case. I'm sure we can concoct fact patterns in which such a result is utterly intolerable, but that is the nature of our imperfect system.
As for your characterization of what he said, it seems that you have it backwards. Under his concept of the defense attorney's role, the state is the one doing the obfuscation and the defense attorney is the one fighting that obfuscation.
EDIT: Is that what you meant by "obfuscate
clearly"? I do agree that obfuscation is a tool used by defense attorneys, in both civil and criminal cases. I do not mean that in a disparaging way. That is just how it works when the law places the burden of proof on one party. The other party often wants to obfuscate.