Defense Attorneys Defense Lawyer

My law professor, is an ex prosecutor, and now a defense lawyer. I have asked him many questions about defending murders and rapist, and does that effect him. He states he cannot let it, in order to do his job correctly. Personally, I do not think I could defend a client that I knew murdered or raped someone. This is just me though. My question is as LEO’s do you tend to have a negative perspective of defense lawyers? Especially, the one that defend heinous criminals?

Absolutely not, everyone that is arrested is entitled to a competent representation under the United States Constitution, and LEO’s know that defense attorneys are just doing their job, like the LEO is.
The attorneys that LEO’s tend to dislike are the sneaky attorneys that bend the law to the point of breaking it in representing their client.
How would you feel if you were accused of a heinous crime and couldn’t find an attorney to represent you? Or if someone framed you for a crime that you didn’t commit. And an attorney wouldn’t represent you because of the crime that you had committed.
Attorney’s who defend people convicted of heinous crimes are often appointed by the Court because the defendant cannot afford legal representation, and in doing so, they must separate the person from the crime, they are accused of committing, and defend that person to the best of their ability. That is why in most jurisdictions, death penalty cases are required to be tried with 2 defense attorneys for the accused. This because of the added burden of the death penalty.

powered by Yahoo Answers

My law professor, is an ex prosecutor, and now a defense lawyer. I have asked him many questions about defending murders and rapist, and does that effect him. He states he cannot let it, in order to do his job correctly. Personally, I do not think I could defend a client that I knew murdered or raped someone. This is just me though. My question is as LEO’s do you tend to have a negative perspective of defense lawyers? Especially, the one that defend heinous criminals?

Absolutely not, everyone that is arrested is entitled to a competent representation under the United States Constitution, and LEO’s know that defense attorneys are just doing their job, like the LEO is.
The attorneys that LEO’s tend to dislike are the sneaky attorneys that bend the law to the point of breaking it in representing their client.
How would you feel if you were accused of a heinous crime and couldn’t find an attorney to represent you? Or if someone framed you for a crime that you didn’t commit. And an attorney wouldn’t represent you because of the crime that you had committed.
Attorney’s who defend people convicted of heinous crimes are often appointed by the Court because the defendant cannot afford legal representation, and in doing so, they must separate the person from the crime, they are accused of committing, and defend that person to the best of their ability. That is why in most jurisdictions, death penalty cases are required to be tried with 2 defense attorneys for the accused. This because of the added burden of the death penalty.

powered by Yahoo Answers

My law professor, is an ex prosecutor, and now a defense lawyer. I have asked him many questions about defending murders and rapist, and does that effect him. He states he cannot let it, in order to do his job correctly. Personally, I do not think I could defend a client that I knew murdered or raped someone. This is just me though. My question is as LEO’s do you tend to have a negative perspective of defense lawyers? Especially, the one that defend heinous criminals?

Absolutely not, everyone that is arrested is entitled to a competent representation under the United States Constitution, and LEO’s know that defense attorneys are just doing their job, like the LEO is.
The attorneys that LEO’s tend to dislike are the sneaky attorneys that bend the law to the point of breaking it in representing their client.
How would you feel if you were accused of a heinous crime and couldn’t find an attorney to represent you? Or if someone framed you for a crime that you didn’t commit. And an attorney wouldn’t represent you because of the crime that you had committed.
Attorney’s who defend people convicted of heinous crimes are often appointed by the Court because the defendant cannot afford legal representation, and in doing so, they must separate the person from the crime, they are accused of committing, and defend that person to the best of their ability. That is why in most jurisdictions, death penalty cases are required to be tried with 2 defense attorneys for the accused. This because of the added burden of the death penalty.

powered by Yahoo Answers

My law professor, is an ex prosecutor, and now a defense lawyer. I have asked him many questions about defending murders and rapist, and does that effect him. He states he cannot let it, in order to do his job correctly. Personally, I do not think I could defend a client that I knew murdered or raped someone. This is just me though. My question is as LEO’s do you tend to have a negative perspective of defense lawyers? Especially, the one that defend heinous criminals?

Absolutely not, everyone that is arrested is entitled to a competent representation under the United States Constitution, and LEO’s know that defense attorneys are just doing their job, like the LEO is.
The attorneys that LEO’s tend to dislike are the sneaky attorneys that bend the law to the point of breaking it in representing their client.
How would you feel if you were accused of a heinous crime and couldn’t find an attorney to represent you? Or if someone framed you for a crime that you didn’t commit. And an attorney wouldn’t represent you because of the crime that you had committed.
Attorney’s who defend people convicted of heinous crimes are often appointed by the Court because the defendant cannot afford legal representation, and in doing so, they must separate the person from the crime, they are accused of committing, and defend that person to the best of their ability. That is why in most jurisdictions, death penalty cases are required to be tried with 2 defense attorneys for the accused. This because of the added burden of the death penalty.

powered by Yahoo Answers

My law professor, is an ex prosecutor, and now a defense lawyer. I have asked him many questions about defending murders and rapist, and does that effect him. He states he cannot let it, in order to do his job correctly. Personally, I do not think I could defend a client that I knew murdered or raped someone. This is just me though. My question is as LEO’s do you tend to have a negative perspective of defense lawyers? Especially, the one that defend heinous criminals?

Absolutely not, everyone that is arrested is entitled to a competent representation under the United States Constitution, and LEO’s know that defense attorneys are just doing their job, like the LEO is.
The attorneys that LEO’s tend to dislike are the sneaky attorneys that bend the law to the point of breaking it in representing their client.
How would you feel if you were accused of a heinous crime and couldn’t find an attorney to represent you? Or if someone framed you for a crime that you didn’t commit. And an attorney wouldn’t represent you because of the crime that you had committed.
Attorney’s who defend people convicted of heinous crimes are often appointed by the Court because the defendant cannot afford legal representation, and in doing so, they must separate the person from the crime, they are accused of committing, and defend that person to the best of their ability. That is why in most jurisdictions, death penalty cases are required to be tried with 2 defense attorneys for the accused. This because of the added burden of the death penalty.

powered by Yahoo Answers

Either they are delusional or they are stupid enough to come up with outrageous ideas to defend some idiot or rapist who deserves jail to get them off our streets. They insult our intelligence and greedy enough to spend time/money defending trash.

Sure.
They disgust me too.
If the ones on TV bother you, you should meet some in real life. They are no better, and often worse.
They disgust you because they are accomplished and guiltless liars. They feel so righteous about defending creeps. They tell themselves it’s their job. Right! Sure! Does that mean bankrobbery is okay because it’s just a job? They say everyone has a right to a defense. That’s true, but does that justify lying? Does that justify taking pride in getting a murdurer off?
Here’s the deal, the end never justifies the means, even when the President thinks it does (like torturing prisoners to get intelligence on terrorists ).

powered by Yahoo Answers

Either they are delusional or they are stupid enough to come up with outrageous ideas to defend some idiot or rapist who deserves jail to get them off our streets. They insult our intelligence and greedy enough to spend time/money defending trash.

Sure.
They disgust me too.
If the ones on TV bother you, you should meet some in real life. They are no better, and often worse.
They disgust you because they are accomplished and guiltless liars. They feel so righteous about defending creeps. They tell themselves it’s their job. Right! Sure! Does that mean bankrobbery is okay because it’s just a job? They say everyone has a right to a defense. That’s true, but does that justify lying? Does that justify taking pride in getting a murdurer off?
Here’s the deal, the end never justifies the means, even when the President thinks it does (like torturing prisoners to get intelligence on terrorists ).

powered by Yahoo Answers

Either they are delusional or they are stupid enough to come up with outrageous ideas to defend some idiot or rapist who deserves jail to get them off our streets. They insult our intelligence and greedy enough to spend time/money defending trash.

Sure.
They disgust me too.
If the ones on TV bother you, you should meet some in real life. They are no better, and often worse.
They disgust you because they are accomplished and guiltless liars. They feel so righteous about defending creeps. They tell themselves it’s their job. Right! Sure! Does that mean bankrobbery is okay because it’s just a job? They say everyone has a right to a defense. That’s true, but does that justify lying? Does that justify taking pride in getting a murdurer off?
Here’s the deal, the end never justifies the means, even when the President thinks it does (like torturing prisoners to get intelligence on terrorists ).

powered by Yahoo Answers

Either they are delusional or they are stupid enough to come up with outrageous ideas to defend some idiot or rapist who deserves jail to get them off our streets. They insult our intelligence and greedy enough to spend time/money defending trash.

Sure.
They disgust me too.
If the ones on TV bother you, you should meet some in real life. They are no better, and often worse.
They disgust you because they are accomplished and guiltless liars. They feel so righteous about defending creeps. They tell themselves it’s their job. Right! Sure! Does that mean bankrobbery is okay because it’s just a job? They say everyone has a right to a defense. That’s true, but does that justify lying? Does that justify taking pride in getting a murdurer off?
Here’s the deal, the end never justifies the means, even when the President thinks it does (like torturing prisoners to get intelligence on terrorists ).

powered by Yahoo Answers

Either they are delusional or they are stupid enough to come up with outrageous ideas to defend some idiot or rapist who deserves jail to get them off our streets. They insult our intelligence and greedy enough to spend time/money defending trash.

Sure.
They disgust me too.
If the ones on TV bother you, you should meet some in real life. They are no better, and often worse.
They disgust you because they are accomplished and guiltless liars. They feel so righteous about defending creeps. They tell themselves it’s their job. Right! Sure! Does that mean bankrobbery is okay because it’s just a job? They say everyone has a right to a defense. That’s true, but does that justify lying? Does that justify taking pride in getting a murdurer off?
Here’s the deal, the end never justifies the means, even when the President thinks it does (like torturing prisoners to get intelligence on terrorists ).

powered by Yahoo Answers