Law Talk: Defending Guilty People Isn't Easy

[aefallen]

Law Talk
In summary: Defending Guilty People Isn't Easy, or, Why Life Is Not Like Phoenix Wright;
and

Comments

[inspired_idiot]

Yes, the "you defend guilty people" or "let guilty people go scot free" is the most often heard excuse given in scorn heaped upon the legal profession.

The thing is, what most may not realise is that lawyers are officers of the court (at least in Singapore). Lawyers can't lie to the court. They can't make up evidence. They don't take a shovel and help our clients dispose of the body in some isolated stretch of road. If the guy admits that he is guilty, lawyers are not allowed to plead that he is guilty and the most we can do is just mitigate. All lawyers can do is work within the system and laws to present the best case to the judge. It is up to the judge to then decide whether to rightly whack the offender with the law or set him free. (Of course, there may be exceptions in less than ethical lawyers... action have been taken against lawyers who were found lying to or misleading the court)

It's also rather hard for one to prejudge who is the "innocent" or "guilty" party. The client comes up to you with their side of the story, true or not, it's the only side you hear. It's always an intriguing experience reading family law cases because both sides sound utterly convincing, at least on paper. Of course it becomes a matter of the judge deciding who is lying. But how do lawyers know for sure that the client is truly innocent or a really glib liar? I think that even if the person is guilty, he does need a lawyer to help him with any sort of mitigation or at least ensure that there is due process and he is dealt fairly under the law.

And as a wise friend said to me (for those who believe there is God or karma or some kind of after life retribution), they may escape judgment on earth, but they can't escape judgment in heaven. ^____~

[aefallen]

*hugs you so tightly!* Thank you so much for understanding - I can't help but think sometimes that maybe only fellow law students/pupils/trainee lawyers can genuinely understand and empathise with the predicament.

I mean, I totally understand why we get a bad rep, and I know that the profession has its fair share of unscrupulous individuals, but the kind of attitude people give the legal profession sometimes completely misses out on the good work that the profession does and can do. A lot of people have this misguided conception of what lawyers can do and do do, and I suspect a fair number of them get their ideas from the media. Or only remember the cases when really bad lawyering turns up. (And of course mostly the bad lawyers end up in the papers so people can remember them better)

That's true! It's so hard to judge who is the "innocent" party, especially when naturally both sides present the most convincing arguments for their case. And sometimes neither party is innocent. I really do wish that there was a universal truth-telling machine, it'd make the job of the courts so much easier.

*grin* A law school classmate once told me much the same thing. I suppose it's the only consolation there is if justice can't be found on earth. But what if (apologies, I don't mean to cast aspersions on faith or religion) there is no heaven, and what of the victim's/other party's family, on earth? I find it so hard to accept verdicts that don't go the way they should, but sometimes there genuinely is nothing that one can do about it. *wry smile* I wish the justice system was perfect. Even though I know it's impossible.