4 ms·

I also wondered a long time about why would an attorney defend someone which clearly seems to be a criminal. My understanding of this is that if someone is an

by 21 9y ago

I also wondered a long time about why would an attorney defend someone which clearly seems to be a criminal. My understanding of this is that if someone is an obvious criminal, it will be easy to prove in court, so the attorney will not change the outcome.

abhi3 9y ago
OJ Simpson
pfranz 9y ago
John Adams volunteered to represent British soldiers accused of killing civilians[1]. He made some good arguments about fairness. Even if they're guilty of crimes, it's still not fair to abuse them, pile on more charges, or take shortcuts when gathering facts. They also still need to be sentenced fairly. For example, if the guy who ran over and killed the woman in Charlottesville didn't get fair representation or trial, both sides could rightfully argue "the system is rigged." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Counsel_for_the_British:_Boston_Massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Counsel_for_the_Bri...
- ThrustVectoring 9y ago
  This is the fundamental essence of classic liberalism. Specifically, the meta-level things like strongly preferring that the system is working well over all situations rather than getting the correct result in any particular one. Also, avoiding even the appearance of impropriety, which causes more damage than getting things wrong. It's also the key insight of rule utilitarianism over act utilitarianism.
cr1895 9y ago
>I also wondered a long time about why would an attorney defend someone which clearly seems to be a criminal. Because even the worst criminal deserves his due process rights, a fair trial, etc, etc; this is fundamental to our American society. It is a cornerstone of our judicial system.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > this is fundamental to our American society Unfortunately, like much of American society, it's a theoretical pipe dream that falls down flat in reality as minorities don't get access to due process, fair trials, etc.
didgeoridoo 9y ago
It's because in the US justice system you are considered innocent until proven guilty. "Proof" requires an adversarial test to ensure you're not only getting one side of the story. Without defense attorneys, nobody could be "proven" guilty because a show trial proves nothing. If you want someone to be eligible for punishment, you should thus WANT them to be defended.

by 21 9y ago

abhi3 9y ago

OJ Simpson

pfranz 9y ago

John Adams volunteered to represent British soldiers accused of killing civilians[1]. He made some good arguments about fairness. Even if they're guilty of crimes, it's still not fair to abuse them, pile on more charges, or take shortcuts when gathering facts. They also still need to be sentenced fairly. For example, if the guy who ran over and killed the woman in Charlottesville didn't get fair representation or trial, both sides could rightfully argue "the system is rigged." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Counsel_for_the_British:_Boston_Massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Counsel_for_the_Bri...

ThrustVectoring 9y ago
This is the fundamental essence of classic liberalism. Specifically, the meta-level things like strongly preferring that the system is working well over all situations rather than getting the correct result in any particular one. Also, avoiding even the appearance of impropriety, which causes more damage than getting things wrong. It's also the key insight of rule utilitarianism over act utilitarianism.

cr1895 9y ago

>I also wondered a long time about why would an attorney defend someone which clearly seems to be a criminal. Because even the worst criminal deserves his due process rights, a fair trial, etc, etc; this is fundamental to our American society. It is a cornerstone of our judicial system.

zimpenfish 9y ago
> this is fundamental to our American society Unfortunately, like much of American society, it's a theoretical pipe dream that falls down flat in reality as minorities don't get access to due process, fair trials, etc.

didgeoridoo 9y ago

It's because in the US justice system you are considered innocent until proven guilty. "Proof" requires an adversarial test to ensure you're not only getting one side of the story. Without defense attorneys, nobody could be "proven" guilty because a show trial proves nothing. If you want someone to be eligible for punishment, you should thus WANT them to be defended.