3 ms·
Personally I find the idea of withholding civil justice from criminals to be entirely repugnant. No matter what their crimes are. I don’t think there is any suc
by AmericanChopper 8y ago
Personally I find the idea of withholding civil justice from criminals to be entirely repugnant. No matter what their crimes are. I don’t think there is any such crime that would justify withholding justice from an individual.
- icebraining 8y agoI don't think the point is whether they are criminals, but whether their legal action is at all reasonable. Suing the government in order to plant bombs is itself unethical. So is suing someone in order to enforce a patent which "attempts to monopolize the abstract idea of monitoring a preexisting data stream between a server" (quoting the judge).
- AmericanChopper 8y agoOne of the role of judges is to determine whether their legal action is reasonable at all. To say that a criminal should not be able to be a plaintiff in a civil suit, or that barriers should be established to prevent it, is simply to deny their access to civil justice. It’s an entirely mindless position.
- icebraining 8y agoYou keep focusing on the criminal part, not sure why. That wasn't the point at all, from what I can tell.
- sl1ck731 8y agoThat isn't entirely the purpose of defense attorneys. They are also responsible for ensuring clients get the "correct" punishment for the crime. If they weren't present there would be no check on heinous sentences for minor crimes.