6 ms·

She doesn't mention the subject of that particular trial, but the previous example makes the stakes of her work clear: overturning wrongful murder convictions t

• lonelappde 7y ago
  How does she know they are innocent if she is actively sabotaging the state's efforts research and prepare the evidence?
  • mgbmtl 7y ago
    Why do you suspect she acted in bad faith, and assume that the state is acting in good faith? It seemed rather strongly arguable that 1) she takes cases she is passionate about 2) she seems to deal with cases where the state was abusive.
    • ShlomoS 7y ago
      It isn't an assumption, it is what she clearly stated: "because I knew that the other side wasn’t ready".
• drtillberg 7y ago
  What prosecutor is going to be caught flat-footed on a high stakes trial? None. One of two things happened: the prosecutor pulled a bunch of all-nighters to prepare ... or else ... was just going through the motions would not have prepared extensively if given another 40 years to do so. I get that sometimes we all have to roll out of bed early to serve a client's interest, but I also think it was clearer with the generation of lawyers that started in the 60s and 70s that in the mine run of administrative and scheduling issues, jamming attorneys like this does not generate a substantive advantage and, as one local luminary would have said, 'generates heat, not light.'