Breaking News: Public defense attorney fulfills ethical responsibility to defend a client to the best of their ability regardless of their own view on the case. More at eleven.
Breaking News: Public defense attorney fulfills ethical responsibility to defend a client to the best of their ability regardless of their own view on the case. More at eleven.
Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
Well, how sure are we that the 12 year old wasn't asking for it?
She was doing her job though. Age is largely irrelevant in law when it comes to these things. If anything I'd think Hilary "slut" shamming would've made it easier for the prosecution to win. Why does her gearing up for a Presidential run matter that much? If anything it shows that she can get the job done.
It has been scientifically confirmed that if Eiffel was green; he would in fact die.
Last edited by Endus; 2014-06-17 at 11:23 PM.
How do you come to that conclusion? Questioning the credibility of the accuser is absolutely defending your client.
People also need to bear in mind that the lawyer presents the case that their client wants and agrees to, not the one the lawyer wants.
If the comment wasn't relevant then it's the responsibility of the Judge and/or the prosecution to point that out, not the defense's.
People should also note that the reason the case collapsed was down to the fact the forensic lab messed up and destroyed vital evidence, crippling the prosecution's case.
The title is extremely mis-leading and a huge attention grab. Literally, you should word it Hillary DEFENDED child rapist 30 + years ago, which was her job. You are making an extremely mis-leading title just to get people to come to the thread.
It was in 1975. "Slut shaming" wasn't even a popular term then.
The problem is with the justice system.
Cops and lawyers get praised and rewarded based on won and solved cases, regardless of justice actually being served. This leads to arrests and convictions of innocent people as well as guilty parties walking free.
It would be nice if Hillary used this as a chance to open the public's eyes to the flaws in the system and try to effect a positive change.
All this tells me is that Conservatives are scared shitless of Hillary in 2016.
Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.
Just, be kind.
This is correct Crissi. During pre-trial motions, either side can object to the type of testimony and evidence that is going to be brought up. If the judge doesn't think it's relevant, they can disallow it. If that wasn't done in this case, then your issue is with the judge.