If you happen to be a lawyer, would you defend a guilty client?

If have been flowing Law & Order and you might realise that not everyone is as guilty as they seem. Even is you are a lawyer defending the guilty thn its is also the lawyers obiligation to follow the law and the guilty has a reason to be guilty and in that case its the lawyers job to give the defended the best advice possible and i dont think that lawyers would be advising their clients to lie cos thn they will be breaking the law. EG: On one episode- there was a battered woman who killed her husband. She admitted to being guilty of killing her husband but she was also a victim as she had no other choice but to kill her husband. Her husband had already told her that soon he has plans to kill her and their children and thn move away to another state with another woman. So in this case the defended is a victim as well and ofcourse the jury said that she was not guilty and the defended was able to walk aay with murder. There is no such thing as a guilty client as everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

oj simpson is behind bars not for the sensational crime he was accused of. but then, he is behind bars. there are people who are cut out to be lawyers and politicians. these are two synonymous positions in the sense that both, if credible, have enough sense of the law. everyone has a reason in doing something. it is how one lawyer defends that reason for the crime that makes it impossible for any lawyer to back out of anything.

I oculd not defend a person I believed to be guilty. I could represent him and make sure he received due process. To defend him I would have to beleive I was doing the right thing and I would not beable to give it my best shot.

Crimninal lawyers defend criminals. Right? There is big buck in criminal law. There is a well known attorney in my town that seems to defend only the guilty. Every time I see him on TV with a suspect, I always say, "That person did it!" The attorney rarely gets them off, but he gets big bucks for representing them. I am a retired police officer. I believe attornies know when they will win and when they will lose in most cases. I have seen people pay a lot of money to an attorney for a preliminary hearing when they really didn't need an attorney. (Those cases were not felonies)

As you point out, it is the job of a lawyer to provide the best defense possible to all clients. Most ask the client not to tell them if there is guilt involved; they should just answer the questions the attorney thinks necessary. It must be really hard to defend someone if you think they're guilty, but I'm sure it doesn't take a whole lot of experience to realize that we can seldom know who's guilty and who's innocent. Surprises come up all the time!

if i were a lawyer, i will still defend a client even if he/she is guilty because defending an accused does not only mean intending to acquit the accused but making sure that in the legal procedure, he is getting and assured of all the right conferred on him under the constitution. Also, an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. there may be some circumstances present in the situation which may lessen his penalty.

i couldn't defend someone if i knew they were guilty. there is no way i could sit there and try to convince someone that my client didn't do it when i knew in my heart that they did. for something petty it might not be as hard. but i couldn't defend someone who had done something violent or hurt someone.

I'm not a lawyer but my husband is. He has already defended a guilty client... and they won. Not murder though. He also had a client that was guilty and he was able to bring down the punishment to something more favorable. Like what he always tells me, being a lawyer, it is his obligation to defend his client. It's hard if you are defending the guilty party, because of our values and belief. In the end he tells me, that he just has to remember that it is just work and nothing else. Being a lawyer has taught him to e unattached to people and situation that is related to his job.

This is a pretty good discussion and that is a very powerful question and I am sure different would feel differently because it is really matter of morals vs your job and money,because I am sure there are a lot of people who would go with the money and defend their client whether they are guilty or not because they do not care as long as they get paid,and it seems that a lot of lawyers are not very nice and some of them act like they have no morals and do not care about right or wrong,and it is almost like they do not have a conscience and do not feel guilty if they help a guilty man get proven innocent which is sad,and that is part of the reason I do not trust lawyers,and then I am sure there are people who would not defend a client if they are guilty because they morals,or if they were defending a client,and find out they are guilty they would refuse to keep defending them,and there are some lawyers like that out there in the world and those are the type of lawyers I like,the ones who actually care about more than the money the client is paying them to defend them,and then there are probably people who do not have a opinion,and do not know if they would defend a guilty client or not,and I can understand why people would believe the way they are,whether they believe in the money,or they actually believe in morals,and doing what is right,I am not a lawyer but if I was a lawyer like on the show Law and Order then I would be a lawyer with morals and strict guidelines,if a client was guilty of a crime no matter what crime it was,and no matter how much they were willing to pay me,I would not take the case,because if I helped them get off by getting a jury to find them innocent my conscience would drive me crazy from the guilt,and if I was defending a client and I found out they were guilty then I would stop defending them at let someone else take over,because I would not be able to continue defending them if I wanted to keep a clean conscience,especially in cases that involve murder,rape or any other really big crime,and I do not think I could shake hands with a murderer and I am also glad that OJ Simpson is behind bars where he belongs,and I do not care if lawyers are bound to an oath to defend a client guilty or not,I would not follow that oath if I knew my client was guilty,then I would not care if it cost me my job,because I would tell them a clean conscience without a job,is better than having a job,but not a clean conscience,and at least with a clean conscience I can look at myself in the mirror without being ashamed of what I see,and I would probably rather be a prosecutor like the DA or the ADA because I would rather prosecute the guilty ones and make sure they get punished for the crimes they committed,then be the lawyer that defends the guilty ones and tries to get them off without any sort of punishment because that way I would hopefully get the chance to put more people behind bars,so that way less criminals would be walking the streets,even though personally I would rather be a cop,specifically a Texas Ranger because then I would be able to find the evidence to prove that a person committed the crime,and then the prosecutor could make sure the charges stick and that the person that did it gets the punishment they deserve.

I am not a lawyer, but if I were I would defend someone unless they admitted to me that they were guilty. I would ask them to be honest with me, of course. That said, though, if I felt that they were guilty, I might not defend them. But that's only if the evidence really does add up against them. Also, and this is unfortunate, but if I were in dire need of money, i might just take the client for that reason.