Yes. We have something here called Due Process, and everyone has the right to a fair trial. If someone is guilty of murder beyond a shadow of a doubt, they are still entitled to a fair trial. The best their lawyers can do is fight for them to not get the death penalty, if that state has it. I may not agree with all of that, but I guess it's better than being declared a mistrial, due to lack of fair representation.
It is my question and I frame it however I want to frame it. In THIS CASE the client is guilty. You don't challenge an author about the specifics of his/her book do you? You accept the parameters therein and either like it or don't like. Authors are not interested in being "nice". Authors are interested in sharing their thoughts and some folks enjoy those thoughts and some don't. So in your view a child torturer rapist or a serial killer has the same right to an energetic defense as a person who is totally innocent? You think that's NICE? How would you defend HITLER? How would you defend all those gun-related slaughterers who massacre folks? What kind of attorney would you be or are you? One who defends evil and tries to get it off the hook or one who seeks JUSTICE? Thank you for your reply. My response was not NICE. It was honest. We all have choices. I'm gonna ask.
This post was edited by RosieG at August 7, 2018 4:33 AM MDT
Not Sure 