Will you defend or do morals tell you not to (read post).

Ok, this is the situation. You just got out of lawyers college/university (w/e you want to call it). You get a job at a company with many other lawyers and your first job defend a celebraty that had murdered 2 children and 5 kittens. Out of this deal the celebraty will give you five-hundred thousand dollars if you win not to mention you will be one of the best lawyers in America. Basically if you win in court you're set for life. If you do not defend the celebraty your company fires you and you end up jobless for the rest of your life.

remeber you just got out of schooling and you need money badly. It's this or nothing.

What do you do?

Edit: I know this is not an accurate representation of how a lawyer gets into a world class case like this. I just want to know if it is against your morals or not.

I'd defend them no problem as long as I get payed.

Thats the problem I have with all the kids in my year level who want to be lawyers. They all think that they will prosecuting the bad guy, not defending them. And then they say "I just wont defend them". Yeah, good luck :roll:

I'd defend them no problem as long as I get payed.

Thats the problem I have with all the kids in my year level who want to be lawyers. They all think that they will prosecuting the bad guy, not defending them. And then they say "I just wont defend them". Yeah, good luck :roll:

freek666

A soul for sale, huh?

Win the case, shoot the woman, and hope that the children's family or friends don't end up in jail. How's that?vlin1108

lol wut?

First off law School is where lawyers get their schooling.....

Secondly they have to pass the bar to practice so being out of school is irrelevant.

Third a "company" would not be taking a murder case. You mean a "law firm"

Fourth a lawyer with no in-court experience would most likely never be allowed to take a capital case.

Fifth 500k is no where near set for life especially after you just spent 150k on law school.

I would defend him without any moral dilemma.....

[QUOTE="vlin1108"]Win the case, shoot the woman, and hope that the children's family or friends don't end up in jail. How's that?psn_Jaimzl

lol wut?

After I get paid for winning the case, I eliminate the woman ( I wanna picture the celebrity as a woman, just because ). The children's family will end up as suspects though, but they'd probably make that sacrifice for the love of vengeance. I give everyone what they want.

Justice is served.

EDIT - I meant the celebrity, yeah.

[QUOTE="freek666"]

I'd defend them no problem as long as I get payed.

Thats the problem I have with all the kids in my year level who want to be lawyers. They all think that they will prosecuting the bad guy, not defending them. And then they say "I just wont defend them". Yeah, good luck :roll:

vlin1108

A soul for sale, huh?

Not for sale, but I dont mind loaning it for a while. ;)

First off law School is where lawyers get there schooling.....

Secondly they have to pass the bar to practice so being out of school is irrelevant.

Third a "company" would not be taking a murder case. You mean a "law firm"

Fourth a lawyer with no in-court experience would most likely never be allowed to take a capital case.

Fifth 500k is no where near set for life especially after you just spent 150k on law school.

I would defend him no without any moral dilemma.....

Mafiree

i wasn't trying to be accurate i want to know if would be against you morals or not.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]

First off law School is where lawyers get there schooling.....

Secondly they have to pass the bar to practice so being out of school is irrelevant.

Third a "company" would not be taking a murder case. You mean a "law firm"

Fourth a lawyer with no in-court experience would most likely never be allowed to take a capital case.

Fifth 500k is no where near set for life especially after you just spent 150k on law school.

I would defend him no without any moral dilemma.....

psn_Jaimzl

i wasn't trying to be accurate i want to know if would be against you morals or not.

Dont read too much into it.. But isnt going to law school already setting your morals aside? I mean sure some get the chance to eventually choose their clients, but your going to take someone on or defend someone. Law is blind. It is opinionated, not fair, nor accurate. It is, in many ways, a game of knowledge.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]

First off law School is where lawyers get there schooling.....

Secondly they have to pass the bar to practice so being out of school is irrelevant.

Third a "company" would not be taking a murder case. You mean a "law firm"

Fourth a lawyer with no in-court experience would most likely never be allowed to take a capital case.

Fifth 500k is no where near set for life especially after you just spent 150k on law school.

I would defend him no without any moral dilemma.....

psn_Jaimzl

i wasn't trying to be accurate i want to know if would be against you morals or not.

It's not really based of any moral discourse though.

If you wouldn't defend him you are against the principles in the Bill of Rights basically. The whole right to an attorney and a fair trial to be specific. The fair trial is what you would be defending in court. You simply would produce exculpatory evidence and block the prosecution from presenting illegally obtained evidence amongst other things.

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

defence lawayers must defend everyone. if he's guilty then the prosecutor must prove it.

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

Chutebox

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

vlin1108

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

Yea, defending a murderer would really bring me happiness.

I find joy in helping others and living a high moral life.

[QUOTE="vlin1108"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

Chutebox

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

Yea, defending a murderer would really bring me happiness.

I find joy in helping others and living a high moral life.

[QUOTE="vlin1108"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

Chutebox

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

Yea, defending a murderer would really bring me happiness.

I find joy in helping others and living a high moral life.

And you'd be helping at least two people, and that's not include their family, assuming they have one! :)

[QUOTE="vlin1108"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

Chutebox

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

Yea, defending a murderer would really bring me happiness.

I find joy in helping others and living a high moral life.

That never came into discussion.

Morals are a pain in the arse. I know they've gotta be and such though. On second thought, virtues are the ball and chain.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="vlin1108"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Morals >>>>> money.

Morals bring me happiness, not money.

vlin1108

Morals are the ball and chain only a martyr would be happy to wear.

Yea, defending a murderer would really bring me happiness.

I find joy in helping others and living a high moral life.

That never came into discussion.

Morals are a pain in the arse. I know they've gotta be and such though. On second thought, virtues are the ball and chain.

Guess I misunderstood you, my bad.

But the hardest things in life tend to be the most worthy and beneficial, and for me having high morals is just that.

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Mafiree

In the OP it said he had killed, not accusesd.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Chutebox

In the OP it said he had killed, not accusesd.

That is irrelevant.

If you fail to defend the accused(or in this case the perpetrator) in this case why not others?

The right toa trial is basic human right in my view. Denying someone that is not the moral high road.

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Mafiree

Everyone deserves a fair trial. If, however, you know for certain that the person you're defending is guilty and will still do it just because you want to earn your bread then, yeah, that's immoral in my eyes.

Lawyers generally don't have a good reputation and maybe part of that is well earned. Some just don't want to lose a case; they like their reputation, they like swinging their charismatic tongues to sway the judge's decision; and when they win, some start believing in their power to manipulate, encouraging their influential selves.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Mafiree

In the OP it said he had killed, not accusesd.

That is irrelevant.

If you fail to defend the accused(or in this case the perpetrator) in this case why not others?

The right toa trial is basic human right in my view. Denying someone that is not the moral high road.

So I have no basic human right to not represent someone? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I'm sure if I don't defend him someone else will be more than willing.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Chutebox

In the OP it said he had killed, not accusesd.

That is irrelevant.

If you fail to defend the accused(or in this case the perpetrator) in this case why not others?

The right toa trial is basic human right in my view. Denying someone that is not the moral high road.

So I have no basic human right to not represent someone? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I'm sure if I don't defend him someone else will be more than willing.

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

I understand how facist get into power now because of this thread.....

So let me get this straight from the people who feel it is the moral high road to NOT defend him.

Basically you want all those accused of a crime to not have a fair trial and just be sentenced to a a certain amount of jail time? That sounds like a police state to me.....

Mafiree

In the OP it said he had killed, not accusesd.

That is irrelevant.

If you fail to defend the accused(or in this case the perpetrator) in this case why not others?

The right toa trial is basic human right in my view. Denying someone that is not the moral high road.

So I have no basic human right to not represent someone? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I'm sure if I don't defend him someone else will be more than willing.

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

How is it a cop out? Doctors and nurses can and do refuse to perform or be involved with abortions even though it's "Their job". People choose morals over their job all the time because it outweighs it. It's their choice and they're not forced to do otherwise.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

Chutebox

How is it a cop out? Doctors and nurses can and do refuse to perform or be involved with abortions even though it's "Their job". People choose morals over their job all the time because it outweighs it. It's their choice and they're not forced to do otherwise.

It's a cop out because you are justifying not defending someone because someone else will do it.

If you are a defense attorney I believe your moral obligation is to defend people and uphold our constitutional rights.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

Mafiree

How is it a cop out? Doctors and nurses can and do refuse to perform or be involved with abortions even though it's "Their job". People choose morals over their job all the time because it outweighs it. It's their choice and they're not forced to do otherwise.

It's a cop out because you are justifying not defending someone because someone else will do it.

If you are a defense attorney I believe your moral obligation is to defend people and uphold our constitutional rights.

It's an example of people doing it every day.

My personal morals outweigh anything business related any day.

[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

Chutebox

How is it a cop out? Doctors and nurses can and do refuse to perform or be involved with abortions even though it's "Their job". People choose morals over their job all the time because it outweighs it. It's their choice and they're not forced to do otherwise.

It's a cop out because you are justifying not defending someone because someone else will do it.

If you are a defense attorney I believe your moral obligation is to defend people and uphold our constitutional rights.

It's an example of people doing it every day.

My personal morals outweigh anything business related any day.

Defending someones basic constitutional rights isn't a moral decision though......

You aren't condoning the murder they committed. So it is not like the case of a doctor refusing to perform an abortion on the grounds that its murder. You are simply defending their right to a fair trial. Which I can't understand how someone could be against....

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="Mafiree"]

As a lawyer you do but doing so would be a little shaddy. Similar to a doctor refusing service in my view. You are a public servent in this situation and your JOB is defend people. You have already made the decision to defend guilty people by taking the job at the law firm.

The last statement is cop out.

Mafiree

How is it a cop out? Doctors and nurses can and do refuse to perform or be involved with abortions even though it's "Their job". People choose morals over their job all the time because it outweighs it. It's their choice and they're not forced to do otherwise.

It's a cop out because you are justifying not defending someone because someone else will do it.

If you are a defense attorney I believe your moral obligation is to defend people and uphold our constitutional rights.

It's an example of people doing it every day.

My personal morals outweigh anything business related any day.

Defending someones basic constitutional rights isn't a moral decision though......

You aren't condoning the murder they committed. So it is not like the case of a doctor refusing to perform an abortion on the grounds that its murder. You are simply defending their right to a fair trial. Which I can't understand how someone could be against....

You are ignoring the fact that in this example he did commit the murder. How is that not considered to be involved with morals. I understand what you're saying, but at the same time of "rejecting" the defendants right to an attorney you are rejecting my right as a citizen who still has their rights.

I can choose who I want to defend, there is nothing wrong with that. Hell, Daredevil does it!

[QUOTE="Mafiree"]

Defending someones basic constitutional rights isn't a moral decision though......

You aren't condoning the murder they committed. So it is not like the case of a doctor refusing to perform an abortion on the grounds that its murder. You are simply defending their right to a fair trial. Which I can't understand how someone could be against....

Chutebox

You are ignoring the fact that in this example he did commit the murder. How is that not considered to be involved with morals. I understand what you're saying, but at the same time of "rejecting" the defendants right to an attorney you are rejecting my right as a citizen who still has their rights.

I can choose who I want to defend, there is nothing wrong with that. Hell, Daredevil does it!

Not ignoring anything reread my post.

Refusing to defend the guy is your right. But, it is in no way more or less moral than defending the guy.

That's why I could never be a lawyer. A judge, perhaps,but I'd be a hard-ass dealth penalty to everyone, kind of judge.DigitalExile

I hear you one that one. :lol:

And also, a defence lawyer's gotta do what a defence lawyer's gotta do. It's just their job at the end of the day. :Pluke1889

It's a-okay as long as you haven't somehow aquired solid proof that exposes the accused as being guilty and do not provide the court with the evidence you've got.

That's pretty much what was implied in the primary question of this thread.

I mean, there's a side-quest in Kotor 1 where, if you find evidence that the person you're defending ( you get to play a lawyer ) is guilty, and do not show it to the supreme Fish Council; but instead succeed in proving the criminal as being innocent in front of the court, you get evil points.

Any lawyer that would do such a thing is, therefore, a piece of Sith.

Since it's a given that he's guilty, I wouldn't defend.Funky_Llama

its your job to defend though

i'ld defend the celebrity, i'ld do more goood in the future that way and hopefully oout way the evil i'ld already donemarkop2003

the "evil" will still be done though, doing good, will just give you piece of mind, it wont undo the bad

Ok, this is the situation. You just got out of lawyers college/university (w/e you want to call it). You get a job at a company with many other lawyers and your first job defend a celebraty that had murdered 2 children and 5 kittens. Out of this deal the celebraty will give you five-hundred thousand dollars if you win not to mention you will be one of the best lawyers in America. Basically if you win in court you're set for life. If you do not defend the celebraty your company fires you and you end up jobless for the rest of your life.

remeber you just got out of schooling and you need money badly. It's this or nothing.

What do you do?

Edit: I know this is not an accurate representation of how a lawyer gets into a world class case like this. I just want to know if it is against your morals or not.

psn_Jaimzl

Actually I got a better idea.

You tape record and document all of this information told by both the firm and client, cover your own butt, and then blackmail the company that if they dont give you a few million dollars that your going to turn them all in on ethical charges and also criminal for trying to cover up a crime. Since they have full knowledge that this client did do the murder then you have everything you need.

So you walk away with 2 million and can start your own little firm across america where you CAN choose who you defend.

Or they try to call it a a bluff, you turn them in and get a 2 million dollar book deal on how you took down this big law firm and this "important" person for all that is just. Then you get to make tens of thousands on endorsements and "good morning America" interviews.

Or you could be silly and try and get only 500k out of it. Look like a saint and make a crapload more is smarter.

i'ld defend the celebrity, i'ld do more goood in the future that way and hopefully oout way the evil i'ld already donemarkop2003