For BB: Alberta Prosecutorial Tizzy

[CountDeMoney]

It cannot be over-emphasized that the purpose of a criminal prosecution is not to obtain a conviction

See, this why you would fail in America, where obtaining a conviction is the only purpose--even if it's the wrong guy.

If you had a JD, you'd know that.   

[CountDeMoney]

"The role of prosecutor excludes any notion of winning or losing," the ruling further states.

Pfft, weak.

[dps]

“The role of prosecutor excludes any notion of winning or losing,” the ruling further states.

Pfft, weak.

You know, the excerpts posted here from that ruling would almost make one think that the CSC at the time had a majority of former criminal defense attorneys.

[Capetan Mihali]

Question:  Do defense attorneys think justice is more important then winning cases?

Justice never even enters my mind.  I spend my day hustling hard to get "guilty" people off free or with insignificant punishment, and when I do, I'm thrilled.  Last night, after an hour or so of pleasant conversation, this guy started me asking all the cliche questions about the supposedly difficult moral situations public defenders have to face, which I didn't mind

I guess it's hard for people to believe, but in my pile of 70 or 80 case, I truly don't make distinctions between my clients based on their "guilt" or "innocence" -- it has very little relevance for how I do my job.  (Actually, the "innocent" clients tend to be more of a headache to deal with.  So are the clients, often facing DUIs, with the mentality of "I'm a good person!  I've never been in trouble before!" -- well guess what, you are now!; and the trouble's not going away on its own.  Ironically perhaps, I've found a lot of hardened cons to be the best to work with, once they trust that I'm not going to treat their case like a stereotypical "public pretender" or "dump truck"; they understand the risks, they understand the system, have clear ideas on what they want, and focus on the important issues rather than rambling about their lives.)

The two caveats are: 1) calling my client to testify; classical defense theory cautions against this 99% of the time, but it can be effective if you have the right client -- I cannot suborn perjury, so I need to be satisfied that his testimony will be truthful before he takes the stand; and 2) the extremely small minority of "heinous" crimes (or child welfare cases) where you need to "search your soul," I guess.  But in my limited time, I've worked on behalf of a double-murderer (quite closely and in person), someone with a cache of horrific child porn, and even a prison guard who raped inmates.  It didn't really phase me.

This schmuck from last night started kind of baiting me, telling me why it was so limited and disrespectful to the clients to think of criminal defense in terms of "fighting," which we tend to do, and that we should change our perception to arrive at the belief that we've 'already' won the case before we start working on it.  Maybe I would've taken it in stride on a Saturday night, but I'd just spent my whole day "fighting" for my clients.  For instance just several hours earlier, when I was meeting a developmentally-disabled 14-year-old boy in a jail cell, completely uncommunicative, sitting next to him as he cried softly and continuously with his head down during the brief court proceeding, watching him lead away in handcuffs, and even catching a view of his tear-stained face slumped against the window in the back of the cruiser as the deputies took him on the ride to juvie -- and I was totally unable to do a thing for him.

Sometimes, you do come home at night a little dazed, feeling like a walking receptacle for human misery, and totally helpless.  Except maybe to succeed on one single criminal charge for one single person, when your head swims with your hundreds of clients' lifetimes of being abused, beaten, disrespected, arrested, incarcerated, robbed, panicked, confused, enraged, desperate, overwhelmed...

Maybe my emergency motion written at 9pm buys my healthy 39 year old client a couple of days so she doesn't miss the appointment to have all her teeth pulled out, before she goes to do her 45 days in jail.  I got that for her, and I was very glad for a minute, since I thought it would be denied.  But the great victory means that she's still locked up in a cell, she's toothless at 39 for no other reason than she's poor and can't afford the dental work that would save the teeth, thus looking more and more like the scummy criminal she's supposed to be, and she's losing morale to see the pending case through to trial.

Perhaps I was overtired at the end of the week, perhaps a little touchy as well after a few drinks at the end of the night, but I argued with this "artistic" moron for way, way, way too long before we left on really quite hateful terms.  I regret it because of how pointless it was to ruin my evening like that.

But "fighting" is the right metaphor for what I do and what I'm so supposed to do.  The State started this particular fight when the police arrested him, and then the prosecutors laid charges, formally announcing that they want to take away his freedom, through physical violence (imprisonment) if they want to.  I'm called his defense attorney -- you only need to "defend" against an attack; and two parties attacking and defending pretty much defines a fight.

So that's the even-keeled professional outlook from the defense side.

[CountDeMoney]

I bet Capetan Mihali is a big fan of Cape Fear.

[Razgovory]

Okay, so the prosecution is much more justified in only trying to get convictions.

[Capetan Mihali]

I bet Capetan Mihali is a big fan of Cape Fear.

Well,the original is a true classic, but the lack of a happy ending is tough.

The remake is great too.  De Niro demonstrates an unorthodox but undeniably effective avenue for a grievance about professional ethics/ineffective assistance of counsel.

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[CountDeMoney]

It might be 2 days before Christmas, but I still got a fellow bail denied today.  Take that Santa Claus effect!   

Fascist.  So a bail bondsman gets to go hungry this holiday because you feel compelled to maintain an erection.

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[The Brain]

Could I do that?

[CountDeMoney]

Of course he was;  if I were locked up, I'd want to release myself on my own recognizance too.

[Barrister]

But "fighting" is the right metaphor for what I do and what I'm so supposed to do.  The State started this particular fight when the police arrested him, and then the prosecutors laid charges, formally announcing that they want to take away his freedom, through physical violence (imprisonment) if they want to.  I'm called his defense attorney -- you only need to "defend" against an attack; and two parties attacking and defending pretty much defines a fight.

So that's the even-keeled professional outlook from the defense side.

I would humbly suggest that the fight started (sometimes quite literally) when a crime was committed, and the state is only responding.

[The Brain]

Nice to know that the Crown has evolved beyond the kindergarten level.

[Capetan Mihali]

It might be 2 days before Christmas, but I still got a fellow bail denied today.  Take that Santa Claus effect!   

And I got guys out on recognizance bail with multiple failures-to-appear and other shit.  

I also pulled the exact "but it's Christmas!?" line that you hate, for one client who has missed many of them due to incarceration; he really wanted me to ask for that in those terms, and we didn't have much to go on, so I gave it a shot, but I did find some humor while I was pitching it because I remembered this thread.

EDIT:  Needless to say, it wasn't successful.