ElkGunner said:
CJ,
"...Somebody brings pliers into a prison, gives them to Dallas, who then cuts the fence and gets into a waiting car. And he is found not guilty of escape??? How is that anything other than brilliant defense work?
Leave it to a lawyer to put the cart before the horse and make it the horse's fault. Gunner, I have come to realize from the last few threads I've been following, that you are an attorney(please correct me if I am mistaken), if this is so then please help me understand something...at what point did the right to an attorney and competent representation vis a vis' a vigorous defense, become a quest to see the guilty aquitted? I'm not talking about Claude Dallas specifically here. You stated he got 22 years so I assume the jury returned a guilty verdict for a lesser charge (M-2 or MS?) but then we are talking about a man who deliberately killed two uniformed wardens to protect his "right" to continue to steal deer...and you sing his lawyers praises. For what? Some innovative legal weasletry in subverting the system? Why are trials more about the lawyers and their egos then about seeing justice served?
Constitutional guarantees were supposed to prevent sham trials, not provide sufficient semantic ambiguity for crafty lawyers to manufacture "reasonable doubt" where non exists.
I do not want to see the innocent convicted but your profession has a rich history of knowingly setting the dangerous free to rape, murder, rob and molest again, all the while hiding behind attorney-client priviledge.
Thur's what right and thur's whats legal an' n'er the twain shall meet
Sad, and yet its still the fairest, most just justice system ever devised.
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers".
King Henry the Sixth, Part II- (Act IV, Scene II).