I'm Sorry, But Some Defense Attorneys Are Plain Scum

[SoCalMusicLover]

"He's Sad. He's Mournful. He's Remorseful. He's A Child." As she puts her arm around the poor kid.

Would she say that if her child had bullet holes throughout their body?

I must be a despicable human being, because I'd much rather put my fist through that guy's skull than give him one fraction of a second of pity.

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Attorneys job is to defend their client, no matter what.

We want them to do that, it is how the system stays strong.

I assume you saw an interview of his attorney, I did not see it.

The better the defense, the stronger the conviction.

We might see this play out with trump or others around him, if they have the brains to hire good attorneys, we want them to have good attorneys because Mueller is better and he will get convictions.

[TheCowsCameHome]

8. I hope the conviction is strong, too.

HIS conviction.

[skylucy]

2. I understand everyone is entitled to a defense attorney, but I heard Cruz's

attorney speak to the press this morning and she definitely should have kept her big mouth shut.

[brooklynite]

60. To those who claim to KNOW he's guilty...HOW do you know?

Did you see him shoot? Did you hear him confess? Or did you read a news report based on what Police and Government officials say? How do you know they were true?

BECAUSE you don't know for certain that is why we hold trials. And that is why the SUSPECT (innocent until PROVEN guilty) is entitled to a vigorous defense.

[skylucy]

64. Wow. This is why although I read DU everyday, I find myself posting less often.

brooklynite, I don't think I deserved such a nasty response to my short post. Of course the accused deserves a defense. I said that. I also listened to his attorney mouth off to the press today. She was pretty combative and had a rather nasty attitude IN MY OPINION. An attorney who comes across so as unlikeable certainly isn't doing her client any favors.

IN MY OPINION, she should have kept her mouth shut today. I know why we hold trials. Why all the anger directed at me?

[ecstatic]

65. I agree, I found her comments off putting. Extremely bad taste

I have a little compassion for the kid--tough life, lost his parents, screaming out for help via erratic social media posts, etc..., but her over the top defense of him didn't help at all. You can't pull out the violin when 17 people are dead and not even buried yet.

[Dorian Gray]

83. The dude confessed.

but whatever.

(Having said that, I think he deserves a defense attorney who will provide the best defense possible. And if he confessed they'll plea and he'll go to jail for the rest of his life.)

[USALiberal]

3. My god, do people not realize it is their fucking job????? A bad defense could lead to a mistrial.

[SoCalMusicLover]

9. Innocent Until Proven Guilty

I'm sorry, but the whole fair trial thing is sometimes a joke.

NOT IN ALL CASES.

But there is no doubt of this guy's guilt. IS THERE? Why does he have EVERY RIGHT POSSIBLE when it comes to being tried? DID HIS VICTIMS HAVE ANY RIGHTS? Oh well, it's too late for them, so why bother worrying. That's in the past.

Many Democrats, not myself, have a problem with the death penalty in cases like this. So be it. But can we dispense of the routine o a fair trial, and just send him away for a few lifetimes?

[USALiberal]

11. Sorry, the process is the same no matter what the crime. Everyone gets a defense. nt

[SoCalMusicLover]

15. Same With Guns, So It Seems

No matter the gun. Everyone has the right to own one. I guess we should just accept that.

[obamanut2012]

68. You just equated due process in law to gun humpers

You need to step away from the keyboard. Between this and believing people you know are guilty don't deserve a trial....

[Matthew28]

26. That includes

domestic abuse and sexual harassment. One is welcome to believe that one party is GUILTY as all hell, but they also deserves a chance at a defense.

[obamanut2012]

69. Shoo

[Blecht]

14. It is in all cases innocent until proven guilty

In the courtroom, that is.

Out here in the world, we know the fucker is guilty. However, he still needs a solid defense.

[Sophia4]

19. "Why does he have EVERY RIGHT POSSIBLE when it comes to being tried?"

For the same reason that you have every right possible in a court of law.

And he has the right to a jury trial if he is deemed able to stand trial.

[Atticus]

24. So, just who gets to decide when there is "no doubt of guilt" in each case? Countless people

have died for the ABSOLUTE RIGHT under our system to a fair trial, NO MATTER THE CRIME; NO MATTER THE DEFENDANT!

I can understand the emotions this slaughter has stirred. I share most of them. But, I hope you are capable of understanding that your eagerness to allow the government to imprison or otherwise punish this person WITHOUT A TRIAL virtually invites and encourages those who prefer the "efficiency" of an authoritarian government. It also seems to condone mob rule.

Finally, if it is so clear that this man is guilty, he will undoubtedly be convicted---under the Constitution and justice system that, while certainly not perfect., has been the envy of the world for over 200 years.

(I understand he has already confessed to the 17 murders)

[Codeine]

29. We cannot arbitrarily decide some people

do not deserve a fair trial. Can’t you see where that leads? The entire foundation of a just legal system is the notion of universality — we all are (theoretically) equal before the gaze of the law.

Now we know that’s not always how it works out, of course. But that’s an entirely separate issue.

And as far as the defense attorney is concerned, that person has a job. They are expected - nay, commanded - to mount a vigorous and ethical defense of their client.

[steve2470]

71. yes you nailed it

We just need the prosecutors to be ethical and well-prepared to convict the guilty and the cops to be ethical (yes yes I know an entire other discussion) and extremely competent in gathering evidence.

[dsc]

39. everyone was convinced the Central Park Five were guilty too

heck they even confessed, how did that turn out.

[obamanut2012]

70. Perfect analogy

[obamanut2012]

67. wtf

[LisaM]

4. Like it or not, that's a defense attorney's job. Everyone is entitled to a lawyer.

Many, many defense attorneys defend innocent people for no fee, but yes, sometimes they need to take these cases too. Years ago I went to an event where the speaker was the defense attorney appointed for the Unabomber. She didn't think he was innocent. But as she described it, if our law cannot provide defense for everybody, then we will end up providing legal defense for nobody (she was eventually moved off the case, for the record). She was compelling. Everyone in the room was quiet, listening to her. She also made it clear that the Unabomber was never going to be let off.

The attorney for Cruz is likely a court-appointed DA who won't be the eventual attorney for the case, but he is entitled to counsel. That is our system.

[DonViejo]

5. When both his attorneys cried when talking about.,..

what their client had done, the impact upon the families of the victims, their community and this country, were you as righteously outraged?

[obamanut2012]

72. This

I live close to where the shooting happened, have colleagues directly affected. His attorneys have cried in every interview with them I have seen. They acn vigorously defend him and still hate what he did.

I don't think many people on DU get what defense attorneys do, and how we want them to do a crackerjack job, because of mistrials, appeals, etc. Pkjus, IT IS WHAT THEY ARE ETHICALLY BOUND TO DO!

[lpbk2713]

6. Why are you sorry they are scum?

[Shrike47]

7. The Constitution entitles him to a defense, dammit, and shes trying.

How would you like that job? You want her to ask for the death penalty? Jeeze.

Sorry, but you pulled my chain. I have been both a defense attorney (first) and a State’s attorney. It isn’t always easy. You do the best you can with what you’ve got and you suffer if somebody you defended is executed, which this guy might well be.

Give her a break, she’s defending the Constitution as well as this turd.

[USALiberal]

12. Thank you for this! Some people just do not get it! I respect the process. n/t

[Mosby]

22. she should cop a plea

And "save" him from the death penalty.

Pretending he is a remorseful child isn't helping him any, it just makes her look like a total tool.

Why is she even talking to the media? How does that help her client?

[marylandblue]

34. She probably will do a plea bargain

But it won't work unless he shows remorse. So sbe is creating that story now. It's his only hope, a d it is her job to do it for him.

[Calista241]

63. She will try. Florida is a death penalty state, and i cant see them settling for

A lesser punishment. I mean, if this case doesn’t qualify for the DP, what case does?

[joshcryer]

47. That's what "he's remorseful" is about.

She's obviously and clearly trying to save him from the death penalty.

It is an extremely uphill battle. He already confessed. The evidence against him is going to be air tight.

The least she can get is a guilty plea in exchange for life in prison.

And it's highly unlikely the DA does a plea deal.

[obamanut2012]

73. Seriously?!

[cilla4progress]

25. I hear you!

I do not have her grace. I want him to pay. But I see her mercy and grace and honor it.

Always makes me think of Sister Helen Prejean (Dead Man Walking).

This won’t be popular to say here perhaps, but in some sense Cruz is also a victim. Of a society so violent and disconnected, and awash in guns.

[smirkymonkey]

10. He's not a "child" . He is 19 years old. Legally an adult.

I understand that he is entitled to legal defense, but her sickening plea for us to have pity on him was just revolting.

[Ms. Toad]

62. Legally, yes.

But not emotionally: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708

[SoCalMusicLover]

13. I Guess I Say, Give Him Same "Fair" Rights He Gave His Victims

He has a right to a fair trial. He has a right to a defense. A defense for what? KILLING SEVENTEEN INNOCENT HUMANS & WOUNDING & TRAUMATIZING COUNTLESS OTHERS FOR LIFE?

Don't get me wrong. I like our justice system. Innocent until proven guilty is a noble ideal. But there should be exceptions, and this is one of them.

I've yet to see anyone here say that we should wait until his trial, to decide whether to convict. So what in the trial is going to change people's minds? Do you think there are going to be people posting here about releasing him as innocent?

[Sophia4]

18. We should wait until his trial to decide whether to convict.

There. I said it.

He will probably be placed on bail. He may or may not go to trial depending on his mental capacity which must yet be determined.

I'm not defending or condemning him. I'm just saying that like any other American, he has the right to a fair trial.

[SoCalMusicLover]

20. Placed On Bail?

Are you kidding me? No fucking way he gets a bail amount.

And really, you're going to spout the pro-gun mental capacity talking point SPIN? He was an angry, racist, bigoted, white kid with a fascination for guns. That does not make you mentally incapacitated. He fully was aware of his actions, and in fact, was disappointed that he did not kill more people than he did. If anything, he views his massacre as unsuccessful.

[Sophia4]

23. He probably won't get a bail amount (my guess only), but then,

look at the killer of Trayvon Martin.

(It's the same state, Florida, after all.)

He may be deemed to lack the capacity to stand trial in which case he will not be tried but sent to an institution. Remember the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords.

On January 8, 2011, U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and eighteen others were shot during a constituent meeting held in a supermarket parking lot in Casas Adobes, Arizona, in the Tucson metropolitan area. Six people died, including federal District Court Chief Judge John Roll; Gabe Zimmerman, one of Rep. Giffords' staffers; and a nine-year-old girl, Christina-Taylor Green.[1][2][3][4][5] Giffords was holding the meeting, called "Congress on Your Corner", in the parking lot of a Safeway store when Jared Lee Loughner drew a pistol and shot her in the head before proceeding to fire on other people.[2][3] One additional person was injured in the immediate aftermath of the shooting.[6] News reports identified the target of the attack to be Giffords, a Democrat representing Arizona's 8th congressional district.[2] She was shot through the head at point-blank range, and her medical condition was initially described as "critical".[2][3]

Loughner, a 22-year-old Tucson man who was fixated on Giffords, was arrested at the scene.[7] Federal prosecutors filed five charges against him, including the attempted assassination of a member of Congress and the assassination of a federal judge.[4][8][9] Loughner previously had been arrested (but not convicted) once on a minor drug charge[10] and had been suspended by his college for disruptive behavior. Court filings include notes handwritten by Loughner indicating he planned to assassinate Giffords.[8] Loughner did not cooperate with authorities, invoking his right to remain silent.[3] He was held without bail and indicted on 49 counts. In January 2012, Loughner was found by a federal judge to be incompetent to stand trial based on two medical evaluations, which diagnosed him with paranoid schizophrenia.[11] Judged still incompetent to stand trial on May 25, finally on August 7, Loughner had a hearing at which he was judged competent. He pleaded guilty to 19 counts, and in November 2012 was sentenced to life in prison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting

The judge will decide. We shall see.

[R B Garr]

27. He was denied bail HOURS ago.

It was all over the news. They had a camera on the judge who denied bail.

[Sophia4]

50. Good!

[obamanut2012]

74. Placed on bail?!

Yeah, no.

[Atticus]

30. "There should be EXCEPTIONS"??? Excuse me, but your attitude is just the sort

of knee jerk vigilantism that motivates the Klansmen and the skinheads. I hope that, after you cool off, you are ashamed.

I think that's all I can say without breaching the TOS.

[GulfCoast66]

32. You want exceptions to the bedrock principle of our legal system?

Crazy idea anytime but with ShitforBrains in the WH?

Please calm down, lay off the all-caps, and rethink you opinion.

[Codeine]

33. There should not be exceptions

to the right to a fair trial. That’s fucking stupid. You should be ashamed of having posted that tripe.

Look, the little fucker is going to be convicted. The attorneys will mount a defense, as is heir responsibility, and they will fail. They know this. That doesn’t mean they aren’t required to defend him.

[obamanut2012]

75. They are desperately trying to spare him the DP

But, this is FL, and he killed 17 Floridians. He will get the DP.

I live down here by the shooting, and I am 100% against the DP, but he will get it, although he will kill himself first.

[moriah]

37. There should never be an exception to "innocent until proven guilty".

I'm not seeing anyone arguing he should get bail after being caught redhanded. He's not going to get bail with 17 counts of murder, as he was arrested with enough evidence to hold him over for trial.

He has the right to ask for a plea to avoid the death penalty and save the court the time and expense of a trial. Or to have one because the deal doesn't include what his attorney thinks are appropriate considerations for any mitigating conditions, and take his chances.

And for all of that he deserves a zealous attorney to represent his best interests. If his defender *isn't* zealous enough it can lead to cases getting thrown out. That's why the Constitution isn't merely a "noble ideal" but mandatory, why prosecutors must disclose all evidence including anything exculpatory even if they're certain they have their guy...

What would piss you off more: an attorney boo-hooing in the press, or the families having to go through the trauma of a retrial because they don't do the job right the first time?

[mythology]

41. Absolutely we should wait to decide a punishment until after

There are potentially mitigating factors. He could have a brain tumor or CTE that impacts his decision making. He could have suffered a psychotic break.

But regardless, especially in a case where somebody has the potential to spend life in jail or be executed, you do it by the book. There are countless examples of people "known" to be guilty who weren't. The consequences are too high.

[X_Digger]

44. Back the fuck up. An exception to innocent until proven guilty?!? No.

Scratch that. Not just no, but FUCK NO!

The goddamned shit that comes out of peoples' mouths..

That is one of the cornerstones of our justice system.

Fuck that shit.

[Mariana]

59. "But there should be exceptions ..."

First, you'd have to amend the Constitutions of the United States and of the State of Florida. Even then, this guy would still get his trial because ex post facto laws are prohibited by both Constitutions - although I suppose that could be amended out, too.

Do you really want start down that road? Do you want the likes of Donald Trump deciding who the exceptions will be, because that is what would happen. I'd much rather everyone get a fair trial, no matter how awful the crime or how apparently obvious the guilt of the defendant, than have some sociopathic Republican determining who gets a trial and who doesn't.

[Sophia4]

16. We have an adversarial justice system.

If you are ever accused of a crime, you will need a lawyer who is, no matter what, come hell or high water and assuming that both you and she tell the truth to the court, clearly on your side.

Lawyers don't just talk loud in court. They also write motions and other papers some of which are submitted to court and, they negotiate deals, plea deals, settlements and contracts of all sorts.

When a law student becomes a lawyer, he or she promises to be loyal to his or her client and to provide a defense for that client.

Don't judge lawyers because they defend the weak, the mentally ill, the murderer or the thief. That's their job. People are sometimes falsely or mistakenly accused. We may feel we know the facts about this case, that we know who is guilty, and we may or we may not.

Every defendant has the right to counsel. It's in the Constitution. The lawyer is doing her job.

[marybourg]

17. We are a nation of laws, not emotions,

no matter how understandable those emotions may be.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

21. "Would she say that if her child had bullet holes throughout their body?"

She might. Some people are able to feel compassion, want justice and reject revenge all at the same time. I will admit my heart hurts for anyone who is in so much pain that shooting up a school seems like the only solution, while wanting to hold that person -- and all who enabled him -- accountable.

[dflprincess]

52. Thank you

I had someone tell me today that I'm nuts because I said I can't help but feel bad for the shooter. Which, as you stated so well, does not mean I excuse him or do not want him held accountable, nor does it mean I do not feel even worse about the pain the families and friends of the victims (living and dead) are feeling.

[Yonnie3]

28. Sounds like the lawyer is already working on the penalty phase.

Talking to the juror pool looking for an easier sentence. A judge isn't going to listen to this in regard to bail.

[msongs]

31. sorry lady he is NOT a child nt

[dflprincess]

54. Nineteen is not an adult either

plenty of studies have made it clear our brains aren't developed until we're 25 and the last thing to develop is impulse control.

He's not old enough to legally buy a beer but he could buy an assault weapon. What does that say about the adults who make the rules?

[pnwmom]

56. I agree. A 19 year old doesn't have an adult brain. The last part to be developed

has to do with impulse control.

[marylandblue]

35. Our constitution provides rights for the defendant

because people make their snap judgements based on emotion rather than facts and law. He has these rights so that if YOU are ever accused then YOU get them too, no matter what people say about you or your lawyer.

[Blue_true]

36. She is obligated to provide the shooter with a defense.

Plus, more that likely a Judge picked her and she did not have a choice but represent him.

[Nonhlanhla]

38. Why hate on the lawyer?

She's doing her job. We don't there to be a mistrial because he did not have proper representation.

Anyway, she is right. At 19 your brain is not fully developed, so mentally speaking he is a child. A terrible child who committed terrible crimes, and who deserves to pay for it for the rest of his life. But before he broke others, he was broken, and now he is even more broken.

[Retrotech]

40. People like that should be disbarred. No ethics, no place in court.

[Demsrule86]

46. Disbarred for what? Doing her job constitutionally?

[onenote]

78. This OP demonstrates why we need to be steadfast in defending the rights of the accused

I thought that was a bedrock principle of progressives. Right to remain silent. Right to an attorney. Right to due process.

There are loads of folks on the right who would be happy to do away with those rights. Sadly, it appears that some on this thread would be happy to join them.

[X_Digger]

42. Everyone deserves a vigorous defense. Every.Goddamned.Asshole.

I'm sorry that you don't seem to get that.

It's important.

[ooky]

43. I would rather put my fist through the faces of those with the power

to address it and instead take money from the NRA.

[Demsrule86]

45. Every person deserves a good defense. It is the backbone of our legal system. She is doing her job

[Dreamer Tatum]

48. Amusic how many Democrats are against democracy nt

[Bettie]

49. He is entitled to a defense

that is a basic principle of our justice system.

Justice is better for society as a whole than vengeance, regardless of how we feel about him at this moment.

[elleng]

51. Nothing 'scum' about this.

He's admitted his acts, hasn't he? Attorneys have obligations to their clients.

[no_hypocrisy]

53. As a defense attorney, I am ethically and professionally bound to say whatever is necessary

to either exculpate my client or mitigate the penalty -- as long as it isn't a blatant falsity. It's called zealous representation.

I defended a woman who let her husband beat her and control her life as well as their five children's lives. I had to show the court that despite her low IQ, she was a decent and caring mother and her parental rights should not be terminated. While I had private doubts whether she was up for the job of being a single mother with 5 children between the ages of 6 and 12, I continued to show the court her progress. And the court was convinced.

To be a proper legal representative, you have to be detached to an extent and argue the facts and the law to the best of your ability.

I don't envy the job of the Florida public defender. The kid can sue for malpractice if everything a "reasonable attorney" would do isn't done.

[Hoyt]

57. Of course, you usually dont have to take the case. Agree the kid deserves a defense.

Best he’s going to get is rotting in prison, anyway.

[no_hypocrisy]

80. In a situation like this, I wouldn't take the case only if I absolutely knew that my personal

feelings would interfere with a proper representation. That's ethics as well as duty.

[NutmegYankee]

84. In some cases a lawyer is assigned.

Hillary Clinton got such a case with a rapist and people pounded her for representing her client. She did what she had to do as she didn't voluntarily take the case.

[FM123]

55. She's a pretty well known public defender here in Broward County.

I'm not convinced that she is truly sympathetic towards Cruz, especially since her mother is a local school teacher. Her public comments may reflect her position as public defender more than private citizen, and she knows how to play that game too (her brother and father are both judges).

[GaryCnf]

58. How sad

And I don't just mean the attack on the most important right embodied in the constitution.

The inability of so many to understand the extent to which people's actions, good and bad, are shaped by their experiences, as opposed to anything resembling free will is truly disheartening. This young man's attorney wasn't calling for pity, she was begging for awareness.

Applied in another setting, this "we're all responsible for our own failures" dogma leaves tragedies from blighted neighborhoods to the prison planet uncorrected by the privileged as they congratulate each other on their "good choices."

[Egnever]

61. Well said

[HopeAgain]

76. I know people personally affected by this tragedy

and I nonetheless agree wholeheartedly. The system didn't only fail his victims.

[ms liberty]

79. This. n/t

[obamanut2012]

66. I don't think you get how criminal defense attorneys work

She is trying to spare him the DP. It won't work, but that's what she's doing.

THAT IS HER JOB! She is ethically and legally bound to be teh best advocate for him she can be.

[HopeAgain]

77. This "scum" has a reputation of standing up

for the least of us and doggedly protecting our rights. Maybe you should read up on the Constitution.

[PA Democrat]

86. +1

[RelativelyJones]

81. This is a nation of laws and everyone is entitled to a defense attorney

[dembotoz]

82. kinda basic...you are supposed to get a fair trial i mean like ......duh

i hope she is good, more than that i hope she is wonderful.....

I mean i anticipate he is gonna fry, but i want a situation where there is no doubt that the system worked and a fair trial was provided and the accused rights were assure.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

85. Yeah. Fuck the Constitution and our Freedoms.

If you would rather kill this guy before he has a trial and a defense as provided by our constitution, then, yes, you are a despicable human being. It is our Constitution and the governmental limits is places that protects our freedom and not the patriotic jingoistic bullshit the Republicans parade around. I don't like this guy either, but he gets to have a defense.

[NCTraveler]

87. Plenty of people in professions across the board are scum. Nt