• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Kill the Death Penalty

Wakeforest22890 said:
I don't think the system is perfect (no system is) but I have to agree with Junebug (this feels weird) that of all the problems out there that can be addressed and/or are issues, criminal defense attorneys zealously advocating for their client is so far down the list it's hardly even worth discussing. That's my opinion though.
Click to expand...

The greater problem is the lack of zealous defense for some defendants.
 
Is this a function of being a poor attorney or simply a lack of concern on the part of the attorney? For poor defendants, what is the pay for an attorney? Is it similar to Medicaid in that many of the top physicians (who are not employees of a medical center) generally manage a limited number of these patients as it is a poor business model, and thusly many are managed by those physicians who are, in general, not in the top half of their field?
 
Are you required to take any indigent cases? Do you take a few as "it is the right thing to do"? Are public defenders known as the people in the lower half of their law school and in general, lower skilled?
 
I don't know how it is across the board. A few of my former classmates work for CPCS in Massachusetts (essentially the public defenders for the Commonwealth) and for the most part they're very intelligent and believe everyone deserves a defense.
 
Good to know. You stated more were needed. Is it because of the low pay (similar to Medicaid for physicians)?
 
There are some very good lawyers who are public defenders. One of my friends is a public defender and she went to Georgetown Law. The issue isn't as much with the lack of good lawyers as much as the fact that public defenders are so overloaded with cases that it's difficult for them to have the time necessary to mount a rigorous defense in a particular one
 
MysteryMen said:
There are some very good lawyers who are public defenders. One of my friends is a public defender and she went to Georgetown Law. The issue isn't as much with the lack of good lawyers as much as the fact that public defenders are so overloaded with cases that it's difficult for them to have the time necessary to mount a rigorous defense in a particular one
Click to expand...

This.
 
WFFaithful said:
This.
Click to expand...

I also completely agree and would draw a distinction between lawyers who work for public defenders offices and court appointed defense attorneys. I have pretty much always been impressed with the quality of the representation provided by public defenders; court appointed defense counsel is much more of a grab bag in my experience, especially with regard to skill, commitment, experience, and ability to get the types of resources and experts serious felony trials require.
 
John Oliver on public defenders
 
my wife has been a PD and an assistant solicitor in SC (solicitor is what they call District Attorney's in SC) and is an assistant DA currently in NC. She maintains that with very few exceptions, the best defenses are given by public defenders. The county she currently works in doesn't have a PD's office, it subcontracts PD's work to private attorneys on a pre determined per hour rate based on the severity of the crime (attorneys put there name on a list saying they want PD work and get work when their name comes up)...it seems to be a pretty decent way to do things
 
That system doesn't seem like it will get the best attorneys. It did get Jimmy McGill though.
 
PhDeac said:
That system doesn't seem like it will get the best attorneys. It did get Jimmy McGill though.
Click to expand...

No system gets the best attorneys, but it does help make sure there is enough manpower to defend the indigent (which is the vast, vast majority of cases)
 
Yeah. I shouldn't have said "the best." I agree quality is more likely although not guaranteed.
 
HowardDeanSux said:
He shouldn't waive counsel, but it seems wrong if the attorney tries to get him off without any punishment. May just be "how it is". As you stated, it is better to ere on the side of innocence than guilty. It just seems like his is absolving the defensive attorney of any type of obligation of justice. I suppose that is the reality of the situation and is the best we can do. I would feel awful if I got a guilty person off for a crime (ie murder) I know they committed, and then the client committed the same crime again when the client should be in jail. It has been interesting to read an attorneys response on this board and will allow me to view this through a different lens.
Click to expand...

Something tells me that white collar criminals abuse the system in this way to a much greater extent than any other group. I honestly don't know how some high profile criminal defense attorneys sleep at night.
 
Strickland33 said:
Something tells me that white collar criminals abuse the system in this way to a much greater extent than any other group. I honestly don't know how some high profile criminal defense attorneys sleep at night.
Click to expand...

On piles of money with many beautiful ladies
 
Looks like the last pending appeal for Kelly Gissendaner has been denied by SCOTUS (one of three by her denied by SCOTUS today). Not sure if Georgia will go ahead with the execution tonight or not (was originally scheduled for 7pm). The execution warrant doesn't expire until Oct. 6.
 
I'm not a death penalty scholar by any means, but what would have been the legal arguments for staying the execution. This doesn't seem to be a case where there is any doubt as to her involvement in the crime. Are people still making 8th amendment arguments?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top