A day in the life of Non

[eynon81]

[Professor]

One other thing that gets under my skin when someone talks bad about attorneys. They say that an attorney got a guilty guy off "on a technicality".

You know what? Those "technicalities" are rules. They are there for a reason. They prevent backlogs in the system (filing deadlines and such). They guarantee rights (reading of Miranda rights). They ensure an unbiased jury (jury rules). All of those things are rules.

Is it worth letting a murderer go free just because a prosecutor happened to file some papers 2 days late? No. But, it is more than worth it to let one murderer go free to prevent prosecutors from routinely filing papers late and keeping innocent people in jail longer than necessary.

[eynon81]

[exploited]

You guys are right to say he was doing his job. I don't deny it at all. Doesn't change the fact that my time was brutally wasted. The guy should have just pled guilty and taken the community service hours. I was just pissed off that I had to be there, and while I was there, the focus was more on my actions than his. "So, Mr. Benner, just how many hours did you engage in training my client per week? Was there a graduation system? Have you ever changed the tips in? Is that part of your job?"

How about you just advise your client to plead guilty and take the wrist slap, and why are you overacting a case like this?

[Dylan]

[exploited]

No, it's the PDs fault for acting like Clarence Darrow at a minor theft trial. You can present a case without behaving like a dickwad. The theatrics, eyerolls, suggestive emoting and all that shit at a juryless trial is bulllllshit.

[Dylan]

He really got to you huh? I bet that guy would tear it up in depositions. If a witness is still buttburt about it years later the lawyer clearly did his job well.

[The Dharma Bum]

agreed

kind of hard to believe a public defender would do that.

Oh yeah, Canada.

[exploited]

Had there been a chance in hell of the scumbag getting off, I may have enjoyed my experience. It would have been interesting. What isn't interesting is going over a video tape while some kid who is probably younger than me asks me the same question in six different ways because he is desperate to get me to trip up. Combined with lost wages and the fact that the judge seemed about ready to censure the guy for being ridiculous, I'd say me being annoyed was pretty justified.

I had to testify for an hour and a half. For a $100 theft. Don't get me wrong, if I was poor and a scumbag, I'd love this guy as my lawyer. But as a person with better things to do who is also smart enough to know there is no way in hell scumbag is getting off (he didn't)... Annoying.

[Professor]