On the plus side, we can now laugh more at the people claiming the VP debate was the great turning point of the Trump Campaign.
Trump apologizes for boasting about groping women, says he'll be talking about Bill Clinton more now
3 Likes
VP?
19 Likes
Gotta take some issue with this one. That is the one and only context in which it’s not only excusable, but arguably a moral imperative for someone to make arguments in defense of a child rapist. Our entire justice system falls apart when we take away legal advocates for people accused of committing crimes. She didn’t volunteer to defend the guy (as is often claimed) but she fulfilled her legal duty once appointed.
I certainly don’t blame the rape victim for harboring a grudge against Clinton, but that’s the way our system works.
27 Likes
There’s a horrible metaphor in that statement.
15 Likes
Honestly, I’m deeply relieved that in 2020 Pence will be remembered as the guy on the 2016 ticket with the sexual offender, and said it made him proud. Pence is at least as dangerous.
16 Likes
These Never Trump people have been around for Trump’s entire campaign. They’re not against Trump, they just want control of their party back.
2 Likes
I know. But their chaos reassures me.
2 Likes
Clinton was ordered by the judge to take the case, and did her job to protect the Constitutional rights of the defendant. She had a legal and professional duty to represent her client to the best of her ability. That included getting a psych. eval on the child and questioning her. It’s certainly gross, but defense attorneys do have to defend people even if they’re guilty, and are put in all kind of horrifying positions I couldn’t cope with. I’m grateful they do it since they are the ones on the front lines of defending Constitutional rights every day. In the legal system, the ideal is to uphold justice which can only be served if both the defense and the prosecution present the strongest case, letting the jury decides which case is strongest. Complaining about a defense attorney doing their job is honestly more offensive to me than the horrifying things they’re put in the position to have to do to preserve justice.
26 Likes
They could change it to Trump Won’t Pull Out Due to Leakage.
6 Likes
That’s the script for the story of a regular person. The script for a “good guy” type goes like this:
“I am forced to resign over principles because I believe my client is guilty (she’s stated so since then) and find another way to help people. Maybe I’ll go in to getting the falsely accused released or into legal victim advocacy.”
Or at the very least she could have reached out to the child victim after the case and done something to help her. Nope.
Again, this isn’t me saying “don’t vote Hill”, but “I’m sad when progressives behave like regressives. If we can’t be completely honest about ourselves then we’re not doing it right.”.
Sec Hillary Clinton is an example of what an extremely competent moderately compassionate person can do. That’s not an argument against her, it’s an argument against the canonization of her.
2 Likes
How about Trump’s Cover is Blown, But, Despite Protests, He Insists On Finishing?
5 Likes
She was ordered by the judge to serve as the defense attorney. There was no “I am forced to resign” option.
16 Likes
Even if it’s suborning perjury, the judge will usually refuse to let you withdraw:
Withdrawal from representation is a surprisingly lively area of legal ethics. Consider the classic case of the avowed perjurer. Criminal defendants have a constitutional right to take the stand in their own defense. Occasionally, one of them tells his lawyer in advance that his entire line of testimony will be lies. This scenario presents what legal scholar Monroe Freedman famously referred to as the lawyer’s “trilemma.” The attorney has an obligation to fight for the client’s interests, a responsibility to identify perjury to the court, and a duty to keep his client’s secrets. Because the client has put the attorney in a situation in which it’s impossible to fulfill all three professional obligations, some lawyers see this as a situation that demands withdrawal.
Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. As mentioned above, an attorney can’t withdraw in the middle of litigation without the judge’s permission, and it’s indisputably unethical for an advocate to directly inform the judge that his client is a liar. What usually happens in these cases is that the lawyer approaches the bench and asks to beg off the case for vague “ethical reasons.” The judge, knowing exactly what’s going on, typically denies the request, because the jury would smell a rat if the lawyer were to disappear right before the defendant took the stand. The judge, continuing the Kabuki-style exchange, informs the advocate that he has satisfied his ethical obligations and must continue. In some courts, the lawyer can protect his sense of ethics by simply putting the client on the stand and instructing him to “tell the jury his story,” rather than specifically prompting the lies.
10 Likes
Even if resignation isn’t a legal option (I’m not sure if that’s so, I did a search but it seems like the possibility that a lawyer might chose to simply resign from practicing rather than defend a guilty client hasn’t been answered authoritatively) she did nothing to reach out to someone whom she believed to be a victim after the case.
She did the thing a regular asshole like me or you would do. She has frequently done the things regular assholes do. Like going after multiple women whom her husband creeped on. She takes money and lies about it or obfuscates when she can’t lie. Again not “evil” shit, but “regular” shit. She deflects, she connives, she uses weasel words, etc.
Remember making fun of people for voting Bush because he seemed like a “regular guy”.
She isn’t a hero character. Maybe people need to believe she is because then her shitty behavior that they also possess makes them feel heroic too.
Well I’m a regular shitty coward like I’ll wager most of you are too. I don’t need to lie to myself about it and I don’t need to lie to myself about her.
1 Like
I don’t buy that one bit. It’s entirely possible that the attorneys for the Central Park Five thought their clients were guilty, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t have a duty to defend them to the best of their abilities.
12 Likes
This line of attack, and they’re using it against Kaine too (He defended murderers!), is part of a growing right wing attack on the 6th amendment and the fundamental right to legal representation. A right that predates the constitution, and American revolution. One of the original points of contention between the colonies and the British Crown. Hell Trump has openly advocated for the denial of this right to terror suspects.
So like you said its not really a valid criticism of Hillary (nor Kaine), and it doesn’t seem to be sticking as hard as they’re pushing it. What it is another example of the GOP twisting their antipathy to certain civil rights into an electoral context in an attempt to sell them better. Doesn’t matter if they have success smearing an opponent with it. They introduce and underline the idea that the right to an attorney is bad, for later. See also voter ID.
15 Likes
I’m no legal expert, but wouldn’t that be ethically compromising for a defense attorney? IANAL, but it seems to me that kind of behavior shows bias and could serve to help a defendant found guilty and potentially be grounds for an appeal adding more of a burden to the victim. Also, of all the people in the world that might bring comfort to the victim, I’m pretty sure the defense attorney defending their rapist is among that last that would be able to do much.
11 Likes
If you feel your client raped someone and your brain decides the best way to serve justice is to undermine the victim using a cross examination not designed to service truth but to discredit someone to serve something you believe to be unjust then your brain does not work the way a “good person’s” brain works.
A “good person” refuses to participate and takes the consequences. A “good person” goes to jail and loses their boxing career rather than kill people in SE Asia, a “good person” flees their home and family for Russia rather than let the NSA spy on people illegally.
A “good person” has convictions that don’t become malleable because it’s inconvenient.
The problem is the baseline for what is really “good” is so low we have to pretend that being a shitbage is “normal” and being just “fairly decent sometimes” is magnificent.
2 Likes
Human nature all but guarantees your perpetual disappointment.
2 Likes
