11-20-2007, 12:35 PM #1
WWLD- What Would a (criminal defense) Lawyer Do?
Here's a question for anyone out there who is a lawyer, has lunch with/ lives with/shares parents with/ gave birth to, or can run next door and ask a lawyer :
Would you continue to represent a client, especially a pro-bono client, if he or she habitually disregarded your advice to avoid media, stop talking, flirting, bragging or anything else you've warned them will seriously hurt their case?
Would your decision be any different for a high-profile case or client?
Do you think it makes you look incompetent when a client repeatedly acts a fool in front of the press?
Anyone with other lawyer questions please feel free to add.
11-20-2007, 12:45 PM #2
My daughter once knew a public defender she dated in Denver "How can you represent these folks with a clear conscience?" she asked. The lawyer replied "It's not my job to "like" the person. They are my client and it's my job to give them the best representation I can, whether I think they are guilty or not."
If you become a defense attorney I think you are conditioned to feel this way or you wouldn't go into that field of the law.
Also, when they are not needy of a "public defender" and have money I would say that you would consider it a great way of paying off your student loans."Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect" Steven Wright
11-20-2007, 12:47 PM #3
I'm not a lawyer.
IMO it depends on who the lawyer is. Did he take the case due to it being something that will put himself in the spotlight? Did he take the case because he sees it as a way to help someone he sees as getting a raw deal?
I think there's a reason we have not seen a top level attorney with DP, any lawyer worth their salt can see this is a trainwreck of a case where the client will not do what would be in his best interests. That leads me to believe the 1 representing him did so with visions of being interviewed by the likes of LK and as long as he gets those perks does he really care how compliant his client is?
11-20-2007, 12:54 PM #4Inactive
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
I think there is a difference between the defense lawyer Drew now has and a so called normal defense lawyer. This guy is right up Drew's alley, he's so much like Drew I am sure they are two peas in a pod.
I read that Drew was contacted by this lawyer after his first Today Show shout out for a lawyer. So right there you have your answer..none of the lawyers I know, friends or family, wanted in any way to jump on Drew's bandwagon, but this guy did.
11-20-2007, 01:01 PM #5Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
11-20-2007, 01:29 PM #6Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
Fox reported today that Peterson's lawyer had gotten himself into legal trouble by forging a dead man's signature on a probate document and received the funds himself.I told you a million times not to exaggerate.
11-20-2007, 02:07 PM #7"I told you a million times not to exaggerate."
11-20-2007, 04:14 PM #8
If Joel Brodsky has Drew P's best interests at heart instead of the bottom line (publicity and the money he can make off the case), he will look at the public opinion (representative of the jury pool after hearing the evidence in the case) He will talk with Drew P (really listening) He will find out the evidence that indicates Drew P's guilt. Then he will decide to do what is in Drew P's best interest.
If Drew P is convicted, he is most likely looking at the death penalty. But if he steps forward, he can most likely get a plea deal by volunteering to plead guilty and offering information to the wherebouts of Stacy's body.Just when I think that I have seen the most depraved things a human can do to another human, somebody posts a new story...........
Why is it that when a custodial parent fails to provide for a child it is called neglect and is a criminal matter. But when a non custodial parent fails to provide it is called failure to support and is a civil matter?
"Just when the caterpillar thought its world was over, it became a butterfly" ~ Michelle Knight
11-21-2007, 12:50 AM #9
I'm not an attorney, nor do I portray one on TV but IMO, DP is shopping around for a high profile attorney by way of his reckless TV interviews.
I think he knows exactly what he is doing and is hoping Mark Geragos comes along with a need to defend another guilty Peterson man.
I can tell you this: If I was a criminal defense attorney, and if I took on the repugnant task of representing this man, I would never ask him if he was guilty, and I would require a firm agreement that he never told me of his own volition either. I think my best defense would be to create a speck of reasonable doubt in the absence of a body, as the situation currently exists.
I would also try to exclude everything related to Kathleen Savio's death, because I am 99% certain he killed her also.
11-21-2007, 09:59 AM #10Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2003