Does Baez Actually Believe Casey is Innocent? - A Philosophical Discussion

[Wescott]

And Johnny paid the ultimate price- according to other members of the defense team, they all knew the truth- the stress of it caused Johnny to die of cancer, and he took his secret to his grave!

Wow, I didn't know this!! I knew Johnny died of cancer, but not the other part. So the rest of the defense team said that they all knew that OJ was guilty?? Sorry for the OT, but I am highly interested in this.

F.L. Bailey is still carrying on about OJ being innocent. Johnny did a Larry King interview in 2000 and talked about how he had moved on which I believe he did. I do not think the stress of it caused him to die from a brain tumor. IMO

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/f-lee-bailey-has-new-evidence-that-o-j-was-innocent/

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0006/12/lkl.00.html

http://www.medicinenet.com/brain_tumor/page4.htm

Sorry for the OT as well.

 

[HRCODEPINK]

I'm a lawyer. Let me say, first, that I consider JB is an embarassment to my profession. In my experience, he is also, thank goodness, an aberration.

I understand that the public perceives the goal of the defense lawyer is to get the client off. A lawyer doing his work, on a day to day business, may not disagree. When the client is innocent, the lawyer achieves his or her goal by seeking the truth. When the client is guilty, the lawyer looks for loopholes in statutes, misconduct by police, prosecutors, and jurors, or errors by judges, and seeks to exploit those things for the client's benefit.

But when we stop to philosophize, we see it from a different perspective. We say that there is a social contract among us by which, for our mutual benefit, we consent to live by certain rules. To accomplish this, we create a government to determine what those rules are, and to enforce them. And we empower our government -- and provide it with enormous resources -- to determine who has violated the rules, and to punish them by depriving them of property, liberty, or -- as in this case -- life, itself.

It is the government, not the lawyer, that has the responsibility of deciding who is deserving of punishment. The lawyer's role is to ensure that the government exercises its power to punish correctly.

Whether innocent or guilty, a client's objective is to avoid being punished. So, when the guilty client is convicted and sentenced, the lawyer "loses". But, despite the loss, the lawyer who did his or her job well achieves the important goal of protecting those of us who are innocent by ensuring that the prosecutor's "win" was fair and square.

I could not possibly agree with you more! I was going to say this in my last post but decided not to because it is an unpopular opinion, but having seen your answer I am going to go ahead and say it now:

I was not happy to see OJ walk for Ron and Nicole's murders. I don't know for certain 100% that he was there, but I am sure that he was involved in some way (Not really trying to get into an OJ argument, except to say that I do not believe that he is factually innocent.) That said: I do believe that the outcome was correct. When you have it, you have it. When things get wishy-washy with investigations, then it is what it is and sometimes the powers that be need to be taught a lesson as well. I am not one that things that there are tons of police and judges and such that do the wrong things, but it would be crazy not to admit that there are some. And when those people abuse their power, IMO, the perp should walk free. Because if you allow things to be fabricated or tampered with for one, you allow it for all and I am not willing to see what happen. I sleep well at night with this opinion, knowing that Karma got OJ in the end. In my experience, it usually does.

 

[elisaannh]

I have no trouble with defending a person who committed a crime, they are indeed entitled to a fair trial and defense lawyers should be making sure that their client doesn't get more punishment than they deserve for that crime.

But what I don't understand is when defense attorney's make up stories (basically lying) to defend a client. There was no need to blame others directly to support her defense, they should have simply implied that there could have been doubt she was involved. Doubt can be implied and planted like a seed. Instead, her DT created wild stories that only served to make themselves appear foolish. THAT is the thing I cannot image how they can sleep at night with....dragging down innocent people to further a lie.

 

[missm]

I could not possibly agree with you more! I was going to say this in my last post but decided not to because it is an unpopular opinion, but having seen your answer I am going to go ahead and say it now:

I was not happy to see OJ walk for Ron and Nicole's murders. I don't know for certain 100% that he was there, but I am sure that he was involved in some way (Not really trying to get into an OJ argument, except to say that I do not believe that he is factually innocent.) That said: I do believe that the outcome was correct. When you have it, you have it. When things get wishy-washy with investigations, then it is what it is and sometimes the powers that be need to be taught a lesson as well. I am not one that things that there are tons of police and judges and such that do the wrong things, but it would be crazy not to admit that there are some. And when those people abuse their power, IMO, the perp should walk free. Because if you allow things to be fabricated or tampered with for one, you allow it for all and I am not willing to see what happen. I sleep well at night with this opinion, knowing that Karma got OJ in the end. In my experience, it usually does.

Intellectually, I understand your opinion. I just don't know how you would explain it to the remaining family members seeking justice for their murdered spouse/child/sister/brother/friend. Nobody wants it to be their case though, where you have to cross your fingers and rely on karma for justice after the fact.

 

[missm]

I have no trouble with defending a person who committed a crime, they are indeed entitled to a fair trial and defense lawyers should be making sure that their client doesn't get more punishment than they deserve for that crime.

But what I don't understand is when defense attorney's make up stories (basically lying) to defend a client. There was no need to blame others directly to support her defense, they should have simply implied that there could have been doubt she was involved. Doubt can be implied and planted like a seed. Instead, her DT created wild stories that only served to make themselves appear foolish. THAT is the thing I cannot image how they can sleep at night with....dragging down innocent people to further a lie.

And this is what I mean, and what I wish those practicing law would comment on: is it OK to do the wrong thing to win at any cost? Is that really where we are now in the justice system?

 

[spqr]

He only believes she is "innocent" as long as that takes him down the path to "stardom" for HIMSELF. If this was any other case, he would have told her to plea and resigned as council if she didn't plea. He used her and this case to make a name for himself, unfortunately for him most of those names are negative. JMO

 

[LaMer]

I have no trouble with defending a person who committed a crime, they are indeed entitled to a fair trial and defense lawyers should be making sure that their client doesn't get more punishment than they deserve for that crime.

But what I don't understand is when defense attorney's make up stories (basically lying) to defend a client. There was no need to blame others directly to support her defense, they should have simply implied that there could have been doubt she was involved. Doubt can be implied and planted like a seed. Instead, her DT created wild stories that only served to make themselves appear foolish. THAT is the thing I cannot image how they can sleep at night with....dragging down innocent people to further a lie.

And this is what I mean, and what I wish those practicing law would comment on: is it OK to do the wrong thing to win at any cost? Is that really where we are now in the justice system?

Apparently!

 

[PaperTigers]

Who was it that said KC has stopped giving Baez the flirty big doe eyes and their relationship seems to have soured a lot in the recent days?

I think even Baez, her last supporter (since she's alienated her own family) is trying to distance himself from her, and she is finding herself completely alone now.

I do think that in time, after she has been convicted, her family will come back to her as they always have. Once all the hoopla dies down.

 

[Carolina Girl]

Okay, I only read the first page. I think JB and all of the other defense team knows ICA is guilty. They are going to try to save her life. THAT is their job in this. I did not realize this until Zahra Baker was killed. EB's lawyer stated that she got the death penalty off of the table, that was her job. So, it looks to me like JB, CM, DS and all of the rest have failed miserably so far. If they get a LWOP sentence, that will be considered a "WIN" to them. They are all in it for the deal down the road.

I think everyone that has been a member of her defense, that is going on TV talking about it now, should be locked up for contempt of court. They sadly do not have sense enough to know that the jury is not hearing any of their BS. But I think they may be tainting a jury down the road if she gets a new trial. They have crossed a line in the client/attorney book IMO.

 

[Caligram]

JB saw knew from the start, but guilt meant nothing to him. He saw how this was getting so much attention in the media and he jumped right in with $$$ in his eyes and $$$ in his greedy heart. He had no "alibi" for her when he initially faced the press. He stated that one day you will learn the truth and learn why my client is innocent. He still can't concoct a believable truth.

 

[JusticeSeeker1960]

I don't think he knows for sure that Casey premeditated the murder of her child, but surely doesn't think she's totally innocent of anything that happened. She wouldn't have confessed to him either, but told him the story that he's using for defense. I'm kind of tired of the media saying that Casey is destroying everyone's lives yet they say all sorts of things about Baez, such as he's narcissistic, had an affair with her, stupid, flirting, etc. I haven't seen all the interraction between Baezy and Casey but it looks to me like he's freaked out by her. Never makes eye contact, a forced smile, changes position, moves his hand, and has uncomfortable looks on his face. He has to know she's guilty and looks forward to not having to deal with her.

Could be or either he's keeping his distance knowing his wife/family is probably watching on TV...we all know he's sleazy!