TRUE STORY
A man had about 5 DUI's. His attorney kept moving trial dates until he could get a "lenient" judge or one who was a personal friend. The accused never spent a night in jail, even though he had a severe drinking problem. His next-to-last accident left him crippled, yet he continued to drink and drive. His last drunken drive killed a man who had a wife and 3 daughters. His attorney still tried to get him out of jail, even though he acknowleged that his client should have his license taken away (as if that would really prevent the guy from driving drunk). The argument was that the care required for his client as a result of years of self-abuse would not be adequate; therefore, the man should not be imprisoned. Tell that to the dead man's wife and 3 kids.
My friend, Jeff, asks: If a lawyer represents a criminal, gets him out on some technicality, and then his client goes out and kills someone, should the lawyer be held accountable?
And how about the victims? Should they be allowed to sue the attorney who repeatedly wins the release of a known criminal?
Our constitution provides for us to have access to legal counsel, and attorneys are bound by oath to do what they must to serve their clients. But suppose the accused is truly a danger to society, and the attorney really knows this? Then what should he/she do? Where is the line drawn?
What do you think? I look forward to your comments.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
My question originated from the fact that lawyers have become so quick to go after the drug companies for releasing drugs on the market with known side affects. We see their ads on TV now, soliciting clients for law suits...
So, I wonder if lawyers should be held accountable on the same grounds... releasing known criminals back out into society on a technicality or for the sake of winning their case?
Jeff makes a good point. The side effects of releasing criminals can be more deadly than the side effects of drugs. Judges and Lawyers and Parole Boards should be held responsible for their twisting of the laws.
I would like to see a lawyer respond to this question. I could never understand how a lawyer can work to keep someone they know is a criminal free. I would not be able to do that, not even to win a case or make money.
But, I don't know if they should be held responsible.
Everyone has the right to counsel. Good counsel. That's the basis of our system. If the system allows the trial date to be moved like this, the lawyer should not be punished. He's doing his job. The system should be changed.
The farthest I could logically see this going is a board of peers who dis-bar a lawyer if his actions proved negligent. I believe that already happens.
In our litigous society, all we DON'T need is more lawsuits.
Response to Birdwoman... your comment "If the system allows the trial date to be moved like this, the lawyer should not be punished. He's doing his job. The system should be changed."
Tell that to the wife and daughters of the man that the 5-time DUI driver killed... or a victim of a known/repeat child molester, etc......
Manipulating a trial date just to win your case, knowing that you are releasing a dangerous person back to society...you can't put all the blame on the system for that.
I think that in the same way a drunk can sue the person that served them as well as the establishment that served the, victims such as these should be able to sue the lawyer who keeps putting this man on the streets.
In addition, I think in Texas you only get so many DUI's before they put you in jail. The more DUI's, the longer you spend in jail and the more your bail is.
Post a Comment