Rich versus poor in American justice system.

[MrFun]

So why should poor people accused of a crime, risk being sentenced for something they did not commit, just because they cannot afford an effective, thorough defense that cannot be adequately provided through a public defense team?


Where is the justice in our system if upper-class elite can afford multi-million dollar, expert, thorough, defense teams that can buy them an acquittal, even if they might have actually committed the crime?

[GePap]

I assume you are asking these things rhetorically?

[Imran Siddiqui]

What, you expect the government to hire Johnny Cochran for every defendant?

[Combat Ingrid]

American justice system

[Kuciwalker]

MrFun - the only possible solution is to disallow attorneys for ANYONE. Which means everyone will be equally vulnerable to being convicted unfairly.

Why do people always think that in order to fix an inequality, it is ok to just tear down those who have an advantage?

[GePap]

Originally posted by skywalker
Why do people always think that in order to fix an inequality, it is ok to just tear down those who have an advantage?

Becuase they shouldn't have an advantage in an area which is suposed to be EQUAL? That sounds like a good reason why.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Becuase they shouldn't have an advantage in an area which is suposed to be EQUAL?

No one ever said you are supposed to have equal quality of your counsel. That would simply be impossible.

Should everyone be forced to take the state defense counsel?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Should everyone be forced to take the state defense counsel?

How about only in cases where one side has to?

[GePap]

There is a vast difference between the normal range of competency within lawyers, and the ability of one defendent to have one l;awyer and another to have the entire resources of a law firm with investigators and so forth behind them..then it is not an issue of "good" lawyer vs "bad", but one of resources.

And I would have no problem with forcing a systemin which the poorest man had the same level of competent advise as a rich man..if anything, it would surely make the rich think several times before they committed a crime, knowing their chances were as poor as those of the, well, poor.

[MrFun]

The inequality between rich and poor in our justice system means that poorer people are less likely to get a fair trial, simply because they cannot afford an effective defense team that the upper-class can afford.

[GePap]

The poor get relatively fair trials (barring ones in which trully outrageous things happen, which are a minority), since most DA's don't spend vast resources on your normal case. The things is, the rich don;t get fair trials, given the resource they can spend on thier own behalf vs. what the state decides to spend againt them.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Should everyone be forced to take the state defense counsel?

I'll be there'd be a marked increase in the quality of state defense attornies.

[Imran Siddiqui]

There is a vast difference between the normal range of competency within lawyers, and the ability of one defendent to have one l;awyer and another to have the entire resources of a law firm with investigators and so forth behind them..then it is not an issue of "good" lawyer vs "bad", but one of resources.

The state has plenty of resources as well. However, they pick and choose which cases they stress. Unlike a law firm, which can reject defending someone, the state cannot. Seeing as there are limited resources, the state will engage in a sort of 'triage'.

And I would have no problem with forcing a systemin which the poorest man had the same level of competent advise as a rich man

The problem is that the only way to do so is force everyone takes the state attorney. Aside from possibly being a violation of Constitutional rights, you'd severly have to increase the budgets of the defense attornies. More taxes in order to let 'the guilty go free', especially if they are rich and can afford attorney's themselves? Can you imagine selling that to the voters?

I'll be there'd be a marked increase in the quality of state defense attornies

Only for a few years (when most of the private defense atty's try to get a job the state). Then the lack of pay will result in less people in law schools that will specialize in litigation. Then the quality will drift down again. After all, the money drives most people to litigation anyway (those that want to do to simply defend 'innocent people' aren't all that common, which is why you have enticements for public interest law).

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Should everyone be forced to take the state defense counsel?

Seems fair. The people are forced to take the state prosecutor.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The people are forced to take the state prosecutor.

There's an idea, let's privatize prosecution .