Johnny Cochran dead

[Dinner]

I for once I agree with Ned. Old Jonny certainly knew how to abuse the legal system and use the race card to get away with murder. Half of the blame also falls on the Judges who didn't keep him on the straight and narrow.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

This guy had people do his homework, He found loops to help his clients, is it his fault that the police and investigators screwed up. His job as a lawyer was to prove reasonable doubt, which if you ask me he has done a great job at. To simply resort to calling him names after he is dead is just wrong.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
His job as a lawyer was to prove reasonable doubt, which if you ask me he has done a great job at. To simply resort to calling him names after he is dead is just wrong.

Exactly. His job is to provide the best defense possible for his clients. You can't argue that he didn't do that.

If we didn't have lawyers like Cochran, we'd have more policeman like Mark Furman.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ned
Marcia Clark wrote a book discussing the trial. I haven't read it, but it might be interesting from the point of view of learning about Cochrane's tricks.

Now that's a great source!


I would argue that it would be unethical for JC not to fight as zealously for OJ as he did. As a defense attorney you take as many liberties as the judge and prosecutor will allow, that's just part of the game. A weak judge and prosecutor, as were in this case, are going to be trampled by an excellent defense attorney every time.

Maybe some of his tactics were distasteful, but if it was my head on the line, you bet your ass I would want someone like him defending me to the end.

Don't blame the playa, blame the game.

[embalmer42]

Originally posted by Wezil
Shaping up to be a good week for those in a pool.

33 points Johnny. Thanx, least you were good for something.

Sorry, I'll save my tears for someone who actually deserves them.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ned
I can no longer remember the particulars of what Cochrane pulled on the court, but at the time of the trial I was daily appalled at the liberties he took and was allowed to get away with. Daily.

The main one being the "race" thing.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Exactly. His job is to provide the best defense possible for his clients. You can't argue that he didn't do that.

Does killing witnesses and/or bribing them count? Sure, Cochran didn't do anything illegal, but I'd say what he did was unethical.

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
If we didn't have lawyers like Cochran, we'd have more policeman like Mark Furman.

Irrelevant. Fuhrman might or might not be racist, but that had nothing to do with this case.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by joncha
Yeah, well, Chewbacca is a Wooky from the planet Kishic, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it. That does not make sense.

I thought Kashyyk was the Wookie homeworld. Is that different from "Kishic"?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Why is it so hard to understand that the man had a job to do and he did it. Most to peoples unliking but does that make him a sob? The case involving oj was fu**** to begin with. Just because you dont agree with the outcome doesnt make this man a sob. The man did his job very well in this and in many cases. He is only unethical if he believed in the guilt of oj and went on with the case anyway. From what I heard he didnt agree with the facts and believed oj was not guilty

[Dis]

all lawyers are sob's. it just goes with the territory.

and how can anyone believe oj was not guilty?

[joncha]

Originally posted by St Leo

Originally posted by joncha
Yeah, well, Chewbacca is a Wooky from the planet Kishic, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it. That does not make sense.

I thought Kashyyk was the Wookie homeworld. Is that different from "Kishic"?

How the hell would I know? Do I look like Kuciwalker to you?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Does killing witnesses and/or bribing them count? Sure, Cochran didn't do anything illegal, but I'd say what he did was unethical.

I missed where Cochrane killed a witness and bribed a witness. Link please.


Also please point out where he has acted unethically. I don't know, maybe he has, maybe he hasn't, but I haven't seen any links to evidence herein that would indicate malfeasance.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
Most to peoples unliking but does that make him a sob?

Certainly.

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
He is only unethical if he believed in the guilt of oj and went on with the case anyway. From what I heard he didnt agree with the facts and believed oj was not guilty

Facts are not something you need to believe in, such as the earth being roughly spherical. You don't have to believe it, but that is the case nevertheless.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Certainly.



Facts are not something you need to believe in, such as the earth being roughly spherical. You don't have to believe it, but that is the case nevertheless.

why is he an sob cause you dont like him?
how was he unethical ? Is it because you dont agree?
Sorry Doesnt make him unethical becasue you dont agree. The man had a job to do whether anybody agrees with the out come.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
He is only unethical if he believed in the guilt of oj and went on with the case anyway.

No, that is not unethical. Otherwise, you would have very few defense attorneys.

The job of a defense attorney is to zealously represent the interests of his client, even if you think he is guilty. If the client wants to go to trial, then you fight as hard as you can for him, as that is your job. You have to assume that the prosecutor will do his job and the judge his, and that the correct result will be reached. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.

Personally, I've taken things to trial where I knew my client was guilty (its rare for me to ask, actually) and won them. I've also lost trials where I genuinely thought my client was innocent completely, or partially.

Different people rationalize this differently. I personally view trials as 1) proceeding as my client wishes 2) trial experience for me, a 26 year old attorney and 3) the system I'm currently in is quite awful, so I like to **** with the prosecutor and cops as much as possible, my wife doesn't mind the occassional long hours. And sometimes even if the guy/girl is guilty, there are gross procedural errors on the states' part, such as warrantless entries, illegal stops, and general harrasssment of minorities and lower ses individuals that make me fight for not just my client but for all the cops involved interact with in the future.