Johnny Cochran dead

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Ned


It is unethical to lie to the court, or permit your witnesses to lie.

Yep the prosecutors were unethical.

ACK!

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Is it ethical for procueter to coach witnesses
and ned thats is perjury

[Wezil]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel


Its better not to know. That way your client can take the stand and you won't be positive that he is perjuring himself (you can't put someone on the stand who you know is going to lie)

I'm in the opposite camp - I want to know EVERYTHING. I hate to be surprised at trial and my client only takes the stand as a last resort anyway.

[Ned]

Can anybody think of what, if anything, Cochran said or did or permitted his witness or other defense counsel to say that he knew to be a lie?

[Boris Godunov]

If Cochran behaved unethically, then I imagine he would have been reprimanded by the Bar Association or even stripped of his license to practice. I'm not aware of any such sanctions against him.

Look, prosecutor's **** stinks just as much as defense attorney's. The goal of a D.A. is to win the case, and they will do anything they can to get their convictions. We see time and time again cases of innocent people being persecuted by prosecutors. Even after pretty convincing evidence has come out that a convicted person is innocent, they will often fight attempts for retrials. So let's not go thinking that D.A.s are all Sam Waterston.

The balance is that we have defense attorneys like Cochran who will go to the mat for their clients and do anything within the bounds of the law they can to secure they are not convicted. I'm okay with that. As much as it repulsed me that O.J. was acquitted, there wasn't any way the jury could convict him. The jury said as much--they felt he was guilty, but they had to acquit, because the prosecution ****ed up royally. They made a ****ty case. And prosecutors shouldn't get away with convicting anyone if their case is handled that badly.

The bottom line is that I would rather see someone like O.J. go free than see innocent people go to prison because their attorneys couldn't represent them to the best of their ability.

[Ming]

They each have their job to do... and as long as they both do the best job they can, and stay within the limits of the law... I have no complaints. I may not personally have cared for some of Johnny's tactics, but I respect the job he did.

[Ned]

Well, I agree with your sentiments, Boris, because you limited your remarks to "within the bounds of the law." However, you have to add that it is not within the bounds of the law to misrepresent facts to the court, or to permit your witnesses to do so. The problem, of course with this is that it is very hard to prove that an attorney is misrepresenting facts if the truth lies within the protection of the attorney-client privilege.

Now, I have been practicing law long enough to be aware of fraud on the court because I was aware of the true facts and knew that misrepresentations were being made. My reaction was one of horror. But I must admit, I did nothing more than report the problem to my superiors. I did not inform the court as I was not an attorney before that court. Were I ever to be found in a circumstance where my partner was lying to the court, I would do something because I have an obligation to do so.

But in the circumstances in the OJ case, I am convinced that Johnny Cochran's defense was not honest.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I am still trying to figure out how this guy was dishonest. I said this once and will repeat it, Just because you dont agree with the outcome doesnt mean the man acted out anything dishonest or unethical.

[DinoDoc]

Don't you want a defense attorney to be a SOB?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

sleep@the wheel stated this earlier he wouldnt want to know guilt of client, that way if he doesnt know he isnt actin unethical. In my opinion the client is the one acting unethical, if they did the crime and tell the attorney they didnt do it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It is unethical to lie to the court, or permit your witnesses to lie.

Is there any proof that he did? What if Cochran sincerely believed in the innocence of O.J.? What if he just didn't know if he was guilty or not guilty? Where is the lie?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

What i find interesting is that this man is being judged simply on the oj trial. For heavens sake he was 63 when he died im sure he had a lot more cases then just oj but none as famous.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Wezil
I'm in the opposite camp - I want to know EVERYTHING. I hate to be surprised at trial and my client only takes the stand as a last resort anyway.

If my clients were actually paying me, I'd probably feel the same way. As I have to take what I'm given, I generally keep it vague and let them tell me what they want. "here's what the cops are saying, what is your story" is one way I do it, if I'm pressed for time.

And I figure, if my client is lying to me about what happened, then he is really just hurting himself, especially if he takes the stand. I actually have been putting more clients o nthe stand lately, but that's what you have to do sometimes.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
The lawyers were not unethical they were doing their job, period end of story.

Being paid to do something makes it ethical?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
That's what makes him unethical.