The lawyer for the bomb suspects insists they are innocent..How does she know?

[burny 10]

....oh he's a dj ok...dysfunctional jerk!!!

 

Harsh!

 

... sorry but you did start the thread with "who does she know etc..." it was always going to get differing opinions!

 

Your second post explained things more but going on your 1st post it appeared to me that you were assuming they were guilty.

 

I know that now to not be the case but thats the way it read.

[burny 10]

Only in how much money they make? Has it occurred to you thay she was acting as she was because of professional ethics? Or indeed because the client she is reprsenting could indeed be wholly innocent?

See the Menezes case, or that guy who was sat in his car ten or nore years ago and riddled with bullets by Police officers who later conceded they'd got the wrong man?

 

Spot on!

 

The lawyer isn't going to go out and say "oh I think he did it, hes a terrorist etc... " is she when she is representing him.

 

What a lawyer says about a client must always be taken with a pinch of salt as it is not impartial.

[Alex C. 10]

Indeed, it is not up to a lawyer to judge the facts of the case, they are there to defend their client to the best of their ability based on the evidence available.

 

Would you never use legal aid if you were suspected of a crime?

[anlabystreet 12]

Only in how much money they make? Has it occurred to you thay she was acting as she was because of professional ethics? Or indeed because the client she is reprsenting could indeed be wholly innocent?

See the Menezes case, or that guy who was sat in his car ten or nore years ago and riddled with bullets by Police officers who later conceded they'd got the wrong man?

..yes you are right ..she was acting within her professional code and ethics..and thats what i'm saying..its sickening(and i question whether there is any moral code in the law profession anyway..i say "profession" metaphorically .i consider it too bent a game to be called a profession really .theres no justice in british courts..theres only law...and anybody with any sense knows that law is in place only to make money for lawyers....

[burny 10]

..yes you are right ..she was acting within her professional code and ethics..and thats what i'm saying..its sickening(and i question whether there is any moral code in the law profession anyway..i say "profession" metaphorically .i consider it too bent a game to be called a profession really .theres no justice in british courts..theres only law...and anybody with any sense knows that law is in place only to make money for lawyers....

 

Why is it sickening? She is only doing her job! She may believe that they are innocent so why not share it and even if she doesn't believe it so what? Do you think she has an impact on what everyone else or the jury/ judge will think?

[rocketpig 10]

look here mister brainless nicolarse-hole!!!!!i never said innocent or guilty..i asked how the woman knew they were innocent..was she there at the time ???and i also asked who paid her fees...neither question had anything to do with your idiotic response....try reading the question and get back on the flags on cars thread and make some daft comments on that you stupid pratt!!!

 

I bet you wouldn't have started this thread if you thought they were innocent!! i'm sure you don't intend to come across as thinking they are guity but i think you are doing......you're leaving a lot of between-line-reading

 

judging from your attack and the fact that i'm at least the 3rd person to have thought this, its more likely that you are in fact the DJ.

[burny 10]

I bet you wouldn't have started this thread if you thought they were innocent!! i'm sure you don't intend to come across as thinking they are guity but i think you are doing......you're leaving a lot of between-line-reading

 

judging from your attack and the fact that i'm at least the 3rd person to have thought this, its more likely that you're are the DJ.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Twiglet 10]

In this country everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Anyone accused of a crime is entitled to a fair trial. They wouldn't get that if a lawyer walked in with assumptions they were guilty.

 

Many lawyers who work for those with legal aid don't get paid huge amounts of money for those cases - 'money-grabbing' probably doesn't even come into it. A highly paid lawyer doesn't have as much sway on a case as a highly paid expert witness either.

[anlabystreet 12]

I bet you wouldn't have started this thread if you thought they were innocent!! i'm sure you don't intend to come across as thinking they are guity but i think you are doing......you're leaving a lot of between-line-reading

 

judging from your attack and the fact that i'm at least the 3rd person to have thought this, its more likely that you are in fact the DJ.

well i personally think they are probably guilty but innocent till proven guilty i say...what my rant is is really about the lawyer..i have personal experience of a defence lawyer making life better for somebody who did terrible things to a member of my family...and i once served on a jury...i was hoodwinked by a smoothie lawyer who gave us that "it would be a travesty of justice if this poor man went to prison bit"and i was beginning to doubt my previous thoughts the accused was guilty..i was convinced by the rest of the jury he was guilty...and after when they read his record of crime out it read like war and peace...and he was laughing...he got about 2 years if i remember...and about 6 months later he was in the paper again for more crimes...

[bobby 10]

napoleon wanted a code whereby lawyers who lost did'nt get paid.

[anlabystreet 12]

napoleon wanted a code whereby lawyers who lost did'nt get paid.

ive always said that...if i didnt do my job properly i would get the sack...they get paid whatever

[burny 10]

well i personally think they are probably guilty but innocent till proven guilty i say...what my rant is is really about the lawyer..i have personal experience of a defence lawyer making life better for somebody who did terrible things to a member of my family...and i once served on a jury...i was hoodwinked by a smoothie lawyer who gave us that "it would be a travesty of justice if this poor man went to prison bit"and i was beginning to doubt my previous thoughts the accused was guilty..i was convinced by the rest of the jury he was guilty...and after when they read his record of crime out it read like war and peace...and he was laughing...he got about 2 years if i remember...and about 6 months later he was in the paper again for more crimes...

 

I'm very sorry to hear that but you need to ensure that your experiences don't cloud your judgement.

 

I think Blair would do absolutely anything to help this "War on Terror" so I won't believe they are guilty unless they confess or there is outstanding evidence.

 

I see people looking at innocent people on the tram/buses etc ... Asian people with rucksacks who don't bloody deserve the looks they get. Its damn annoying!