59 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
View submission: The Ethics of Defense Lawyers
Defense attorneys rarely say their client is innocent. Instead they say the state has not proven that their client is guilty. That is a subtle but important distinction.
They are only commenting on what the state has proven, not whether their client actually committed a crime. They are only arguing the state has not met its burden of proof.
Comment by [deleted] at 14/01/2020 at 02:48 UTC
14 upvotes, 0 direct replies
This. As an officer if the court, I can’t argue that someone didn’t commit a crime if I know they did, but I can (and will) argue that the crown hasn’t proven their case.
This is a fundamental concept of the justice system, and I don’t think I’m morally defective for providing clients the benefit of legal advise.
/Canadian lawyer
Comment by Yung_French at 14/01/2020 at 00:02 UTC
-18 upvotes, 2 direct replies
There are many notorious cases where the burden of proof was met, but the defendant was still found innocent.