Derek Chauvin GUILTY

[William Treseder]

I think in these cases, the defence's job is to make sure the prosecution and police have done their jobs properly.

If you have a system where people are pretty much guilty before any trial, and there are countries like that, then that makes it easier for innocent people in other cases to be found guilty. It's easier for the state to go for their enemies.

So it's to keep the other side in check by always providing a defence, no matter what.

I agree with everything you’ve said Lardy, and the last thing anyone of us would want is an innocent person to be found guilty of a crime.
The point i’m trying to make though, is if a small error had been made by the police or prosecution in a case like this, the defence could have got this guy off on a technicality. How many guilty people over the yrs have got off on a “technicality” The defence then go home, after doing their job correctly, and a guilty man( that every man and his dog knows is guilty) walks.
That’s a big difference in a case where the evidence is sketchy or flimsy.

[lardy]

I agree with everything you’ve said Lardy, and the last thing anyone of us would want is an innocent person to be found guilty of a crime.
The point i’m trying to make though, is if a small error had been made by the police or prosecution in a case like this, the defence could have got this guy off on a technicality. How many guilty people over the yrs have got off on a “technicality” The defence then go home, after doing their job correctly, and a guilty man( that every man and his dog knows is guilty) walks.
That’s a big difference in a case where the evidence is sketchy or flimsy.

I thought your point was 'how do defence lawyers live with themselves for defending guilty people'.

If it's that sometimes they get off with a technicality and it could have happened here, then ... ok yes this is true.