In another thread, a poster questioned the ethics of defense lawyers in the case of an unconvicted ped0. Before anyone lynches me, I'm not supporting them at all, but I wanted to raise the issue enclosed in the article below:
THIS is why those same defense lawyers exist. The vast majority of people accused of a crime will say, even against sturdy evidence, that they didn't do it. This man wasted away behind bars because some police and law enforcement officials had decided that he was guilty - but he wasn't. An innocent man spent 10 years of his life in prison for a crime he didn't commit. His marriage failed, another marriage failed because of it and he spent years afterwards still being shunned because of the mistakes and wrong doings of the police.
Defense lawyers are there to keep the police honest - something which they all too often are not. Nothing can give this guy those years back and it is an injustice of the worst kind that it happened in the first place.
The legal system is far from perfect and needs to be overhauled rather dramatically. But please, don't question the ethics of those people who have to defend those who stand accused. Their job stands as the foundation of our democracy. Without them, any police could accuse you of damn near anything and you'd get put away for it. That's what's known as a police state and we desperately don't want that. Every single person has the right to a defense when standing accused and whilst there are some who'd love to see some people never be given that opportunity (like accused ped0's), to do that would be the ruin of us all. Just remember Kirk Bloodsworth and his wrongful conviction as a testimony that there is a big difference at times between who the police think did something versus who actually did it.