Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!perelgut
From: perelgut@utcsrgv.UUCP (Stephen Perelgut)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: "The client is always right" considered harmful
Message-ID: <2060@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Aug-83 11:25:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.2060
Posted: Tue Aug 23 11:25:19 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Aug-83 15:03:17 EDT
References: <2058@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: CSRG, University of Toronto
Lines: 18

I don't believe that the problem was lawyers actually condoning illegal 
activities but rather the ethical responsibilities within the legal system.
Even playing the game it is possible for people who have committed illegal
acts to go unpunished due to technical legal reasons.  We have all heard many
times about the criminal who escapes on a technicality.  Take the U.S. 
"Miranda Rights" (please).  If a cop sees someone pull out a gun and shoot
someone dead but doesn't read him his rights, does that criminal go free?

I understand fully why there are technicalities.  (Keep officials in line and 
prevent abuses).  And I have heard the stories of people wrongly convicted on
circumstantial evidence.  I am just unsure whether technical loopholes should
apply in capital crimes.

[ I am a fan of contract and corporate law, but all criminal defense lawyers 
should have one finger chopped off for every technicality they invoke :-) ]
-- 
Stephen Perelgut    Computer Systems Research Group    University of Toronto
	   { linus, ihnp4, allegra, floyd }!utcsrgv!perelgut