Posted: November 13th, 2015

Prosecutor v. Defense Attorney Boundaries of Advocacy

Prosecutor v. Defense Attorney – Boundaries of Advocacy

You are required to reply to 2 other classmates John Legrand  and Candice Homers threads. Each reply must be a minimum of 150 words.

Responding to a classmate’s post requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward. Thus, the response post is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon posts to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced in them. As such, reply posts must do more than merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous post(s). Instead, your responsive posts must make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion.

John Legrand

Maybe I am misunderstanding the question, it seems to be backwards. Why would a prosecutor want to hide evidence to prove a defendant’s guilt? I thought that was the job of the state (prosecutor) to make sure justice is served for the victim and for the state.  When Das, ADAs, police officers, judges or anyone in the position to take make decisions on taking away some liberty or even their life swear to an oath, why would they  not do what they  could to make sure those things that are quality of life issues are rectified. That being anyone who breaks the law and prey on the innocent.  Even when defense attorneys are representing their clients, they want to do everything they can to get their client off, no matter how bad of a person he or she may be. It is their job. I know that when an officer screws up by not reading Miranda Rights or illegally searching a person or a vehicle a defense attorney can’t wait to play that ACE of spade.  Beside from the minute a constitutional right is violated everything after that is fruit of the poisonous tree and is not admissible in a court of law.

Leviticus 19:15 reads, “You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor. “  So here is an order for those in this position to judge fairly and seek the truth. This is what the public expects and the public trust that justice will be fair and without prejudice.

Candace Homer

There would never be a time for a prosecutor destroying evidence of a defendants guilt to be considered acceptable. Prosecutors have a vast amount of discretion in the decisions they make, but destroying evidence would not be included in that. Why would a prosecutor destroy evidence of a defendants guilt, when they have the ability not to prosecute the Defendant in the first place? As an officer of the court the Prosecutor has the responsibility to see justice served (Neubaurer 2014).

A defense attorney’s sole purpose is to ensure his client (the Defendant) has effective (Neubaurer 2014 p.179) representation in court proceedings.  One of the responsibilities would be to ensure his client’s constitutional rights had not been violated. There could be no moral justification for ignoring such a violation.

There are so many times the Criminal Justice system comes under fire for what could be considered misconduct by the officers of the court, and each time these things are brought to the public s attention there is a chance of the public losing trust. The ones who are in the positions to uphold the law, and seek justice should do exactly that; it is their responsibility, it is their obligation to the victims, the defendants, and the public.

Neubauer &Fradella, America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System (2014).

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A GOOD DISCOUNT 🙂