This isn’t all he has. He has his perhaps bogus perhaps not strategy of blaming the mother. He has the fact that while in this case the circumstantial evidence is pretty damning, it is circumstantial evidence. He could try insanity, and I think that I read somewhere that the defendant was abused as a child himself. These are all defenses. In fact, I think that the lawyer has indeed used most of them. But he still feels the need to throw this victim-blaming shit in. He could have also tried to talk his client into a plea bargain (and maybe he did, I don’t know), seeing as how the guy is pretty damn certain to be convicted, anyway. There’s absolutely no reason to blame a little girl for the abuse that she suffered at the hands of her stepfather. None. It’s wrong, it’s disgusting, and no, it’s not necessary.

We have other defense attorneys who are calling this kind of behavior disgusting. I imagine that they their opinion would hold more weight than my own.

It is up to a jury to do justice, though I think we’ve seen recently that this method isn’t the best when juries are so easy to manipulate and are often not given adequate instructions. But it is a lawyer’s job to behave in an ethical manner. A big part of that is to defend one’s client to the best of your ability. It’s not the only part.

People seem much happier to jump on defense attorneys who claim that fat women should see rape as a compliment, or defense attorneys who try to characterize a raped woman’s cries of pain as moans of pleasure. How is this different, and how is it just as bad if not worse?

This little girl got absolutely no respect in life. I do think that as the society who failed her, we do at least owe her some respect at her damn murder trial.

And this is the same guy who’s going to defend women who respond with violence to their long time abusers, who are caught up in their boyfriend’s drug scheme and end up with federal charges with a 10 year mandatory minimum, who are charged with child abuse/neglect for failing to leave an abusive relationship. Criminal defense attorneys don’t cherry pick their clients (unless they work for non-profits and do cherry pick their clients). And we should all be grateful for that.

I’m not sure it’s the case that she lashed out, though obviously I wouldn’t blame her if she had. What I understand is that she managed to snag a cup of yogurt out of the fridge – probably having a good idea what fresh hell she’d catch for it if she was caught – because she was starving.

So, imagine if you’re a defense attorney, a public defender who is required to defend this horrific person, and you know he didn’t commit murder, but in your own personal opinion you think he’s as guilty as someone who did. You know you can probably get him off (cause we don’t convict child abusers), but you really don’t want to. And he won’t take a plea. This might just be the type of argument you’d make. There is no way anyone would ever accuse you of failing to zealously defend you client, but he still gets convicted.

*sigh* This is why I would never be a criminal attorney. I’d end up turning over my license in less than a year.