<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
Donovan,<br><br>You have been saying two different things. You have been saying that lawyers only care about winning, and that is wrong. You are also saying that the system 'has been corrupted enough that it now justifies guilt or innocent, and
the right to murder based on who can afford the best deceiver to
represent them.'<br><br>First, we always want to win when we go to trial. I think it's true for both public defenders as well as private practitioners that we always want to win when we first take a case and when we go to trial. That's how it should be. No rational person wants a lawyer who isn't trying to do that. But most cases settle, and when that happens we try to get the best possible deal we can. Again, that's how it should be.<br><br>You say everyone has the right to a defense. Yet you want that right to be meaningless, because you don't want us to try to win for our clients.<br><br>Now do people with more money get better representation than people with little or no money? If they get a good lawyer, most likely. They're going to be able to pay someone to devote more time to their case than I'm going to be able to do as a public defender. A private lawyer can stop taking new cases, in order to devote more time to that case; the pd is going to have new cases coming in all the time.<br><br>I think our founders expected lawyers to work hard for their clients' interests, and to do nothing else. You keep saying it was not always this way. You are completely wrong on this point. There is a lawyer on the other side charged with representing society. That lawyer is to work equally hard on society's side, and in my cases, that side has far more resources.<br><br>If you believe that our founders wanted something different, you should prove it.<br><br>Sunil<br><br><hr>Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 23:31:07 -0700<br>From: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com<br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lawyers' dooty<br>To: ophite@gmail.com<br>CC: sunilramalingam@hotmail.com; vision2020@moscow.com<br><br><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-stretch: inherit;" valign="top"><div><span>Sunil</span>,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>That is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that we have a legal system that has been corrupted enough that it now justifies guilt or innocent, and the right to murder based on who can afford the best deceiver to represent them.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Legal cases are not about doing what is right for the people involved and the community, they are about the lawyers representing them. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Do you think this legal system, based on winning and $$$$, not what is right or wrong, is the best we can come up with, or the intention of our founders? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best Regards,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Donovan</div>
<div> </div>
<div><br>--- On <b>Sun, 9/21/08, Andreas Schou <i><ophite@gmail.com></i></b> wrote:<br></div>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px;">From: Andreas <span><span>Schou</span></span> <ophite@gmail.com><br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lawyers' duty<br>To: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com<br>Cc: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com>, "vision2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><br>Date: Sunday, September 21, 2008, 5:40 PM<br><br><pre>Donovan --<br><br>What you're telling me is that the defense, prosecution, and judge<br>should collude in order to determine whether the accused is guilty,<br>then (together) work out what the penalty should be? Really? You<br>think this is the best legal system possible?<br><br>-- ACS<br><br>On Sun, <span>Sep</span> 21, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Donovan Arnold<br><donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com> wrote:<br>> Sunil,<br>><br>> I think you make my case for me better than I can. Many lawyers aren't<br>> interested in justice, just winning and money.<br>><br>> Our legal system is broken, not just for the innocent, but also criminals.<br>> As you said, innocent people are losing their rights every year. While<br>real<br>> criminals and terrorists are gaining more.<br>><br>> I disagree with you that the US has historically been so greedy and more<br>> about winning over doing what was is right and just. Never has there been<br>> such a nation as judicious and greedy as the US in the modern era. We have<br>> 90% of the world's lawyers and only 5% of the population. Most of the<br>> lawyers I have encountered, don't care about justice, what is good for<br>> society, or what is just plain right. They only care for their goals and<br>> interests.<br>><br>> Best Regards,<br>><br>> Donovan<br>><br>> --- On Sat, 9/20/08, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com><br>wrote:<br>><br>> From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com><br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lawyers' duty<br>> To:<br>> Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><br>> Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008, 6:47 PM<br>><br>> You are describing the legal system you wish we had, not the one we<br>actually<br>> have. The values you are saying we should have as lawyers are not the<br>> values we have or have ever had in our society. The system you wish we<br>had<br>> would harm my clients.<br>><br>> My only duty is to my client, not to society. There is another lawyer on<br>> the other side, and that lawyer has a duty to society. You are stating<br>your<br>> views, but they do not accurately state my duty at all.<br>><br>> I've had lots of clients plead guilty, far, far more than I've<br>ever taken to<br>> trial. Most defendants plead guilty, and do so because it's in their<br>best<br>> interest. Of course we try to make the decision that's in the<br>client's best<br>> interest, and to get them the best sentence we can. Not the sentence in<br>> proportion to the offense, but the best sentence we can. Any duty<br>regarding<br>> proportionality resides with the judge. I don't want something<br>> disproportionately harsh, but if I can get a lighter sentence for my<br>client<br>> than what would be proportional, my duty is to strive for that.<br>><br>> My clients' rights shrivel each year. That means yours do too.<br>><br>> Finally, I don't know anyone around here charging $250/hr in criminal<br>cases.<br>><br>> Sunil<br>><br>> ________________________________<br>> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:55:42 -0700<br>> From: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com<br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lawyers' duty<br>> To: sunilramalingam@hotmail.com<br>> CC: vision2020@moscow.com<br>><br>> Sunil,<br>><br>> You write,<br>><br>> "Of course defense lawyers want to win when they go to trial. <br>That's our<br>> job."<br>><br>> That's my point. It doesn't matter to too many lawyers if they are<br>right or<br>> wrong, or if they do harm to the overall community, or an innocent<br>> individual, they just want to win. That is what it is about for them.<br>><br>> "Our only job is to represent the client regardless of our views of<br>his or<br>> her guilt or innocence."<br>><br>> I disagree. Your first job is to be a responsible member of the community.<br>> Not to destroy it or bring harm to its innocents.<br>><br>> "We are to represent them within the bounds of our ethical<br>obligations and<br>> all applicable rules. "<br>><br>> That is another problem. Many lawyers don't have ethical obligations<br>and<br>> rules are subject to the interpretation of the lawyer to fit his/her<br>desired<br>> outcome.<br>><br>><br>> " I have not yet had a client who wanted me to to lose the case for<br>his or<br>> her benefit."<br>><br>> You have never had someone plead guilty? Try to get help. Just want a fair<br>> sentence in proportion to the offense?<br>><br>> "As to moral corruption, I'm not sure what you mean. I would be<br>corrupt if<br>> I did not try to win for my client."<br>><br>> I think a lawyer should do what is in the best interests of the client and<br>> the community. Work with the prosecutor and judge. Get the person fair<br>> sentence and treatment. Instead, we seem to often have a prosecutor that<br>> wants the death penalty for jaywalking or a defense attorney that wants<br>the<br>> person free to commit crimes against the community with impunity if they<br>had<br>> their way.<br>><br>> We have too many rights for the criminals, and little for the innocent. I<br>am<br>> not aware of this type of behavior in our nation's past where<br>criminals go<br>> free when it is so obvious to layman they are guilty and continue to do<br>harm<br>> after they are released.<br>><br>> Look at Mark Foley, Micheal Jackson, OJ Simpson, Bill Ayers, and many<br>other<br>> people go free that are clearly guilty of crimes against other humans.<br>Many<br>> others get off with incredibly light sentences for the crimes they commit.<br>><br>> Further, if most lawyers really believed their clients right to a fair<br>> defense, they would not be charging $250 an hour, which clearly states,<br>only<br>> the upper classes have the right to quality representation. What many<br>> lawyers really believe in is getting rich off the misfortune of others,<br>with<br>> deception, and manipulation of the lawyers. Our legal system is about<br>$$$$$.<br>> Not justice.<br>><br>> Best Regards,<br>><br>> Donovan<br>><br>><br>><br>> --- On Sat, 9/20/08, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com><br>wrote:<br>><br>> From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam@hotmail.com><br>> Subject: [Vision2020] Lawyers' duty<br>> To:<br>> Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><br>> Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008, 9:02 AM<br>><br>> Donovan,<br>><br>> I hope I can say this without the usual disintegration that often follows<br>my<br>> attempts to communicate with you.<br>><br>> Of course defense lawyers want to win when they go to trial. That's<br>our<br>> job. Our only job is to represent the client regardless of our views of<br>his<br>> or her guilt or innocence. We are to represent them within the bounds of<br>> our ethical obligations and all applicable rules. I have not yet had a<br>> client who wanted me to to lose the case for his or her benefit.<br>><br>> As to moral corruption, I'm not sure what you mean. I would be<br>corrupt if I<br>> did not try to win for my client.<br>><br>> I don't know why you think this is something new. Can you point to<br>> something in our legal history that suggests lawyers did not owe their<br>sole<br>> duty to their clients in the past?<br>><br>> Sunil<br>><br>> ________________________________<br>> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:06:07 -0700<br>> From: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com<br>> To: lfalen@turbonet.com; ophite@gmail.com<br>> CC: vision2020@moscow.com<br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama<br>><br>> Andreas,<br>><br>> Good people work to find the truth and to bring justice. Our legal system<br>> doesn't do that much of the time. Often because we have bad lawyers<br>that<br>> want to "WIN" more than they want to do what is right for the<br>community and<br>> their client.<br>><br>> People are entitled to fair and appropriate counsel. They should not be<br>> allowed to harm others and their community because they can buy lawyers<br>with<br>> no morals only interested in winning at any cost to get them off from a<br>> crime.<br>><br>> A lawyer that punishes someone beyond their crime is doing society harm. A<br>> lawyers that gets a criminal off scott free from a crime is doing harm to<br>> their client and to the community. They do because they want to win, not<br>> because of any other reason.<br>><br>> The idea of "the right to fair defense" should not, not has it<br>ever until<br>> recently, meant, a right to put yourself above the law if you can afford a<br>> morally corrupted lawyer.<br>><br>> Best Regards,<br>><br>> Donovan<br>><br>><br>> --- On Fri, 9/19/08, Andreas Schou <ophite@gmail.com> wrote:<br>><br>> From: Andreas Schou <ophite@gmail.com><br>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama<br>> To: "lfalen" <lfalen@turbonet.com><br>> Cc: donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com, "Chuck Kovis"<br><ckovis@turbonet.com>,<br>> "vision2020" <vision2020@moscow.com>, "g.<br>crabtree" <jampot@roadrunner.com><br>> Date: Friday, September 19, 2008, 10:44 AM<br>><br>>>> A good lawyer should be one that brings justice to society, not<br>one who<br>> can free criminals to victimize others again with impunity.<br>><br>> "A good lawyer works for the prosecution, not for the defense,"<br>is<br>> what you mean, right? Because no one would ever defend an accused<br>> criminal other than scum?<br>><br>> -- ACS<br>><br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made<br>> available by First Step Internet,<br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>> http://www.fsr.net<br>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> =======================================================<br>><br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>> http://www.fsr.net<br>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> =======================================================<br>><br>> =======================================================<br>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>> http://www.fsr.net<br>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<br>> =======================================================<br>><br></pre></blockquote></td></tr></tbody></table><br>
</body>
</html>