Lawyers keep innocent man in prison, what would you do?

[upgrade]

As one of the attorneys, what would you do?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/06/60minutes/main3914719.shtml

[upgrade]

I'm surprised all of the bleeding hearts on here haven't chimed in.

[jason_perrlx]

I don't know what I would do, but a system that does this without shame is obviously one that needs some tweaking. 

[Cabra]

So I'm thinking: innocent man in jail for life and almost sent to death by nothing more than witness testimony--if he had a competent lawyer that would not have happened.
Maybe the thing I'd do is hire a good lawyer to appeal the *&^% out of his conviction...

But I agree with what the lawyers did, even if it makes me sad.
 

[upgrade]

That is a good point Cabra.  If these two attorneys were so convinced of his innocence and felt as terrible as they claim, why didn't they pony up some money for a stronger defense for the accused. 

[pulvillus]

The guy had a public defender, ergo he couldn't afford a good attorney, which certainly must have factored into the equation. If I had been one of the attorneys, I would have tried to terminate my relationship with the real culprit in a way that would allow me to talk. If that was not an option, I'd probably keep quiet, keep my license and not sleep well for a while. Luckily, I intend to stay clear of the criminal justice system and thereby avoid getting caught in a similar dilemma.

On a side note, in business if your client tells you about his intent to cheat or illegally exploit the other party of his contract, you as an attorney have to act upon that information. If your client is a criminal, however, you must keep everything confidential unless your silence will cause "imminent bodily harm". Now, which seems to be valued more in the system, money or lives?

[gladiator]

The irony is that the guy probably wouldn't have gone to jail for long if they gave him the death penalty. The lawyers acted like if he got a death sentence, they could skirt the attorney-client privilege by saying they were preventing a death by stopping his death sentence from being carried out. So the two people who at least had enough sense to not give him the death penalty ended up inadvertently costing him 25 years of life. Of course, this shows how absurd the death penalty system is in the first place. If you can convince 12 people that a factually innocent man is guilty and 10 of the 12 that he deserves to be killed (something which has occured many times over), then isn't it time to get rid of the death penalty and make it life without parole to have a chance to reverse the errors?

[Astro]

Quite honestly, I'd forfeit my career as an attorney for this *&^%.  It's not worth it, IMO.  I couldn't live with the guilt.

[Just_Chexin]

On a side note, in business if your client tells you about his intent to cheat or illegally exploit the other party of his contract, you as an attorney have to act upon that information. If your client is a criminal, however, you must keep everything confidential unless your silence will cause "imminent bodily harm". Now, which seems to be valued more in the system, money or lives?

The sad answer, I believe, is money.

As far as the "imminent bodily harm" claim, do you think the lawyers could have used statistics showing the high percentage of prison violence as evidence that the innocent man was, in actuality, at risk of imminent bodily harm? I am just wondering if there is SOME kind of loophole in the system for them to be able to free him. (Because if there are any countless numbers of loopholes to pay less in taxes but there isn't a loophole for a lawyer to be able to free an innocent man from a life of imprisonment - something is wrong there!)

[goaliechica]

Good article about the ridiculous scope of attorney-client privilege. And how lawyers are what's wrong with society 

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200412/simon