Really? Jesus defended you when you were guilty? I thought you REPENTED so that you could be forgiven??? Where do you draw the line, Brother? You are supposed to be APOSTOLIC? And now you insinuate you are capable of defending someone you believe did WRONG in the eyes of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whom you are supposed to believe in, supposed to even, in fact, carry HIS SPIRIT around?
My goodness, am I communicating with Holy Ghost filled people, or just intelligent elements of society? Please clarify. I'm astounded at times the discussions I have with people professing to have the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ dwelling in their bodies, their TEMPLES. . . .dare I write further and suggest. . .people who KNOW JESUS IS GOD and not a part of God???
We are to be a LIGHT amongst darkness, not join them!!!
Excuse me but if a child molester and rapist need defense then they should seek counselors who are like unto them. NOT those who are supposed to profess righteousness. Maybe you didn't understand my question, because to get those individuals charges dropped you would have to find loopholes, and therefore, lie.
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 10For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
Look I understand that you don't know how the law works.
I have never lied for a client nor will I. Beyond the moral ramifications lying to the court could cost you your license, I get a list of attorney who lose their license in DC every month for lying to the court or their clients.
A loophole as you call it, means that the government cannot prove their case without using illegal means to gather proof. The fact is when a criminal is not convicted because the government broke the law what the defense attorney is really doing is protecting your rights against unlawful search and seizure, unlawful detention, etc.
We are a country of laws and we do our best to hold the government to those laws as well as the citizens. You may "know" someone is guilty but if you can't prove it with admissible evidence the law says he walks. Where do you think our Evidence tradition comes from? It comes from the OT.
In the OT law you could have an eye witness to the murder and guess what he walks on a technicality.
"At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death."
"This is a court of law young man, not a court of justice." Oliver Wendell Holmes
__________________
"Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." ~Aesop
Really? Jesus defended you when you were guilty? I thought you REPENTED so that you could be forgiven??? Where do you draw the line, Brother? You are supposed to be APOSTOLIC? And now you insinuate you are capable of defending someone you believe did WRONG in the eyes of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whom you are supposed to believe in, supposed to even, in fact, carry HIS SPIRIT around?
My goodness, am I communicating with Holy Ghost filled people, or just intelligent elements of society? Please clarify. I'm astounded at times the discussions I have with people professing to have the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ dwelling in their bodies, their TEMPLES. . . .dare I write further and suggest. . .people who KNOW JESUS IS GOD and not a part of God???
We are to be a LIGHT amongst darkness, not join them!!!
Excuse me but if a child molester and rapist need defense then they should seek counselors who are like unto them. NOT those who are supposed to profess righteousness. Maybe you didn't understand my question, because to get those individuals charges dropped you would have to find loopholes, and therefore, lie.
A criminal defense attorney does not defend a client and certainly does not condone their actions.
They defend the constitution of the United States of America.
If the state puts on their evidence, follows the rules of procedure, and a jury convicts and sends to prison, then the defense attorney has done his job.
If the state cannot meet the burden of proof, follow correct procedure, or the jury is not unanimously convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then there is no conviction.
I don't think there is anyone on this forum who has 15 years criminal experience worked for two different district attorney offices and was a defense attorney in between those positions. I have been involved in over 5,000 criminal cases.
I have seen the innocent go to prison. I have seen false confessions given. I have seen evidence falsified. And I have seen the guilty walk. I have tried cases from both sides where the issue was not guilt but appropriate punishment.
The system is flawed, but it is still the best system on earth.
And to attack the office of defense attorney is to attack due process, and by proxy the constitution of this country.
As I stated at first DB, I know you are better than that, so why can't we stick to the issues of the thread?
The point is someone who has not raised their kids to adulthood does not have the experience to know what works and what doesn't. My wife and I tease my oldest that he is our practice child to see what works. I am convinced that a good upbringing is very beneficial to a child however I am equally convinced that their is no formula by which you can raise kids to do exactly as you want them to act as adults. I have seen to many kids who grew up in the same families go completely different directions.
God created Adam and Eve perfect and yet they failed, does that make God a bad Father for placing the tree in the Garden?
God had a contract. In the contract He mandated a consequence that they DIE should they CHOOSE to eat. Adam and Eve broke contract. Therefore they lost their souls and their paradise. Mow, did not mandate a consequence in his covenant to his eldest son.
I research denominations, religions, cults and sects. Of all of those different groups it is dogmatic ones who raise generations successfully passing on their religion. The real important point in all this is to raise children who will be truly devoted to a higher power, then just their parents and elders traditions.
__________________ "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
We are a country of laws and we do our best to hold the government to those laws as well as the citizens. You may "know" someone is guilty but if you can't prove it with admissible evidence the law says he walks. Where do you think our Evidence tradition comes from? It comes from the OT.
In the OT law you could have an eye witness to the murder and guess what he walks on a technicality.
"At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death."
"This is a court of law young man, not a court of justice." Oliver Wendell Holmes
And while it is unfortunate when a guilty party walks away, it is a very good thing when an innocent party is not convicted of a crime he didn't commit.
God had a contract. In the contract He mandated a consequence that they DIE should they CHOOSE to eat. Adam and Eve broke contract. Therefore they lost their souls and their paradise. Mow, did not mandate a consequence in his covenant to his eldest son.
Hmm lets see why don't you suggest a consequence for an adult that you have no power over. While they were in his house they obeyed his rules.
__________________
"Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." ~Aesop
A criminal defense attorney does not defend a client and certainly does not condone their actions.
They defend the constitution of the United States of America.
If the state puts on their evidence, follows the rules of procedure, and a jury convicts and sends to prison, then the defense attorney has done his job.
If the state cannot meet the burden of proof, follow correct procedure, or the jury is not unanimously convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then there is no conviction.
I don't think there is anyone on this forum who has 15 years criminal experience worked for two different district attorney offices and was a defense attorney in between those positions. I have been involved in over 5,000 criminal cases.
I have seen the innocent go to prison. I have seen false confessions given. I have seen evidence falsified. And I have seen the guilty walk. I have tried cases from both sides where the issue was not guilt but appropriate punishment.
The system is flawed, but it is still the best system on earth.
And to attack the office of defense attorney is to attack due process, and by proxy the constitution of this country.
As I stated at first DB, I know you are better than that, so why can't we stick to the issues of the thread?
Be blessed.
JAG
Brother, let me make myself clear. ONE sentance you wrote I must address: I am NOT attacking the office of the defense attorney. I am attacking anyone who claims to walk in the spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ and feels no conviction to defend a guilty man. Are you saying they should? That it is their job? Then they need to find another job that does not VIOLATE THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST! Or simply, DEFEND PEOPLE THEY BELIEVE ARE INNOCENT. It is that simple.
__________________ "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
Hmm lets see why don't you suggest a consequence for an adult that you have no power over. While they were in his house they obeyed his rules.
Just calling it like I'm seeing it, councilor.
__________________ "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
A criminal defense attorney does not defend a client and certainly does not condone their actions.
They defend the constitution of the United States of America.
If the state puts on their evidence, follows the rules of procedure, and a jury convicts and sends to prison, then the defense attorney has done his job.
If the state cannot meet the burden of proof, follow correct procedure, or the jury is not unanimously convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then there is no conviction.
I don't think there is anyone on this forum who has 15 years criminal experience worked for two different district attorney offices and was a defense attorney in between those positions. I have been involved in over 5,000 criminal cases.
I have seen the innocent go to prison. I have seen false confessions given. I have seen evidence falsified. And I have seen the guilty walk. I have tried cases from both sides where the issue was not guilt but appropriate punishment.
The system is flawed, but it is still the best system on earth.
And to attack the office of defense attorney is to attack due process, and by proxy the constitution of this country.
As I stated at first DB, I know you are better than that, so why can't we stick to the issues of the thread?
Be blessed.
JAG
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa
Brother, let me make myself clear. ONE sentance you wrote I must address: I am NOT attacking the office of the defense attorney. I am attacking anyone who claims to walk in the spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ and feels no conviction to defend a guilty man. Are you saying they should? That it is their job? Then they need to find another job that does not VIOLATE THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST! Or simply, DEFEND PEOPLE THEY BELIEVE ARE INNOCENT. It is that simple.
Linear Mode
