FuturePD wrote:Stinson wrote:jkay wrote:Stinson wrote:at the end of the day the functional aims of your efforts are allowing child molesters and rapists to escape incapacitation for what they did.
The functional aim, and the ethical duty, of every lawyer is the same: to get the best possible results for a client, according to that client's definition of "best." BigLaw attorneys often do work that has the functional aim of making it so that giant corporations can cause personal injury, environmental damage, or economic hardship to others at as little cost to themselves as possible.
But prosecutors are the exception to this rule. Our job is to see a just outcome rather than what some client wants. That is why I find your statements so questionable. What I just cannot fathom is your vitrol at those who want to protect others who have done nothing wrong. Yes, there is overcrowding in prisons. Yes, drug laws should be reformed. But talking about those is blatantly changing the subject. Between the rape victim and the rapist I want to help the victim. You want to help the rapist. How is this a discussion?
I want to point out again that not all PDs think this way, and I would never accuse a poster like Void of the above. He/she clearly indicated that the system is the aim. If he or she was opposite me in a rape trial, I would not associate him with the defendant's crimes.
I certainly agree that work in Biglaw occasionally has moral issues like that (although mostly it is just big companies fighting each other rather than an Erin Brockovich type story).
Normally I would not have joined the potential derailment of a thread like this that has good info for aspiring PDs, but I just can't let some of this go on the off chance it influences future PDs.