The Victim and the Accuser-Society’s Anger, Society’s Responsibility: “To Defend a Killer”

Student’s Name

University Affiliation

The Victim and the Accuser-Society’s Anger, Society’s Responsibility: “To Defend a Killer”

Society has always had moral, religious, and situational obligation to conduct specific acts or make certain decisions based on their relevance in protecting the values and virtues accepted by the wider community. In the video program, To Defend a Killer, lawyers, prosecutors at local, state, and federal courts, as well as, judge talk about the ethical dilemmas involved when deciding their approach to homicide or even rape cases. Based on the video, it is apparent that professionals working in the criminal justice system have to endure different challenges in their bid to pursue justice while also trying to defeat the morals instilled by society (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993).  Being a defense attorney in a homicide case can prove challenging, especially in cases where the lawyer indicates that the client committed the crime. Murder is considered an offence and thus, despite the assumption that one is innocent until proven guilty, being at the courtroom presents a different challenge of having to convince the jury that the suspected murderer is innocent.

Criminal law is a challenging field; therefore, lawyers, the judges, and defense attorneys find it hard to deal with aspects related to cases such as attention from the media. I agree with the panel that the media can be used to popularize cases, especially those belonging to wealthy people claims that influence the people’s perception of the accused, which influences expectations about case outcomes (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). This publicity comes with a lot of questioning and requests to say something by the media, which can be damaging. An individual suspected to have killed their girlfriend is likely to be prejudged by society before the court verdict on the case comes out, which explains the poor relations former offenders may have with the community. Ethics in America is an extensive network of different moral values that may encourage a defense attorney to defend an individual he/she knows is guilty of the crime suspected (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). The unethical issues faced during criminal law representation can be explained by the question “when does being passionate and committed to professional guidelines and rules become professional misconduct?”

I concur with the panel of law experts that the attorney-client privilege is professional; however, it can be considered unethical regardless of the framework of justice and its implementation. However, it is worth noting that evidence always plays a crucial role in determining the fate of the accused and the accuser. For the case of ethical conduct and dilemmas present in legal representation, prosecutors have to endure the possibility of defense attorneys withholding crucial information. Although this is lawful on professional grounds, it is also unethical in moral grounds, which society tends to use when passing judgment (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). I agree with the panelists that an accused person’s rights can influence the enforcement of the law from state to state. In high profile and critical cases, house searches and seizure of documents or property based on court orders can be excused as ethical.

The psychological battle involved when arguing against the prosecutor’s claims of the client being guilty as a defense attorney can prove challenging. On professional guidelines, fact-specific situations in which the defendant’s freedom is threatened require judges to use and apply rules governing attorney conduct. In cases where evidence is apparent and the indication that the defendant committed the crime, the courts have the moral obligation to prohibit false defense tactics (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). I agree with the concept that systemic influence makes it possible and sometimes necessary for defense attorneys to promote false defense and withhold vital information. This choice is controversial because it obeys the legal framework of the criminal justice system while also violating morals and the obligation, to be honest. The struggle of having to differentiate between mere accusations in the protection of the rights of the people involved in individual cases can prove ethically draining. In this regard, defense attorneys have to practice the client-attorney trust relationship and share details that can shape their defense, regardless of whether they are true or not.

For female and male attorneys, prosecutors, and judges, emotions can influence the willingness to participate in cases based on moral values and virtues. In the video program viewed for this assigned, Ethics in America, the panelists give their opinions and verdict on what aspects would influence the outcome of cases involving rape and homicide. From a personal standpoint, rape cases are sensitive, and for the female panelists, it is challenging to practice in a case that involves defending a crime against a fellow woman (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). This aspect of the criminal justice system connects with the psychological battle of having to imagine societal judgment and prejudice due to perceived criminal behavior. It presents both a professional and an ethical dilemma in that a female lawyer will turn down an offer to earn a living and support their needs in fear of judgment by society.

I agree with the legal framework’s functionality that a suspected is innocent until proven guilty. However, it is worth noting the influence of judgment by members of society regarding and its perceived role in the ability to follow the law. The ethical dilemma of having to turn down a job that the professional invested time and resources can be hard to comprehend on professional grounds. Conversely, from a moral standpoint, it is easy to understand why a female attorney would want to avoid seeming to validate the crime committed. In this regard, social influence serves a similar role in determining the fate of attorneys, prosecutors, and judges regarding their ability to act ethically or unethically. It is worth noting that both systemic and societal influence affects the outcome of decisions and the interpretation of aspects related to criminal law.

From a societal perspective, a husband accused of murdering their wife who maybe had disagreements is likely to be prejudged and exposed social prejudice, which sometimes contributes to a similar interpretation of the defense attorney’s efforts to prove his/her client’s innocence. Attorneys can have personals reasons for not taking on a case; societal perception and moral values partly influence such intentions. I agree with the analysis of panelists like Justice Antonia of the US Supreme Court and Jack Litman, especially their approach to having the responsibility to defend cases that involve less moral obligation (Deutsch, Elliott & Miller, 1993). Being the defense lawyer of a suspected murderer can prove costly considering that society passes judgment on morals, as opposed to the legal framework that guides attorney practice.

I concur with the view that being a female lawyer backing a suspected criminal can paint a bad picture of ignorance and insensitivity, which influence case outcomes. In this regard, being an attorney involves choosing whether or not to work under certain circumstances or aspects that may affect the societal perception of the efforts to defend the suspect. As the title of video states, defending a killer requires years of experience and knowledge development on ways to overcome varying dynamics that affect the outcomes of the case.

References

Deutsch. D., Elliott. M. & Miller. B. (1993). To Defend a Killer- Ethics in America. Video Program.