Believing a person deserves a defence is not the same as doing anything in your power to get him off scot-free.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The individual is not only best qualified to provide his own personal defense, he is the only one qualified to do so: and his right to do so is guaranteed by the Constitution.
I am still not at all in favour of offering any defence. Even if the court had accepted that petition submitted by some of my co-accused regarding defence, etc., I would not have defended myself.
No one is going to stick their head out of the trenches for someone they don't respect or trust. You can get shot doing that.
There can be no defence like elaborate courtesy.
The role of the defense is to be an advocate for their client, regardless of whether he did it or not, within the bounds of the law.
You can't defend the indefensible - anything you say sounds self-serving and hypocritical.
Doesn't the fight for survival also justify swindle and theft? In self defence, anything goes.
It might be pardonable to refuse to defend some men, but to defend them negligently is nothing short of criminal.
Obviously, a power player in a criminal organization doesn't have to persuade anyone. He can just do what he wants.
For there is no defense for a man who, in the excess of his wealth, has kicked the great altar of Justice out of sight.