That's because Lawyers are seen as very sleazy.  Some of them are sleazy, too.

There is outcry though.  Especially in cases where the person appears to be innocent.  But you won't see many people defend someone who appears guilty.  Even if it's Innocent until proven guilty, that only goes for the court system.  Not so much for the court of public opinion.

Imagine a child predator gets off on a technicality.  It's justice for the justice system, but injustice in the eyes of the public.  Especially if that child predator goes out and kills three more children, before finally being brought in, and found guilty.

The innocent need to be protected. But court of public opinion isn't going to favor someone who appears to be guilty.  Nor should anyone expect it to.  As long as the justice system does it's job, everyone will get a fair trial.  That's what lawyers are for.

Lawyers by and large earn the rep. Plenty of ridiculous lawyers doing ridiculous things for ridiculous clients for money.


But you bring forth a very interesting point and notions:


What is a technicality, for one.


Personally, I've only had maybe 3 cases dropped on a true technicality. One was a case where the guy was charged with carrying a concealed, and technically it was an antique under florida law, not a firearm.


Anyway, the notion is that I cannot recall ever any outcry against the party performing the illegal search or doing unwarranted search or stop.


I am trying to think of one time where blame was attributed to the agency who actually screwed up.


I am not being sarcastic. I am trying to recall the public being mad at the agency for allowing a likely guilty party walk because they chose to violate someone's right. A very likely very guilty person. Basically their wrong resulting in a bigger wrong.


Again, trying to recall this, and I'm willing to be wrong, however,I doubt I'm wrong about the general principles here. I don't think I've even read a newspaper editorial where they demanded accountability for letting some monster go because the agency couldn't be bothered with the rules.


Gotta be examples.....

---

And every time a women is abused the women's rights group make an outcry. When blacks are wronged the black community makes an outcry. When gays are wronged the gay community makes an outcry, it's why these groups are formed.

Your attempting to say because we stand against different legislation we ignore injustices in the legal system.

Are you upset because the NRA doesn't protest illegal search and seizure in a narcotics case?

For the record almost every 2nd amendment group I know and support also has a strong stand against police check points, warrant less phone taps , illegal search and seizure and so on.

But that doesn't do anything to paint us as backwoods hicks.

I actually am not referring to the NRA at all, as after all, they have a limited agenda, which I agree with in about 50%.


I am referring to the general idea that people don't care much about the right to privacy, intrusion and invasion of their homes and possessions, until it is their own.


I am saying that people are just fine ignoring injustices in the justice system. Absolutely. On a mass scale.


As far as portraying gun crazies as backwood hicks, it is pretty well earned, so I don't know what to say. These folks paint the rest in a poor light. Back to the NRA, their leader does not help with this at all.

---

I actually am not referring to the NRA at all, as after all, they have a limited agenda, which I agree with in about 50%.


I am referring to the general idea that people don't care much about the right to privacy, intrusion and invasion of their homes and possessions, until it is their own.

I am saying that people are just fine ignoring injustices in the justice system. Absolutely. On a mass scale.


As far as portraying gun crazies as backwood hicks, it is pretty well earned, so I don't know what to say. These folks paint the rest in a poor light. Back to the NRA, their leader does not help with this at all.

 

Hasn't the pretty much overwhelming support for whistle blowers like Edward Snowden countered that thought? You haven't seen people out crying against the NSA and the mass surveillance programs, come on. Here's a few examples of people taking stands against mass surveillance, privacy invasions and illegal search and seizures. 

 

https://rally.stopwatching.us/

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26...66640.html

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/04/cro...-movement/

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/stop-a...k-protest/

---

Hasn't the pretty much overwhelming support for whistle blowers like Edward Snowden countered that thought? You haven't seen people out crying against the NSA and the mass surveillance programs, come on. Here's a few examples of people taking stands against mass surveillance, privacy invasions and illegal search and seizures. 

 
<a class="bbc_url" href='https://rally.stopwatching.us/'>https://rally.stopwatching.us/</a>

 
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/nsa-stop-watching-us_n_4166640.html'>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/26/nsa-stop-watching-us_n_4166640.html</a>

 
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/04/crowds-across-america-protest-nsa-in-restore-fourth-movement/'>http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/04/crowds-across-america-protest-nsa-in-restore-fourth-movement/</a>

 
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/stop-and-frisk-protest/'>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/stop-and-frisk-protest/</a>

Great point on the stop and frisk movement. I'm going to look into what the end result of that is. There needs to be a lot more of that, as it was and is outrageous. And happening all over still.


I'm not sure the NSA stuff really has hit home or changed anything.

---

Great point on the stop and frisk movement. I'm going to look into what the end result of that is. There needs to be a lot more of that, as it was and is outrageous. And happening all over still.


I'm not sure the NSA stuff really has hit home or changed anything.

 

Well no I don't think it's changed anything, I'm just bringing to light people do care and there is an outcry. Even by us back wood 2nd amendment hicks  :thumbsup:

---

Btw, I haven't heard much of anything that leads me to believe this is close to a slam dunk for the prosecution. When I see them leaking stuff and trying to manipulate the press with other allegations like they have been here, it leads me to think they are hoping creating a perception is their hope rather than relying on the evidence, and here it seems lacking.

 

First off, thanks for weighing in on this.


 

I agree with your above statement. This is why I asked the question in the first place. It seems to me that the state does not now have a winning case, and that any delay can only make a conviction more likely because it gives the state additional time to (maybe) find something.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

More delays = more attorney billable time.

 

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

---