ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ม.ค. 2017
- Ram Jethmalani is perhaps the most famous lawyer in India, not least because he has represented the accused in some of the most famous criminal cases. Here he talks about defending a client who you know is guilty.
You can watch the rest of this video here: mylaw.net/videos/Ram_Jethmalan...
This shows what a important role a judge has to play
If the court will not be presented with good enough evidences, what can a judge do? I am not saying judges are not to be blamed. But it is the lawyers who have rigged this system.
A good lawyer knows the law, a great lawyer knows the judge.
genius comment
*an important role
"This is business"
But the client is guilty
"I knew, but I did business"
Pawpaw
@@deepakb9304 business
This is professionalism...
@@bigk2367 Tu bhi jaanta hai kya hota hai eemaan bechne ka nateeja,
Phir kyun ban raha hai is jethmalani ka bhateeja
@@swaraarnav8510 bhai india constitution me likha hai ki agr kki guilty bhi hai..usko bhi poora haq hai case ladne ka aur lawyer ko pura haq hai usko bachane ka...isme koi galat baat nhi hai
I guess this is what u tell yourself before going to bed at night.
Perfect
There are no loop holes on the law ...the laws are made with loopholes intentionally ..
You must be a BA pass.
Sahi bola
Padha h law kabhi zindagi me ..ya bas 12th pass krke gyaan baantna shuru kr diya
@@chaitanya605 like batorna hai bhai inhe, batorne do
@@chaitanya605 chutiye sbse jyada Scam me politician nd high authority hi involve hote hai, tb hi uss time v kitne politician ne resignation de diya nd loopholes the tb hi itna scam hua tha, jaha benefit milega uss insan ko wo uss loophole ka faida hi uthaega aur lgta hai tmne toh 12th v ni kiya hai
He explained criminal defence law in less than 2 minutes.
The problem is that these people will try to erase evidences and say that there is no proof that my client commited mistake.
court doesnot work how they show in the movies.
@@kartikeysheokand6647 u think evidences cannot be manipulated?
I mean to say what a normal person think an evidence is and what a court thinks what an evidence is much different. Court has made it illegal to make for a lawyer to not accept the case on the basis of a person is guilty or not just like a doctor cannot say no to a patient.
Technical a very right answer but morally it's very wrong to defend a client knowing he is guilty.
But don't we have a ethical responsibility to uphold the regulations and functions of a society?
@@gyatsogurung6215 Exactly what I was trying to say it's ethically wrong protecting guilty people forgetting their impact in society if they are let free
@@teerthupadhyay3931 I think upholding the credibility of the law is ethically more sacred than dismissing it, in the face of a random ethical responsibility, such as withdrawing from representing the self-acclaimed guilty individuals. Therefore, if we're forced to make a decision to side with one of the two opposing ethics, we better weigh the pros and cons. and in this case, representing guilty person is ethically more sacred than concerning oneself with ethical shortcomings of representing him. Sorry, not comprehensive enough, but topic itself doesn't leave us any differently.
@@gyatsogurung6215 True
@@teerthupadhyay3931 🙏🙏
He's the devil's advocate, literally.
Always lol !
@@bigk2367 He was literally a senior advocate of the Supreme Court. And he was a criminal lawyer. So he was sometimes seen defending the indefensible, which makes him the devil's advocate in a metaphorical sense also. It's wordplay that works on many levels.
Name one lawyer of any repute who isn't..??
@@copinonino yeh bhi theek h
The only reason was money that he was getting.
😆😆😆😆🤣🤣🤣
Nothing wrong.
It's called professionalism.
"Rationality only works till things don't affect you directly"
Like akshay khanna said "We're not in business of justice, we're in business of law"
He was right though, a society that runs on Justice but not on law is chaotic and vigilantic.
If someone is guilty and gets Scott free...after defending by their advocates..
It is clear indication that their is also loopholes in laws also.
@nag p 🤣🤣🤣🤣 ye padh ke lga ki mai upsc ka ethics paper ka answer padh raha hu.....ekdum balanced...
@Programming Buddy 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Ofcourse, why do you think 80% of politicians are roaming free instead of being in the jail ?
No it's mean the evidence provided was insufficient .
Even Yamraj had to argue with him for 87 years to take him to almighty...
U may be smartest but if that smartness u r lending to wrong people in society to benefit then there is no argument if u r good or bad.... u are an evil to society ...
He is doing his job. Judge is the one who have to decide not an advocate
@@kartikeysheokand6647 desh kanoon aur law samaaj KO sudhaarne ke liye manaaya gya tha.....agar vakil hi essey chizz Karne lagey tho yeh samaaj sudharne say rha....🤷♂️ Then Kabhi yeh hope mat rakhna yeh desh developed country waps ban paayega...
They using loop hole of our constitution....jahaa
1000 gunaahgaar chuut jaaye chalegaa magar. Ek nirdosh KO sazaa Kabhi nHI honi Chahiye.....
Aur wohii 1000 gunehgaar, lakho bekasuro ki jindgii hell banaa dete hai.
I literally hate this type of advocate Jo, essey logo Ka Saath dete hai, Jo samaaj main araajaktaa failaate hai....issi wajhaa say gareeb humeshaa ameer logo ke niche dab Kar reh jataa hai.
@@Princesharma-nw5wz shawshank redemption dekhi hai tune? Udhar wo ladka jail ki saja kaat raha tha for a crime he believed he committed but actually didn't commit. Agar tere logic se jane lage toh usko ta pehle hi koi defence nahi milta. A lawyers job is to represent a person and speak for his favour tge opposition lawyer's job is to speak against them providing evidence, facts to dispel their argument and a judge's role is to hear both side of the arguments without biasness and to give his judgement in light of the quality of arguments presented in the court of law a lawyer who judges and assumes the conviction of a person and declines him in a way becomes the executioner which is not a lawyer's role
@@dibyamshuwagle8284 you speak as if this is the norm. Most criminals know they committed a crime. If you are going to doubt everything the guy you are supposed to represent tells you, you can't reach logical end to that scepticism objectively, to the point where you will present in court what you don't believe. As regards to lawyers behaving like executioners, what a sad attempt that is. A lawyer refusing to defend someone after hearing the guy say he did it is only refusing. He hasn't harmed the guy in any way. Let's not pretend so.
@@JBHACKSAW a lawyer refusing to defend someone hasn't harmed him? Wtf are you smoking? The lawyer has harmed him/her by refusing to defend him/her and if we make rwfusing clients a norm then trust me with time we will be heaeing a lot of wrongfully incarcerated people's cases. Our justice system's motive isn't to punish all the criminals it's motive is to prevent one innocent from being wrongfully punished
And people curse Doctors for being insensitive and money minded😂😂😂😂 well after hearing this statement of one of the most CELEBRATED Lawyers of India it is very clear JUSTICE IS SOMETHING WHICH IS RARELY SERVED WHAT SERVES IS WHAT YOU CAN PROOVE....No wonders why cases take years to reach a particular conclusion😑😑
He is not lawyer ...he is an advocate first of all know what you are writing...do you think it is in only india it is also in foreign also..that cases takes a lot of years because delivering a verdict is not a simple task
The duty of a lawyer is to defend his client at all costs. You cannot blame him for doing his duty. This is exactly what Krishna Bhagwaan told Arjun when he was reluctant to fight his cousins-- "the duty of a soldier is to fight, and fight you must!"
have u gone mad ????? Don't twist the reference u stupid idiot.
@@wisdomtales4739 How am I twisting the reference? Krishna Bhagwaan was clear in his position that one must put their head down and do their duty regardless of the outcome. Karma decides the result. If Jethmalani did his duty well, then the judge would agree with his argument. He is not doing anything illegal, he simply doing his duty.
@@15arihant SHUT UP GOD WILL PUNISH PEOPLE LIKE YOU
@@15arihant Krishna told adharm is also valid if it provides Dharma (that's morally correct you have to serve what's morally correct ) ...... Here if RJ knows he's client is guilty still he is providing a protection then he is serving duty correctly he's not morally correct ......doing dharma to a adharmi 🤣🤣
@@harshad3767 He his fulfilling his lawyer's dharma just as Arjuna was fulfilling Kshatriya dharma.
And only a rich guilty client afford the fees per hearing.. Jethmalani and Salve not only defended their guilty clients but they both eventually become the part of the government.. And that's a shame for democracy
he had fought more cases for
You may have defended your clients well, but sorry but this defence of your own actions were not convincing enough...
Your client isn't guilty UNTIL the judge says so. And even if he does, you have umpteen number of appellate options.
RIGHT
Come on, just say "its all bcs of money"
We have no principles other than clients. We've told to do what we listen and argue over that.
@@gauravmishra6628 absolutely correct but on ethical terms is wrong no matter what Principles in a profession says.
@@maniishk4171 RIGHT F WE KNOW A PERSON IS TERRIOST THEN WE NOT TAKE THEIR CASES
He was the best lawyer of the country. But some how im thoroughly unconvinced by this argument
This is why I like Mr.jethmalani
They fight for the client not for the justice
Judge knows that Lawyer knows the truth.... guilty should be punished
Plz always upload full video of any judge , advocate, lawyer as a law student we also learn from your channel..thank u
Swar Saha th-cam.com/video/qls9RutkI9o/w-d-xo.html
U should use quora
@@pitabassahu2123 what is quora sir .I didn't understand plz tell me
@@swarsaha5152 a question answer site.. app is also available..
His teacher failed to instill in him moral science lessons
Moral lessons🤣🤣🤣
@Yadnyesh jo aadmi gunehgar ke sath khada rehta hai, usko to jail mai daalna chahiye pehle
@@tony3017 kuch galat kaha kya bhai maine?
@@pranitgandhi6832 yes. Galat kaha aapne
Perfectly put.
Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi-
Journalist- supported Gandhian and revolutionaries ideas
Born- 26th Oct 1890.
Kayasth Patshala.
Translated Victor Hugo's novel - 93
Karmyogi. Swaraj- revolutionary works. He was associated with them.
Mahavir prasad impressed. 1911- Saraswati. Hindi weekely
Abhudyay. Upto 1913.
"Pratap" against exploitation and injustice. In Kanpur.
Even during economic troubles- didn't took any ads from English and princely states.
He understood communalism. And worked against its forces.
Was for secular India. Against religious split of nation.
Was killed in a mob lynching trying to stop Hindu Muslim fight.
Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi- award- given by President of India since 1989
This is an example how can a clever lawyer win aginst innocent and the the cause for it is nothing else but money ! Rest all his words are fake!
Every culprit finds a excuse to defend himself and money does that job...
This doesn't mean that he's innocent
Laws are created to keep the powerful in power... justice is a luxury ... the weak can't afford it...the sooner they understand it the better...
The practical problem with withdrawing representation once your client admits guilt is no criminal would ever admit it.
Ya right like going to the court and saying that Jessica Lal was shot by an unknown sardarji....this man all his life put his professional benchmarks over and above general ethics forgetting the fact that law is but a servants
to the society and is not above ethics. That said he was one of the sharpest legal minds india will ever see.
For money person can do anything
He has prepared answer for every questions
His saying clear my mind on guilty and being guilty cases
That's what the problem with Indian judiciary. Victims are mostly came from poor background. They can't afford to pay these lawyers. Criminals have no fear in them, they do crimes and pay hefty fees to these kind of lawyers. Get rid of it.
What he meant was... Show me the money 💰....right and wrong is nothing....
Haha. Every murderer has a reason to kill. Still, a murder remains a murder.
He is not talking about guilty he is taking about accused about whom decision will be taken by judge on the basis of evidence and due process. So lawyer's job is to only defend his client on evidence not on the basis of accused told him that he is guilty.
My lawyer didn't defend instead of providing every detail and I was asking justice for my self
It means it's loophole in judiciary where one can easily play with evidences & get his client free.
So a video uploaded 3 years ago and comments about 4days ago this is the question that's been eating mind about TH-cam
A man with full insights on the law and human conscience. He pretty much navigated through the both.
RIP
Its like defending undefendable. That shows money is more important for many people rather than integrity.
Legitimate but unethical answer.
And it's called the "Justice" Court.
just watch "12 Angry men" you will get all the answers.
Lawyers should have a moral (and arguable legal) obligation to reveal any knowledge they have of the law being broken. If the client is guilty, the lawyer should have a legal obligation to argue the case pleading guilty.
true that. in spirit of law even that would be guilty because despite having full knowledge the lawyer still supporting would amount to being complicit in the miscarriage of justice.
Such a lame argument to get away with your own sins. If a lawyer really wants to defend his client and at the same time wants to protect his integrity, then go for a rational solution rather than playing with the evidence and arguments
Exactly
Sins. Hmmm Defending the accused is not sin.
Absolutely correct
Look into yourself before accusing we are like him one or the other way
En choron ki wajah se , crime badhta hai. Criminals with money power gets bail easily and innocent people spend life in jail. Ram jethmalani is the Ravan of justice system who used god gifted intellect to release most wanted criminals of our country.
So IF somebody kill your daughter or son and tolds u privately that he/she had killed yours..than you will defend him and told the judge (he/she is not guilty)
It's called a conflict of interest. So he won't be permitted to take the case.
He knew all along when he was being interviewed by Thappar
We need to understand the difference between ethics and morality. In business ethics is more important than morality.
We are not in the business of justice. We are in business of law.
LAW IS NOT ABOUT WHAT IS ACTUAL TRUTH OR LIE
IT IS ABOUT WHO CAN
"PROVE BETTER WHAT IS TRUTH OR LIE"
ANONYMOUS....
Wow to defend a guilty 🙏
Who is here after watching scam 1992??
100% correct.. In the 3rd semester a subject Professional Ethics and Bar-Bench Relations teaches an advocate to keep the words of his client in private and to not publicise those words. Only convincing evidence may shall be the closing gate for the defense to lay off their hands from the table
This question is simple. People are most desperate at two places-the Hospital and the Courtroom. People are willing to pay any amount of money to not go to jail or to not die. Lawyers just use this fact to earn millions. It's economics. Very poor ethics to be honest, it's just thirst for money which makes people do such things
On the contrary, Doctor most of the times bound to ethics. I think that's why lawyers think themselves as God like as they can make anyone innocent and can threat anyone with legal matters and they have inner hatred for doctors because both are high profession but treating people is noble profession and people treat doctors like God not the lawyers. No amount of money can give back life to last stage cancer patient but hepty amount of money can prove a rapist into a innocent. That's the difference.
If there are any well organised mafias then
1)Doctors
and
2) Food companies
Are the most sinful persons for having allowed the rule of evil pharmaceutical corporations.
Advocates are nowhere comparable to the extent of Evil deeds a Doctor does on daily basis.
We have very very few Doctors who expose the Nexus of evil Pharmaceutical corporations in working of Medical Profession and What government should and shouldn't do in decisions pertaining to Medical aspects.
I wish more doctors expose these evil corporations.
@@praveenh6288 If you aren't part of health system then you have seen nothing what a medical student goes through to become a doctor. Only a registered doctor not the established one, which one can achieve around 40 yrs of age. what you are trying to say all about corporate hospitals where you may be true. But you have never seen a gov hospital set up and workers there, how hard working they are and after giving all if you can't save any one patient it feels like you have lost your nearest one. Even gov setups improving day by day and providing top facilities which a private sectors give. Doctors don't earn money by brainwashing alike lawyers, cause you have to work physically and mentally simultaneously. And if you deliberately saying about corrupted doctors still he or she must has fear of legal issues but a lawyer has barely such fear cause they know every possible way to way out. A honest doctor can earn more than a honest lawyer but a corrupted lawyer can earn way more than a corrupted doctor.
@@nirupam8666 when you drew comparisons between Two...you have to know both sides.
If Lawyers brainwash clients, then it is apparently true that doctors rob patients by instilling fear for life, and make them spend fortune to rob them of lakhs of rupees.
Coming to Doctors working in Govt Hospitals may be you have never visited any government hospitals only few are honest rest all works only to direct patients to their private clinics after work and to perform surgeries and procedures in Govt hospital after their private fees is taken care of.
Coming to hardships faced by Med Students atleast there is certainty pertaining to depth of subjects although very deep but in case of Law Students you are not much informed how difficult is gaining a grip on legal aspects atleast you can join a hospital initial pay will be atleast 15-20K in a most underrated place.
But for Lawyers struggle for minimum 5years without any fix financial income they are happy even if they get 2-3K from Seniors have to spend from pocket unlike commissions from Pharmacists and Medical Reps filling pockets of Docs.
Lawyers have no right to withhold Decree or order from court when client fails to pay fees, unlike doctors who can restrain even a Body of deceased for want more money.
I know in and out of both professions only sufferers in both profession are Honest beings.
@@praveenh6288 And to become a lawyer normal or successful one, its not necessary to have LLM degree, only LLB (Bachelor degree) enough which is way easier to get a seat than NEET UG or AIIMS. But to become an successful doctor several years of prep for NEET UG, then MMBS 4.5 yrs, intersship 1 yt, housestaffship min 1yr, PG prep 1 to 2 yr, if you get MD/MS 3 yrs course, superspecialty prep 1 yr , if you get DM/Mch for 2 yrs or even some other foreign degrees thay will count extra. Around 15 yrs after your 12th board, you have to study. And if you want to get in prestigious institute like AIIMS then add 2 or 3 yrs more. Just imagine, it's a long way to get jealousy from others. Its natural, people can't tolerate doctors just for what they can gain, this society never gives them enough respect, always has seen them as term of robbery but never seen their years of sacrifice behind it. You know just because of this every year many jewel med students go aboard by clearing PLAB exam. Less violence, more respect, more suitable environment to learn.
And that ladies and gentlemen is the reason why you can hardly ever get justice in India
High time need huge changes to be made in Indian law
Everything has loopholes or vulnerability as we have in cybersecurity world. We get frequent updates for the bugs in apps but laws don't get updates.
Saul Goodman everybody.
Desi Saul Goodman
This man has defended the worst of the worst of india.. 😢
Anyone after watching Scam 1992?
A lawyer but never a judge
what a tweak..jethmalani sahab
Nice.
1:08 So his clients are special than everyone else, just becoz he could pay your hefty fees. Standards are called standard for unification
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏So in Short this is what Mr.Jethmalani is telling to himself (justification of all the criminals & rich bad men he defended just like Salman wasn't driving the car and 6 poor r dead because they aren't fortunate to have soft cushy mattress but the hard cold roadside concrete) ....
🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝🌝
GODS WILL PUNISH HIM
Things would have been much simpler if Judicial system wouldn’t have been trying hard to defend the guilty
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.
I always feel very bad regarding the aspect that to get justice you have to pay....then what's the justice that you get ...I don't know if I am confused!
What happens if someone kills his son or daughter but gives you money to defend him in court?
Bhai aapp pagal ho kya???
The society through the Constitution has granted you the entitlement to defend a guilty, your conscience doesn't.
Ideally you should at most defend the guilty to the extent of reducing the quantum of punishment citing lack of evidences.
The old man has gone berserk
Both the parties knows the truth it's the judge who's on trail
Ok,what about the foul play, Lawyers might get into to save their client even though they know he is guilty,are they allowed to that as well,Mr great lawyer?
Justice is a subset of the law and the not the other way around.
In the court of God , your this statement will not spare you for your did.
This shows as clearly as possible why we should remodell our constitution as soon as possible
we are not in a business of justice....we are in a business of law.
Being an advocate is worst of the professions..
You erase someone's sh*t by selling your discretion..
Worst than a janitor or a prostitute..
5 people rape a girl and confess in private to the lawyer. And he says this in court. Oh! How humanity has fallen!
His was the lawyer of Harshad Mehta too I remember
That's stupid way to make money out of injustice
What if the accused himself pleads guilty in the court?
Then ,there will be no question arise of defending him /her
Then he will get reduced sentencing...
In every case there is one right party and one wronged party, and lawyers like Ram with decades of exprience can probably anyway tell if the client is guilty or not, but that's not what the law is for, you need to fight for your client no matter what , else it's a clear case of professional misconduct.
Expert of Evidence act
If this is how court n lawyers operates then common man should not hope for justice
I am a medical student and its just mind play...aap kisi ke upar bura krne ko ya khud se apne kisi evil deed ko justify krne ke liye uski mentality ko groom krte ho...our seniors told us its just intro(ragging) and for fun and it is bcos so that you might respect us and seniors help juniors and blah blah..and here ram jethmalani isnt directly saying that it is wrong he too is justifying it.
World is not bad due to bad people, but due to ignorance of good and educated people.
And what if they do present evidence that accurately and factually incriminates your client?
Law is not law if it violates the principles of eternal justice
Actually any person who committed any type of crime .. is not a born criminal.. society plays a cruical role shaping a person’s mind set.. so an offender has a right to denfend himself.. but he must confess his crime in law of court.
If as per law a lawyer can prove the same person guilty or innocent depending on whether he is client or not shows the inability of judiciary to do justice
But human ethics should be above everything!
But human intelligence is lagging behind in reconstructing the faulty system
Who is he ?
And which guilty person has he defended ??