Georgetown Law's Professor Abbe Smith on why she represents guilty people
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2025
- In her new book "Guilty People," Georgetown Law Professor Abbe Smith gives readers an in-depth look at guilty individuals on trial. A lifelong criminal defender, Smith explains why she chose a career in defending the guilty and highlights the need for defenders who can navigate through a complex criminal justice system that is not always equipped to recognize nuances.
For more, check out this Q&A with Abbe: www.law.george...
From a public defender, YES. Thank you.
I was surprised by her answer. I can understand that answer in many cases. But I can’t believe it can be the reason in all cases (whereas making the mighty power of the State meet its burden of proof seems a universal reason). For example I’m thinking of some horrific cases here in California (but certainly not unique to here) where men Zoomed in (using Zoom as a generic term) to watch and get off on a toddler or infant being violently raped, where parents tortured their children to death in unspeakably cruel ways, the dragging murder of James Byrd in TX, etc. I would find this a bit more interesting (to me) if she would have addressed more in depth what she likes about those types of clients. I think her last example got closest, but I have to imagine PDs such as yourself at times get clients you know are straight psychopaths or evil incarnate (I also assume those types of clients are much more rare than the public at large assumes). I‘m a conservative, so most of my acquaintances are surprised (perplexed even) when I tell them that the lawyers I respect the most are criminal defense lawyers, and PDs in particular (since they can’t choose their clients), because of how important the job is to individual rights/liberty, and frankly how thankless or unpopular the job can be. If you know of any good resources or books/videos/etc. re: how PDs deal with having to represent people accused of truly heinous crimes, and who may walk and recommit if the PD is effective at convincing a jury that the State failed to prove guilt, I’d appreciate the pointer. (I often think of Steve Feldman who represented David Westerfield in San Diego. Leaked plea negotiations showed that he offered to have his client tell police where he dumped Danielle Van Dam’s body if the death penalty was taken off the table, and then went on to vigorously argue for a not guilty verdict (the body was found by volunteers during trial and Westerfield was convicted)). Thanks a lot. Keep up the important work.
Bad people do bad things too.
Well.. true good people may screw up from time to time and hopefully they’re punished accordingly but somethings going wrong now because people who are definitely a danger to society keep getting opportunity and opportunity and opportunity to harm more people, and create a larger list of victims.
This woman spoke about the Kyle Rittenhouse case and was under the impression that Kyle needed a license to carry that AR. I heard her say this on a podcast.
Plot twist: Everyone is a guilty person!
Everyone does need a defender at times. I hope you don’t feed their victim beliefs though. And people put themselves in jail/prison. Others don’t do it TO them. I would like to see effective rehabilitation/education, whatever works. Bottom line though is that it all comes down to personal choice. I’m not judging either. I’ve been at the bottom before, too. It’s what we believe about ourselves that determines our outcomes.
This lady has spent way too much time as Hannibal Lector’s psychiatrist. 😳
You are right too many in jails. A LOT more need to be executed.
Disgusting.