RESPECT: Lawyers or Doctors.....

[Minuano27]

---

or is he "gutless" because he's defending you even if he knows that you're really guilty?

.. is this the very nature of being a lawyer??

.. basically, that's the whole point of my question. Let's take your example; I committed a crime, then i was CHARGED with that crime. In my own conviction, i am guilty, because i know deep inside me that i've killed someone coz i drove him/her over with my car. I mean, why is the law like this ?? In our example, i am guilty but still a lawyer comes in to protect me. I'm not being martyr and i'm not a saint, but why would you protect me ??

the answer is simple - by protecting you, the lawyer is also protecting the rest of society so that no one can FALSELY charge you (or anyone else) of a crime, or FORCE you (or anyone else) to admit to a crime, and get away with it. those who accuse you must PROVE it in court with enough admissible evidence to convict you beyond a reasonable doubt.

good if you admit to a crime, but what if you're innocent? the law can't make a distinction between those who admit and those who deny because a large majority always denies. that's why the presumption has to apply to all cases. in fact, even if you admit to the crime charged, the procedure still has to be followed - you get charged in court, you get arraigned and plead guilty, and you get sentenced, all with the assistance of a lawyer, just to make sure that no one forced you to admit that you're guilty.

the problem really is to prevent you from being framed, or forced to admit to a crime you never committed. you've probably read in the news of a court acquitting someone because it believes the accused was framed. suppose it was you who got framed for say, possession of shabu. if it were the other way around, the moment you're "charged with a crime", that's it, you go to jail. obviously, you wouldn't want that.

now, if it happens to you, it can happen to anyone with impunity. police will charge people they don't like, or they get corrupted by people who want someone arrested. those in power can threaten you with jail time if you don't give them your house, your business, or whatever you may have that they want. think of Martial Law declared by Marcos - people got arrested and jailed for whatever "reason" the people in power could think of, the most prominent of whom, obviously, was Ninoy Aquino. The coercive power was so great that the Lopezes had to give up Meralco, ABS-CBN and other businesses. I assume you know the rest of the story of those times.

[shimiyu]

We have to keep in mind that the legal system is rife w/ corruption. On the other hand, we are being fair & balanced to say that lawyers are forced into that notorious reputation for being gutless, as you would call it, because people do have a limited understanding of the law's working system. I think one can safely say that the masses' ignorance of it contribute to these professionals' infamy.

[yokam]

your question would be valid if you ignore the lawyer's obligation that i posted above, and the way the legal system works.

as i posted, the lawyer's first task is to test the evidence of the prosecution. in some cases, that's the only defense that can be made, like in that infamous claudio teehankee jr. case in the early 90s (which together with the vizconde and the rolito go cases led congress to pass a law imposing the death penalty for "heinous crimes"). especially in the teehankee and rolito go cases, everyone knew they were guilty because there were victims who survived the shootings, and the events were well publicized. in short, they were "convicted" in the eyes of the public. so what then? they automatically go to prison? without any trial? they may have been convicted in the eyes of the public, but that's not the way things work.

the most IMPORTANT thing that should be remembered is that the PROCEDURE APPLIES TO EVERYONE. that's the way it should be, because in case YOU are charged with a crime, the whole process will apply to you.

for example, you're driving your car and you hit someone, who dies in the hospital. you're charged with homicide through reckless imprudence. there are witnesses who saw you when you stopped your car after hitting him. your lawyer will naturally ask you if it's true that you were driving the car and you hit the victim. unless you lie to your lawyer, then he will KNOW that YOU ARE GUILTY.

I was doing some back reading and concluded something, lawyers don't choose their clients and it's professional courtesy, panginabuhi man gihapon na. What I'm trying to pinpoint is that if a defendant is really guilty and yet there's no substantial and strong evidence to prove his guilt, that means he's acquitted right? Justice is still not served.

What I was asking was somewhat a personal question about profession and conscience and what they feel weighing the situation and not about "how it works". Sorry for the personal intrusion, but that's where respect comes from, from the person and not from the profession itself.

so now apply your argument to yourself - would you rather have a lawyer committed to defending you by testing the prosecution's evidence, or a lawyer who's half-hearted about it because he has a "guilty conscience" because he knows you're guilty?

I stand by my principles. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I'd rather admit it and get everything done and face whatever consequences rather than complicating things yet at the back of my mind I know I'm guilty. Dali ko madala sa akong konsensya.

[Minuano27]

I was doing some back reading and concluded something, lawyers don't choose their clients and it's professional courtesy, panginabuhi man gihapon na. What I'm trying to pinpoint is that if a defendant is really guilty and yet there's no substantial and strong evidence to prove his guilt, that means he's acquitted right? Justice is still not served.

yes, he's acquitted, but unless someone comes up with some other way to do things, that's going to be the unfortunate result.

What I was asking was somewhat a personal question about profession and conscience and what they feel weighing the situation and not about "how it works". Sorry for the personal intrusion, but that's where respect comes from, from the person and not from the profession itself.

i agree with you; i've already said that respect comes from a person's character. my posts are my reaction to filgolfin's generalization that lawyers don't deserve respect because they defend guilty people, and the only way to understand how lawyers work is to give the background.

[LytSlpr]

basta ako mga sirs, sukad pagka-bata mo ingon na gani ug "the most noble profession", the practice of law gyud na.

if you will ask me why, i won't even bother to justify. all i know is that there should be a very valid reason for such title and i bet that there were already a lot of debates that has transpired regarding this matter even before ALL of us in this thread were born.

[Velvett]

daghan sad kaayu doctors mangwarta. sige push ug mahalon nga tambal maski pwede ra ang generic. mo abuso sa medical representatives. mag prescribe ug mga therapy sessions maski poor prognosis...sus kamahal raba sa 300-400 per session then daily pa jud. tsk. wa pa nay labot sa mga medications. naa pay mga medical mistakes nga sila-sila ray nakabalo. of course to protect the medical community, di jud na ipahibalo sa public. daghan na nangamatay sa sayop nga dosage, sayop nga tambal, negligence, etc.

so that evens up the playing field eh? wala na sa propesyon.

[TAMB0K]

doctors hahahaha

[fingolfin]

in fact, even if you admit to the crime charged, the procedure still has to be followed

.. i get it now. It's all about procedures and due-process. Same as the oath of confidentiality of doctors, that whatever happens inside the clinic or E.R. stays in. No word shall come out.

[chad_tukes]

but the patient has the right be informed of her state, regardless of what he/she has been diagnosed of, right? so it still boils down to confidentiality due to a consent signed by the patient to release information about him/her. i don't have concrete knowledge regarding this since i'm not a doctor.

[TAMB0K]

daghan sad kaayu doctors mangwarta. sige push ug mahalon nga tambal maski pwede ra ang generic. mo abuso sa medical representatives. mag prescribe ug mga therapy sessions maski poor prognosis...sus kamahal raba sa 300-400 per session then daily pa jud. tsk. wa pa nay labot sa mga medications. naa pay mga medical mistakes nga sila-sila ray nakabalo. of course to protect the medical community, di jud na ipahibalo sa public. daghan na nangamatay sa sayop nga dosage, sayop nga tambal, negligence, etc.

so that evens up the playing field eh? wala na sa propesyon.

1. why expensive meds ang patient man puy to blame because they're not following the ordered medication, thats why pagbalik nila mahalon na nga tambal coz the cheaper one is not effective/efficient anymore.

2. and for the medical mistakes, taw ra bya pod ang mga doctor, masayop pod intawn heheheheh mayntag isa ka sayop 100 ang saved unsaon nalang kun nabali.

3. kanang sayop nga dosage/tambal sala nana sa mga nurses hehehe nasayop ug kwenta, unsaon nalang.. naa raba gyuy mga tambal nga masobrahan gamay TIGOK ang resulta