> I see them as highly educated people who excel in relativism and twist ethics and law to achieve narrow goals without regard to principles.
That's how I see most lawyers.
That's how I see most lawyers.
It's bad for prosecutors, though...
I understand people get upset when they help a very likely guilty person get off (OJ Simpson anyone? see the point about being rich above.)
But defence lawyers have an important job, irrespective of who they're representing or what they're alleged to have done.
This only shows that using lawyers is a classic game theory problem. Both people using lawyers prolly makes the system worse off overall, but neither side can defect in isolation.
Think of divorce lawyers for example so that you don't feel this is about criminals on one side and innocent people on the other. In a divorce settlement, neither side is usually the criminal, and yet they spent thousands of dollars lawyering up in a bizarre game of mutually assured destruction. cf. The Marriage Story.