Close Topic Options

Lawyers Must Lie?

Lawyers Must Lie?

If you believe 'bending the truth' or 'painting an elusive picture' is lying then do you believe that it is necessary for Lawyers to lie in order to win a case for their client? If you were being accused of a crime that you did not commit, but acquired evidence seems to claim otherwise, then would you resort to lies (either on the part of your lawyer or self) in order to ensure your innocence?

Lie Lawyers

This is a very hard question to answer, for one side I know that to lie is wrong but the other hand I know I did not committ such crime and I do not want to be sentenced to prison for something I did not do. I think it all depends on the case and who is your lawyer. I do not believe all lawyers lie, but they do play with words very well. If I was in that particular situation I would try to do anything within the legal and moral area that would allow me to defend myself in the best way possible and then just hope for the best. It is sad but many people were found innocent after long years in jail or after they were sentenced to death.

Lawyers Must Lie? History & Civil Business Politics

I believe lying within the legal system is rampant. It really is a disgrace. Lawyers don't want to know the truth, they just want to save their client, or help them win their case. I have a moral problem with this. The way society has become so letigious where nobody can take responsibility for their actions is sickening.

If you are innocent of a crime why would you need to lie to prove you didn't do it? Whatever happened to being innocent until proven guilty?

Lie Lawyers

That's right but what about if all the evidence points you out as the guilty and yet you did not do it?.

Lie Lawyers

But if you didn't do it then I fail to see why you would need to lie to prove that. If evidence is compelling against you than it is faulty evidence, or misrepresented to the court.

If you didn't do something, you must have been doing something else at that time, so I wouldn't see the need to lie. If people are being convicted without enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt they are guilty, the laws need to be changed.

Lawyers Must Lie?

I am surprised a man of your experience would question that. Here is a simple situation: Let us say you are accused of murder and for whatever reason the evidence points to you. Now, you did not do it, but cannot prove your whereabouts at the time of the murder (you could have been cheating on your wife at the time or at a place where no one would have known you personally such as a cinema or walking in the park), so to keep you out of jail an arrangement is made to say that you were with 'x' person during that period.

Now in keeping with the topic, I believe Lawyers like to bend the truth for the sake of perspective. They are trying to paint a picture and if the jury or judge is able to see it in that light then they have won, however, for me we must decide what is a lie and in my mind: anything that is not the truth is a lie. Withholding information can also be considered a lie and many of these things are used to win cases. If you are innocent then I believe you must do whatever it takes without hurting someone else in order to be vindicated, but unfortunately those who are guilty will also use that.

Lawyers Lie

I think it would be extremely rare circumstances where evidence would be overwhellming against you but you weren't anywhere near the crime.

I guess the question is more what substantiates overwhelming evidence? And how much evidence does a judge or jury need to convict.

The problem with lying to prove your innocence is that if it fails, you lose all credibility. Telling the truth can never fail. I take your point, but I believe that would be extremely rare.

A famous Australian trial where this actually happened is the Lindy Chamberlain case where a mother was convicted of killing her baby, despite never doing it. Lindy said a dingo killed the child and this was true. It was recently revealed by a man who shot the dingo and found remnants of the child but was too scared to tell authorities at the time.

Actually there is a famous case in Australia at the moment where this scenario could be playing out. Bradley Murdoch is being accused of murdering Peter Falconio and abducting his fiance Joanne Lees in the Australian outback. Murdoch is adament he didn't do it, but there was his DNA found on Ms Lees.

Falconio case

Edited: arvhic on 5th Dec, 2005 - 10:09am