TED Conversations

Salim Solaiman

TEDCRED 100+

This conversation is closed.

Is it MORAL for a smart LAWYER to twist the meaning of words of law to save a CONVICT about whom s/he is sure to be a convict ?

There are lot of discussion on MORALITY here in TED which is necessary and found to be very much thought provocating for the greater benefit of humankind for the establishment of justice fighting all injustice.

There are talks and discussions of morality of scientific development specially biological scinece. Discussions are there about the morality of politicians, media , interantional bodies, NGO etc etc. Was wondering what about the morality of our Judiciary System (not any particular country rather as a whole).

Hopefully Judiciary system is there to fight all injustice and establish the rules of justice (realtive though in respect to time , space , culture etc). Law makers (they are definitely not beyond debate) afters days. months or even years of debate comes up with new law or ammend old for the betterment of society.

What happens while implementing that LAW? Smart, intelligent lawyers all the time find out way to twist or bend the law to save their client , which in many cases they definitely know s/he was a real convict.

Yes from professional stand point those lawyers may be right to do that as they are commited to serve their client best of their capability honsetly.
But what about morality ?
How moral it is for them ?
What is the impact of their victory on the psyche of society as whole on the total justice system?

By doing so smart lawyers become famous and costly earns lot of money. Normal citizen can't afford them, rather a rich convict can , so law start speaking with money.

What are your thoughts about it ?
How can we prevent that implementation of law is not linked with money or power ?

(Well I agree FORGIVENESS is great virtue , but that forgiveness should only go once CONVICT agrees s/he did something wrong then only it can come in place, it's my view though)

Eager to hear your thoughts

Edit : Question edited replacing How with Is , courtesy Helen's post below :)

Share:

Closing Statement from Salim Solaiman

Thanks for all the contributors & their valued insight. Well it seemed though what I was proposing in premise as question of Morality , someother things it's more a matter of ethics. That being said it can be easily something is not right in our justice system.

Unanimous comment was that poor and people with out power can't really get justice from our current system. So we need to look for a change for the betterment.

Other point can be concluded that it's actually not a high priority cahllenge that our civilization facing , which is visible from the numbers of contributors contributed here.
Once it goes up the priority list , we defintely will have more discussio. Looking forward for that.
Good day for all. WIsh everyone can get justice from out current justice system.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Aug 9 2011: Kate My Friend

      Agreed fully with you.
      But the reality is just opposite. Lawyers at large seems are in competition to show how efficiently they can prove a real "convict" as an angel !!!

      More successful they are in doing that ,more money, more fame , more gliterring life style etc etc they enjoy.

      So what kind of situation we are in when morality and ethics are at stake around our justice system? (used your small j, liked your that post )

      Afraid am I whether performing the act "contempt court' by raising this issue !!!
    • Sep 6 2011: I believe Ironside was a police not a lawyer but Raymond Burr's other character Perry Mason was a defense lawyer who's clients where accused of crimes they did not commit so he had to look for the evidence to prove thier innocents. Ironside however as a police was looking for evidence to capture the criminals.

      The problem is with lawyers who know that thier clients are guilty, the code of ethics for a lawyer prevents the lawyer from providing the damaging evidence to the prosecutor and requires the lawyer to defend the criminal to the best of thier abilities and word manipulation while unethical is not illegal however actually lying about evidence is illegal.
      • Sep 6 2011: Raymond - the code of ethics for a lawyer is a varied as the countries where law is practiced. Defense lawyers, for example, are much more constrained in commonwealth system countries such as England as compared to the USA.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.