Skip to content

May 16, 2010

29

what if casey anthony had melissa huckaby’s attorneys?

by Andrea O'Connell

The sick, sadistic, utterly disgusting case of the murder of little Sandra Cantu at the hands of Melissa Huckaby has recently been decided.  To avoid the death penalty, Melissa Huckaby has changed her plea from not guilty to guilty.  Her sentencing will be in June, but the sentence has already been decided: 25 years to life without the possibility of  parole.

You may recall that Sandra Cantu was the darling little 8 year old girl, from Tracy, California, last seen skipping with joyful abandon across her neighborhood street – caught in the act of happiness by a surveillance camera

The Sandra Cantu Case

The Sandra Cantu Case. http://www.abcnews.com

That was the last anyone saw of Sandra.  She was later found in a suitcase belonging to the killer, Melissa Huckaby, in an irrigation ditch two miles from her home.

Sandra Cantu was reported missing on March 28, 2009.  Her body was discovered April 7, 2009. Melissa Huckaby was charged the very next day with the murder.

This guilty plea was entered on May 12, 2010, more a year after her arrest.

Should this have happened in the Casey Anthony case?  Did Casey Anthony have an attorney capable of laying out for her EXACTLY what evidence Law Enforcement had against her?  Instead of going along with her lies, perhaps Attorney Baez could have approached the State of Florida with a negotiable plan of action for a plea?

Having spoken to Criminal Defense attorneys in the South Florida area about this case, they are in agreement that if Jose Baez did not do this he did not do his client any favors.

Last week, Assistant State Attorney Ashton made mention of a “phantom plea.”  Was the plea dreamt up by Casey Anthony?  This seems to infer that there was NEVER a plea deal on the table, or even discussed.  And if memory serves me, the State Attorney’s Office DID give Casey Anthony a DEADLINE to respond with information surrounding Caylee’s disappearance.  The State of Florida was quite clear in the information it wanted: “Where is Caylee’s Body?” is what they wanted to know.   That would have been the PERFECT time for Baez to work with Casey on a plea before the deadline ended. One can rightly assume, given other case history, this is generally the time (early in the game) when the State is amenable to a discussion about a plea.

Had all this happened, Casey might not be facing the ultimate penalty right now.

Had Baez really cared for Casey Anthony, he would have told her what that State Attorney deadline meant to her and to the rest of her life.

Casey apparently has mental issues that prevent her from grasping truth, or reality.  Baez surely could have helped her with this.  Since Baez was not able to help her, he could have WALKED AWAY from the case, forcing Casey Anthony to hire an attorney who could help her save her own life.

Another more experienced attorney would have negotiated with her, scared her into seeing what the future would hold for her – that death WAS an option for her.

Another attorney may have gotten her to see the evidence that the rest of the country saw, which is irrefutable proof that she murdered her daughter.

Another attorney would have known that the aggravating factors in the case measure up to the death penalty.

Another attorney would have approached the State asking them to deal.

Apparently this is what Mellisa Huckaby has done. She is avoiding the death penalty, plain and simple by pleading guilty.

Now, chances are that Casey Anthony has been lying to Baez and the other attorneys all along – claiming her innocence.

Despite all the evidence against her, what lie is Casey sticking to?  Is it Zanny the Nanny at Sawgrass Apartments, or Blanchard Park…?  An accident in the home pool?   Whatever her story is, she is apparently sticking to it. But where’s the evidence?

Perhaps the defense will play the OJ case-card and come up with Media bias, or even gender-bias?  Nah, that won’t work.

Perhaps, in the spirit of the OJ case, they’ll pull a “Mark Furman” and find fault with and attempt to destroy an Orlando a Law Enforcement representative?  I pray that doesn’t happen.

Or they may concoct a nursery rhyme similar to “If it doesn’t fit you must acquit.”  How might Casey’s nursery jingle go?  Let’s see….what rhymes with Zanny the Nanny?  Oh never-mind – the defense could use it and I’d never forgive myself. (Just kidding!)

Why did Baez keep the Casey Anthony case?  Why would he take a case, where a human life is on the line (Casey’s) and use this case as his Internship to learn how to try Murder One trials?  Is it ego or hubris that drives this?  I would truly like to know what his thinking was.

I hate to think it was merely fame and fortune he was after and yet one cannot help but go there…..

I often hear people saying: “this case will never go to trial, she’ll cop a plea.”   If she did “cop” a plea, would the state drop the death penalty?  From what I’ve  learned by talking to other Criminal Defense Attorney’s, the answer is a resounding: NO.  The deadline has passed – the State of Florida will not go there now.

Regardless, I doubt that Baez would go there, he and Cheney Mason seem to be having too much fun – they’re enjoying themselves too much to consider giving up the ghost this early in their game.

If any of you know the attorney’s working for Melissa Huckaby, please ask them to contact Casey Anthony….maybe it’s not too late?

Advertisements
29 Comments Post a comment
  1. Ideas
    May 16 2010

    I think you’ve exhausted the possibilities here. Baez is the only reason I feel sorry for Casey.

    Melissa, if I remember, is also quite the liar, but I think she broke down whereas Casey would never feel remorse.

    In addition, Casey had her whole family rallying around her publicly touting her innocence. Even if Casey told the truth to Baez, and Baez correctly advised her, there is no way Cindy would have let Casey be the murderer.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 16 2010

      Hi Ideas. Man, you’ve hit the nail on the head. What you say is very true. I remember, though, early on in the case when George was speaking with Yuri Mellich, George was none too complimentary about Baez. I specifically remember a conversation in which George (who didn’t realize he was being recorded) and Yuri. Yuri asked: “Where’d she get this guy?” (meaning Baez), and George answered with an incredulous tone that Casey had talked to someone there at the jail (I think while she was waiting to be booked).

      I feel like you do….that it’s because of Baez that I feel sorry for Casey. I hope that Cheney Mason helps her with a real defense, and no trickery like in OJ. I hope he has scruples, and I hope that Judge Perry will not let him get away with some foolishness. From what I have seen, Judge Perry is no Judge Ito, thankfully. But Judge Perry cannot try the case for them and I think this case could be appealed based on (I forget the legal term) “insufficient counsel” I think it’s called….

      In the early days, George was on to Baez, but he was not strong enough to persuade Casey, nor, apparently was he strong enough to help Cindy see the truth. But, then again, there’s not much anyone can do to change a person’s mind, especially when it comes to husband and wife dynamics like we see with the Anthony’s. George is clearly the follower in that family.

      Yup, Melissa was crying her eyes out and surely was remorseful over what she’d done. Casey was not in the least bit remorseful – she showed nothing but apathy for her child which is what I, for the life of me, will never be able to comprehend.

      It’s been just a travesty, the whole thing. I hope soon we’ll see more of an even playing field – I say that only because I think it would be criminal if Orlando had to repeat this trial.

      Reply
  2. May 16 2010

    What Attorneys have you spoken to in South Florida? People will write anything on these blogs and claim they have inside information or “phantom sources.” I have no issues with Baez who is just doing his job. Anyone who is facing the world against them would be lucky to have a Lawyer like Baez who fights for his clients. You clearly have a bias in thinking she’s guilty before you here the evidence “AT TRIAL” Which is when its evidence, not when the media reports it. All of you bloggers without a life and no legal training should move to China where you are guilty unless proven innocent and you face the firing squad the next morning. This is our system where defense lawyers defend their client. Casey enjoys that freedom just the same as you are permitted to write these foolish opinions. You have no more rights than Casey and vise versa and thats the way it should be.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 16 2010

      Steve, You are absolutely correct, I do have a bias that she is guilty – anyone, fair minded or not, who has read the discovery (which is not evidence) would easily come to the same conclusion – which countless people have also come to. We feel that Baez is a show-boater and is harming Casey Anthony. It appears that you have no background in this case, it appears that you have not read any of the “discovery” that has been released pursuant to the “Sunshine Law” in Florida. Now, I know full well that “discovery” is NOT EVIDENCE, but that’s what I’ve based my opinion on, and so should you have done.

      I never pretend to have a law degree, but I think it’s pretty sad that Casey is facing the death penalty when this could possibly have been avoided. I don’t want Casey Anthony to die. That is the point that I am trying to make.

      I know full well that our system of justice requires a jury as a trier of fact – not me or bloggers or anyone other then 12 men and women. The jury will have the final say, despite my opinion.

      Baez is not “just doing his job” as you say – he’s doing a poor job and he has someone’s life in his hands and I find that horrendous. You are clearly not familiar with this case if you say something like that. But, that’s your opinion – I’d only question how you came to that conclusion?

      I do know that my opinion means absolutely nothing in the big scheme of things, but it is my hobby to write about this case, I find it fascinating, I find the players fascinating, though very maddening.

      Myself and other bloggers, just like you, have every right to state our opinion because we live in the US not in China.

      I think our criminal justice system the best in the world – when it works – because the defendant is able to ensure that the state or the government proves their case with actual evidence in front of 12 impartial people who must see that the state has met its burden of proof. I am not a lawyer, but this I know is true. I happen to love the law, though I have never worked in the system, or been a part of it, I have friends who I can talk to who are lawyers. I ask for their anonymous opinion, and they have been generous with their experience, that’s all. I have talked to lawyers who worry that this case could be retried due to ineffective counsel. I live in Florida and I don’t want this burden as a taxpayer. That’s the long and the short of it, and why I am entitled to my opinion – I am paying for this circus.

      I welcome your additional opinion, especially if you’d like to discuss some of the discovery.

      Reply
  3. Hilde
    May 16 2010

    Andrea, that is a good Question what If…?
    I believe the Trial would probably be over by now and wouldn’t take 3 Years to get to the Trial!
    The Difference in the Huckaby Case and the Anthony Case, the Body of Sandra Cantu was found 7 Days after she was reported missing, therefore there was a lot of physical Evidence to work with and the Cause of Death could be established.
    Caylee Marie wasn’t even reported missing till 31 Days went by and it was not Casey but Cindy who finally reported her missing. The Remains of little Caylee weren’t found till six Month later by then there were only skeleton Remains left of Caylee 😦 which made it a lot harder to establish the Manner how she was killed and that was in Favor for Casey A.
    However the Fact is it was a Homicide by undetermined Means!
    I do believe if Casey would have had a different Attorney, say some one who is defending Huckaby it would have served Casey better in the Long Run and this Case most likely would be over by now and Justice for Caylee would have been served! JMO

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 16 2010

      Hi Hilde!

      you’re so right…. the fact that it took so long to find poor Caylee is the biggest difference between the two cases. The lack of physical evidence due to the length of time Caylee was in the woods, has a lot to do with it, I’m sure. But, in truth this is such a strong, strong circumstantial case. I am quite certain that the evidence the jury will see will be laid out in such a way as to tell a very harrowing tale by the prosecutors. They’ll have a time-line that will be very powerful when all is said and done….. Still, if only she’d have had counsel that would have helped her level with LE. Baez was not the lawyer to do that, and I understand that he was doing his job and protecting her at all cost. But what’s so maddening is he forgot about Caylee. He forgot about Caylee because Casey had long forgotten about her….. it just is so upsetting to think about it…so I’ll close by saying thanks again as always, Hilde, for sharing your thoughts here… you are so right… and Ideas pointed out the fact that Melissa Huckaby was so remorseful, whereas Casey was just the opposite. I think that has a lot to do with the state’s case, too.

      Hope you’ve had a happy weekend! 🙂

      Reply
  4. Diana
    May 16 2010

    I think there are a number of reasons Casey did not report Caylee missing.

    1) She knew if she reported her missing, her life of partying would come to an abrupt ending.

    2) The longer she kept Cindy guessing where Caylee was….The more “in control” she felt. She was one-upping Cindy in the sick game they played.

    3) As each day passed, Caylees body was decomposing and evidence was being lost.

    4) The more days that passed, the longer she had to make up more lies and concoct a better BS story.

    5) She figured LE would just except her word about a fake nanny and a fake job, and thought when they couldn’t find Zanny at the apt. they would just shrug it off and move on to another case.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 16 2010

      Hi Diana,
      You are absolutely right on every point…. I also think she thought she had hit the big-time with Tony Lazarro given his connection with Fusion, and the other entertainment related projects he had going. I think she was really taken with him.

      I often think about those 31 days and how she pulled it off for that long. How she managed to escape scrutiny of Lee and her parents…But, there was also the fact that she and Cindy (allegedly) had that major blow out where Cindy grabbed her by the neck over Casey stealing money from Cindy’s parents. I think Cindy knew she’d maybe crossed the line and for a time could understand why Casey left. Otherwise, why in the world did Cindy and George not go crazy searching for Caylee during those initial days in the timeline? Why did they wait so long…. ? I don’t understand that – not that it would have made any difference, sadly.

      Anyway, thank you so much for visiting here, Diana! I sure hope you come back to lend your insight…. 🙂

      Reply
  5. veniceborn
    May 16 2010

    Huckabee had attorneys with her best interest at heart, which is a FAR CRY from the Anthony case. Too bad…too sad.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 16 2010

      Hi Venice…you got that right. LOL!

      Reply
  6. auntdeedee
    May 17 2010

    Now, how would Baez get the break he wanted to become a famous lawyer if he would have had Casey take that plea? Okay, I’m being snarky~

    Baez says that Casey is in control. This phantom plea, the one where Casey got all upset because she thought it was trickery by the State to get her to confess to a crime she didn’t do tells me that Baez did try to talk to her about it. She just misconstrued what Baez was saying, perhaps. Casey says she is innocent and Baez sees $$$. Casey wants Baez as her attorney and he sees $$$. It isn’t easy, from what I’ve heard, for an attorney to be taken off of a case. Baez might as well run with it.

    As far as a retrial because of ineffective council, Judge Strickland made sure that would not happen. He asked Casey if she wanted to retain Baez and she said yes. Casey may try it but it won’t be granted.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 17 2010

      Hey auntdeedee…

      I’m LOL at the word snarky! that’s a new one…love it!

      Ohhhh I’d forgotten that Judge Strickland asked her that question! Thank you for that! Judge Strickland was very thorough, that’s for sure…. I had totally forgotten that, but now that you mention it, I do remember him asking her direct questions like that.

      However, I think (I’m not sure – will have to check on this) that ineffective council is determined by an appeals court…. I could be wrong, but that’s what I think is true. Even if the defendant thought their attorney was brilliant, I think it’s not up to them as they are not expected to know the law well enough to know what’s effective versus ineffective…..

      If anyone has additional info regarding this, I’d be so grateful if you’d share……

      Reply
  7. jon
    May 17 2010

    Let’s face it, for an ambulance chaser like Baez, this is the case of a lifetime and he’s going to milk it for all it’s worth.

    I’ve said all along that if Casey were to plead guilty she’d probably escape the death penalty and get life and Baez should have been advising her of this. I think though that Casey, when the plea deal was on the table, might have though she could fool people and get through it all without being accused and may have had Baez fooled in the beginning as to her innocence. She’s gotten away with so much else in her life that she probably though this was just another one of those situations in which she’d walk away.

    I, for one, have had questions about her relationship with Baez from the very beginning but will say no more. Let people think what they might.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 17 2010

      Oh dear… I’m glad you didn’t say it!

      I was surprised to learn last week, when Jeff Ashton made mention of it, that there was never a plea deal out there for Casey! He referred to a “phantom plea” and said there was no such thing from their office. But, I do remember they had a deadline for Casey to respond, that I do remember.

      Anyway, I am hoping that Jose Baez is not as bad a lawyer as we think he is….. I hope the other lawyers will rub off on him. We surely don’t want this trial to end in a mistrial.

      Take care, Professor (tee hee)

      Reply
      • jon
        May 18 2010

        I just think he’s been out of his league on this case from the very beginning. Didn’t she find him by just asking a guy who was being arraigned at the same time as she was if he had a lawyer? That’s hardly a recommendation for the mess she’s in now. Maybe Baez is only used to handling petty crime, etc.

      • Andrea
        May 18 2010

        I think it was at her arraignment, or in the jail when she was waiting to be booked…. one of the two. Well, I know there was some scuttlebutt about Baez having a case similar to Casey’s just prior and it resulted in a guilty verdict and some bad press. Though I forget the exact details, the info is out there on the web. There was some reporting about it early on in the case, too.

        You know, I have to agree with Weezie’s comments today at 3:35 in which she says, heck we may not like him, it sure doesn’t amount to a hill of beans what we think as long as Casey has faith in him. BUT….. if we and so many others like us, don’t like him, I am wondering how he’ll play in front of a jury????? That’s an important question for any defense attorney. Though it really shouldn’t matter, it is very important to ensure that an attorney is likable, credible and can gain respect – or is seen as sincere in the eyes of the jurors. As a juror, it shouldn’t matter what you think of the attorney’s, but the truth is that an attorney has to be very careful and control, as far as they’re able, how the jury perceives them…. At least, that’s my take on it…

  8. May 17 2010

    Thanks *Andrea

    You have one of the very few blogs left that are not bashing and trashing others. I sure hope you keep it going.

    As for Cindy Anthony……..I would like to know just what Casey was referring to when she said to Cindy…Don’t worry, I didn’t say anything. I think it was about that big fight that Cindy says NEVER HAPPENED. Yeah right. Like anyone would believe a word out of her mouth. I don’t know who lies more…….Casey or Cindy. Both habitual liars.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 17 2010

      Hi Diana,

      Thanks so much for your feedback! I don’t want to be involved in the blog wars….it’s too stressful and certainly not a constructive thing to focus on…. I will absolutely not tolerate the bullies or the sniping… glad you don’t get involved in it either.

      So, I can’t remember the comment from Casey to Cindy re: “Don’t worry, I didn’t say anything.” Do you remember when she said that? Do you think she was referring to the big blow-out they both had? You’re right about the both of them being strangers to truth…. I think George and Lee have that DNA, too, though not to the extent that Casey and Cindy do.

      Anyway…. so glad you stopped back by! 🙂

      Reply
  9. Patriciao
    May 18 2010

    This is a nice blog and I’m glad I found it today. IMO Baez is doing his job with a difficult client. Casey won’t admit to anything so Baez can only proceed as he is doing. Not having contact with her family (other than thru letters) allows her to not have to face them and answer their questions directly. She is living in her own created world where she decides what she believes and what she doesn’t. I really think Casey suffers from MPD. Multiple Personality Disorder. I see this in her handwriting too. Some of her handwriting is very broad and curly, letters have no slant and fills the lines on a lined sheet from bottom to top of line. She has a 2nd handwriting style that is similar but the letters are much more narrow and slant slightly to the right. And they don’t always fill each line of a lined sheet paper.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 18 2010

      Hi Patriciao… So nice that you stopped by to visit! Yes, I think that may be the case: that Baez is doing the best he can with a difficult client… I think that may be he knows the truth and he wants this case despite the fact that there may be very little honesty associated with it. The fact is, it’s okay because Baez is responsible for making sure that the state meets their burden of proof….However, I think that’s where he will fall short. I mean, given the mounds of discovery that we’ve been privy to, how does he continue to try his case? How does he not come to the very same conclusion we have? Even his new defense attorney, Cheney Mason, said early on that this case will probably result in a life sentence for Casey…. Even he looked at the discovery way back when (see my article called “the ABC’s of Justice” as I included a quote from Cheney Mason in which he and another lawyer are discussing this case), and concluded the case was problematic for the defense.

      I love that you looked at the handwriting! I did too… and the fact that she writes with short and stumpy letters that don’t vary in size, shows a great deal of immaturity – you see that often in young people (high-schoolers mostly) before they begin to mature and their handwriting becomes more angular and filled with short cuts.

      I think it’s entirely possible that she could have MPD, too. The handwriting is an extension of the personality, and there’s some variation depending on our moods, if they vary so drastically, maybe it is an indication of MPD…. I think it is entirely possible!

      My mom studied handwriting analysis and I thought it was fascinating (this is a few years ago). It would be great to see a full handwriting analysis done…. Heck, the FBI, I believe has Graphologists on staff… but, I think they use the practice to proove forgeries. I don’t know if the court allows analysis of peraonality.. do you know? We’ll have to do some research on that one!

      Thanks again for sharing your excellent observations with us!

      Reply
  10. weezie10
    May 18 2010

    Andrea; As usual a great article. Well I have a differing opinion in one sense. One could argue that Baez is not the calibre of Lawyer that should be representing a murder one case, but it was his duty to lay out all Casey’s options and also to recommend the course he thought she should have taken. Firstly, we don’t know what he said to her. Second: I am inclined to believe Casey would never even tell Baez that she was ever involved = EVER. It’s not likely in her makeup to ever plead guilty to any of her acts. He was able to get her to apologize to Amy in open court for her cheque fraud, but that was fluff for her. She sounded very strong in her voice, not weak like people make her look with those frilly little blouses (isn’t that a scam!). There is no guilt with this woman. There is no fear, there is no regret, there is glib behaviour. She even refuses to see her LOYAL parents. Now fi that’s not insane I don’t know what is? She has concocted an “US” against the world, so no wonder Baez has become her SVENGALI, because that is what she made of him! Master manipulator, extrodinaire. I don’t believe a case can be made for insufficient counsel, due to the other well rounded cast of characters, all specialist’s in their realm. She is covered and I don’t believe any higher court would grant a retrial, no matter the outcome of this one. Yes I’m sure they are gathering as much for later on after trial as they are for the upcoming one. I don’t really have much to say about Baez. We are all a little in the dark about how they propose to defend Casey, so in that regard, he knows not to go on t.v and blast that information about, thank god.

    As much as you dislike the man, this is the one Casey chose and she has never wavered in her choice of lead Lawyer. It’s her prison right?

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 18 2010

      Wow, Weezie… great comments. Yes, I do agree, it matters not a hill of beans what we think of Baez, Casey, as you mention, has not wavered (as far as we know) in her support. And, you’re right – you are absolutely right, there is no way we can know the dynamics in the relationship between Casey and her lawyers. And, more importantly, it is a likely scenario that Casey never admitted to anything hence Baez’s unwavering support, because he has to support her. But, there again, another attorney would perhaps say to her: (if he or she were a cowboy attorney):

      “Well, little lady, whoa now! Let’s just talk this out, Ms. Anthony. You see, uh, you have a whole wagon-full of stuff against you now and it’s not lookin very good for ya, hear?”

      Casey says, “I don’t care what they have against me, I did nothing wrong.”

      Our cowboy attorney says: “Well, you did something – you were the last one to see Caylee alive, or am I makin that up?”

      Casey says, “No, Zanny had her. Zanny took her! Zanny was the last one to see her alive!” To which our cowboy attorney responds, “Well, we have some issues with that, we have some issues with you and the truth, little lady. Now, I don’t know if this Zanny is a fig-min-ta-tion of your im-a-gin-nation!”

      And Casey would say something like…. “Well, I was scared that’s why I made up all those stories..and that’s why I lied but now I’m tellin the truth.”

      So, the point in that little scenario is an attorney would HAVE to come to some conclusion and would advise his client accordingly. If the attorney has scruples and feels that his client is not truthful, he may feel the case cannot be won – given the facts and his clients truthfulness; that’s the attorney’s “out” right there. Our cowboy could say:

      “Ms. Anthony, I have to tell you this: I’ve looked at the LE reports, I’ve seen what the State has, and lemme tell ya, I cain’t see how I can try this case for ya, darlin.” And the cowboy rides off in the sunset. And Casey is left with a Public Defender who is required to defend his client whether she lies or not.

      Do you see what I mean? I just don’t see how an attorney could take a case like this and not tell his client: “Look, you’re facing death!!! We need to see how we can work with the State and negotiate a settlement of this problem, or you could either die or live the rest of your life in prison….”

      If the Casey continues to say “NO, I’m innocent.” Well, so be it. I just think, the lawyer, faced with all the discovery we’ve seen, should NOT talk on the courthouse steps like Baez does! He should not, as the kids say, talk SMACK!

      Reply
  11. Patriciao
    May 20 2010

    Good Morning Andrea,
    My friend was falsely accused of a crime and I went with her to her attorney. The first thing her attorney said to her was, ‘if you did this I do not want to know, so do not confess to me as I will not be able to represent you if you admit guilt’. I always thought that was the strangest thing for him to say and wondered do all defense attorneys say something like this to their clients? Did Baez spell out to Casey that she was never to confess to him which is why he continues with his facade of Casey’s innocence?

    The most humorous part of Casey’s jail house letters (imo) was where she spoke about her trial possibly being moved to Miami. She wrote as if she would be going on a beach vacation. Casey will thrive in prison. Her imagination will have her at Club Med versus Club Pen.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      May 20 2010

      Hi Patriciao!

      What a great post. Thank you for asking this question. Now, I am not an attorney, but with a little bit of research I can verify what I believe is in the realm of fact with regards to the question you pose.

      Your question: If an attorney knows the guilt of his or her client, could they continue to represent them. the answer is yes they are able to continue to defend their client, but many attorneys have trouble defending someone they know is guilty of murder. There is the “attorney client privilege” which means the attorney may never (it’s their ethical code) divulge what the client has said. Period. The attorney is supposed to go to their grave with this info.

      The criminal defense attorney is an advocate for the client and works to ensure the prosecution can PROVE their case in the face of the doubt that the defense attorney raises. The role of the criminal defense attorney is not really to ensure justice so much as it is to advocate for their client. The role of “justice seeker” is for the jury – they are the trier of fact, as we know, and they must decide, in the midst of the adversarial system, which side has met its burden according to the law.

      If the attorney knows his client is guilty, he or she can drop the case, or keep it, it’s up to them. What the attorney cannot do is dissemble or mislead the jury. They can raise all the reasonable doubt they want to, and they will attack the prosecutions evidence as vigorously as possible.

      When an attorney is told by his client he is guilty but “they can’t prove it” then that’s okay, too. But, the attorney cannot put that client on the stand – they cannot allow their client to lie on the stand. And the attorney cannot lie for the client, ever.

      Alan Dershowitz said this regarding this topic:

      “If you’re a decent human being and you’ve been a victim of crime yourself and you have family members that have been victims of crime, you feel tremendous turmoil. We’re supposed to say, “It’s not our job to worry about society, and everyone is entitled to a defense.” That’s all true, at an intellectual level, but at an emotional level, this takes a terrible toll, which is why some lawyers don’t want to know if their clients are guilty.”

      Reply
  12. weezie10
    May 20 2010

    Patriciao: I’m not sure but I believe it is stated in the law, that as a Defense Attorney, if you know your client by his/her words to be guilty, you can not represent them in court, or it would be grounds for an appeal. I think that is why those words are said to the each and every client. Sort of like when the police or LE give you your miranda rights.
    If someone knows differently I would like to know because I’m just taking a shot at that answer.
    If you are guilty wouldn’t that be comforting to know that you and your Lawyer are a “stricktly business” duo, and you have absolutely noone to bond with! In Casey’s case, Baez knows but acts as if he isn’t the least bit interested in anything but himself and winning a better deal for Casey. No matter what happens he has won getting his mug on t.v. and moving up the ladder of his own desires.

    Reply
  13. Jun 5 2010

    Unfortunately in North America, with good lawyers, you can get away with anything.

    Reply
    • Andrea
      Jun 5 2010

      Hey Toronto: Well, that’s sure the truth, unfortunately.

      Reply
  14. Lawyer in Oshawa
    Jun 21 2010

    I love this blog so much… Such great posts all the time!

    Reply
    • Andrea
      Jun 22 2010

      Thank you, Lawyer in Oshawa, I do appreciate that so much, especially coming from a lawyer! Do come back and visit again!

      Reply

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

%d bloggers like this: