Sunday, February 13, 2011

An honest Lawyer?

So, a man convicted of robbery in Lawrence is getting a new trial AND a new liar. The Supreme injustices of the court ruled that Charles Smith was entitled to a new lawyer when his original attorney refused to present fraudulent evidence because video from the crime clearly showed Smith was there.
The high idiots ruled that a lawyer who knows is client is full of shit is crossing the line. That is foolish. If a lawyer knows his client is guilty, he should be under no obligation to present false information.
Receiving a fair trial does not include the right to lie, introduce fake evidence, or manipulate the jury. The supreme court of Kansas screwed us.
Attention Kansas Voters! Every election cycle we have the chance to toss out unjust judges. In the 150 year history of the state, we have failed to ever do that! Its time to make history and toss every one of these idiots to the wolves.
James Rumsey nad asked to withdraw from the case, but Judge Murphy told Smith he wasn’t going to appoint a new attorney because all lawyers are prohibited from presenting evidence that they feel is false.
The problem of course, is that 99% of liars heve no conscience. That would include the crop we have in our courts.

1 comment:

LargeBill said...

How is this any different from suborning perjury? A lawyer can be disbarred if he knowingly puts a witness on the stand who will not be truthful. Knowingly presenting false evidence into a trial should have similar penalties.

Separately, thanks for the blogrolling. You're listed on mine now.