The Injustice Of Our " Quot & Justice; Program: The Final Time You Employed A Lawyer? Or, Would You Afford One?

[hardouin]

I have usually heard the old saying, "justice is for folks who are able to afford it", or something to that particular effect.Whatis your view of the economic inequities of our judicial technique? Whenis the final time you found oneself in the requirement of a lawyer and found the connected charges were just beyond your indicates?Or just how several do you know, who had been wrongly accused of the crime, and the expense of protecting themselves led to their bankruptcy?I when lived in a hotel in the Tenderloin section of San Francisco, one particular socio financial step up from skid-row. And my entire life was endangered by another tenant consequently to be in a position to defend myself, I bought a fire-arm(way of funding, I need expose). But was advised it must be declared by me to law Enforcement. When I did - although I maintained the bullets, the gun was unloaded - they place me in prison: precisely what a nightmarish 3 occasions that followed - experienced a "court-appointed lawyer" - no aid whatsoever. Anybody had an identical experience?

[oved]

LglSec said: 2 I work for an Attorney ..and he is a lazy person ...but he is honest ...so I guess it depends on who you see ... 60 months ago

[Kalen]

Alberich replied to post #4: 5 I meant for the focus of my question to be on the "financial" inequities of the system: the fees an established, competent attorney charges are in my opinion exorbitant to say the least. Court appointed attorneys are usually(not always) a "joke": they're usually grossly incompetent, whose only interest is to expend as little time and effort as necessary. The one appointed for my case, contacted me only 15 mins. prior to appearing before a judge who was assigned to adjudicate it.I didn't address the issue of race in my question; and it had no relevance as far as I could see. 60 months ago

[CampbeIl]

I work for an Attorney ..and he is a lazy person ...but he is honest ...so I guess it depends on who you see ...

[gwydyon64]

kymlor said: 1 What possessed you to walk into a police station with a gun ??? They don't take too kindly to that...Is that like the guy who walked into a local PD and wanted to swear out an arrest for his roomate who "stole his dope" ??? 60 months ago

[Rong]

Geppetto said: 4 It's a simply stated question for a complex subject. It's hard to understand where and if the inequities exist. I think your question tells us that the inequities begin with attorneys. But seems unfair. Do they begin with the police? Maybe sometimes, but probably not a significant number.Attorneys have financial requirements just as insurance salesmen or steel workers do. They have children to raise and send to college.Maybe you're suggesting there should be a government supported "defense system" of attorneys paid by your taxes, that's a whole different matter. That would seem to be a majority of citizens supporting the minority of perceived or actual lawbreakers. And that seems unfair.There are indigent programs set up to pay for attorneys - ".....will be supplied to you if you cannot pay...." In cases like this the court appoints an attorney and the fees are paid by your taxes.Maybe you're pointing to the perceived inequities with respect to race. Obama made this a part of his campaign. Hardly a day goes by but we hear of so many black people incarcerated...because the cannot afford the same kind of attorney whites use.My personal feeling on this is it's nonsense! It has nothing to do with black or white...it has to do with financial means. There are probably as many "poor" whites as "poor" blacks. Poor whites cannot afford an attorney any more that a black person can. A white person defended by a court appointed attorney seems to me to be on the same level as a black person defended by a court appointed attorney. Court appointed attorneys get paid the same fees if the client is black or white.Well, is there a solution? I doubt it....short of a branch of government devoted to spending it's time defending "poor" clients. I'm not even sure there are inequities. Maybe harsher laws to punish lawbreakers is the answer. I went to Taiwan recently, and while leaving the airport, I saw a sign that stated "DRUG TRAFFICKING IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH IN THE R.O.C." I'm not advocating death for trafficking...but a good caning would work wonders....I think. 60 months ago

[Cadda]

I meant for the focus of my question to be on the "financial" inequities of the system: the fees an established, competent attorney charges are in my opinion exorbitant to say the least. Court appointed attorneys are usually(not always) a "joke": they're usually grossly incompetent, whose only interest is to expend as little time and effort as necessary. The one appointed for my case, contacted me only 15 mins. prior to appearing before a judge who was assigned to adjudicate it.I didn't address the issue of race in my question; and it had no relevance as far as I could see.

[Suzu]

What possessed you to walk into a police station with a gun ??? They don't take too kindly to that...Is that like the guy who walked into a local PD and wanted to swear out an arrest for his roomate who "stole his dope" ???

[Westbroc]

It's a simply stated question for a complex subject. It's hard to understand where and if the inequities exist. I think your question tells us that the inequities begin with attorneys. But seems unfair. Do they begin with the police? Maybe sometimes, but probably not a significant number.Attorneys have financial requirements just as insurance salesmen or steel workers do. They have children to raise and send to college.Maybe you're suggesting there should be a government supported "defense system" of attorneys paid by your taxes, that's a whole different matter. That would seem to be a majority of citizens supporting the minority of perceived or actual lawbreakers. And that seems unfair.There are indigent programs set up to pay for attorneys - ".....will be supplied to you if you cannot pay...." In cases like this the court appoints an attorney and the fees are paid by your taxes.Maybe you're pointing to the perceived inequities with respect to race. Obama made this a part of his campaign. Hardly a day goes by but we hear of so many black people incarcerated...because the cannot afford the same kind of attorney whites use.My personal feeling on this is it's nonsense! It has nothing to do with black or white...it has to do with financial means. There are probably as many "poor" whites as "poor" blacks. Poor whites cannot afford an attorney any more that a black person can. A white person defended by a court appointed attorney seems to me to be on the same level as a black person defended by a court appointed attorney. Court appointed attorneys get paid the same fees if the client is black or white.Well, is there a solution? I doubt it....short of a branch of government devoted to spending it's time defending "poor" clients. I'm not even sure there are inequities. Maybe harsher laws to punish lawbreakers is the answer. I went to Taiwan recently, and while leaving the airport, I saw a sign that stated "DRUG TRAFFICKING IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH IN THE R.O.C." I'm not advocating death for trafficking...but a good caning would work wonders....I think.

[Mayhew]

Alberich replied to post #1: 3 I guess you must have missed this sentence in my question:"But I was advised to DECLARE it". And note, I said that I "carried" the bullets; they were not in the gun's chambers, and therefore it was not loaded. 60 months ago