Latest news with #criminalDefense
The Guardian
3 days ago
- General
- The Guardian
Readers reply: Should barristers have to defend the ‘indefensible'? Or should they be able to refuse clients?
Is the 'cab rank' rule for barristers fair? It means every accused party in the UK gets the legal representation they're entitled to – but it also means barristers may have to defend people who have done things they feel are indefensible. J McBride, Birmingham Send new questions to nq@ The error Mr McBride makes is in assuming the client is guilty and that his barrister is trying to get him off. The defence barrister is there to test the prosecution's evidence since the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the client is guilty as charged. We've all read about cases where exculpatory evidence has been withheld, forensic results contaminated or mistaken identity has led to wrongful conviction. You cannot expect a layperson to know the rules of disclosure, the admissibility of evidence or the scope of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. He needs a professional to ensure his rights are protected. Beyond that, if the prosecution evidence cannot be discredited, he will be convicted. Guilty or innocent, the cab rank system enables justice to be served: the guilty to be convicted and the innocent to be acquitted. Nicky Ottaway JP, Surrey Surely a barrister is defending the person not the offence? A barrister is never defending the indefensible: they are defending a person who may or may not have done the thing that is indefensible. It is for the state to prove that the defendant is guilty of the indefensible. Whenever we see a barrister being questioned over their morality when taking the task of defending the accused in such a case we are witnessing somebody calling for a potentially innocent person to be convicted unfairly for a crime of which we know only limited detail. John Close, by email After 20 years as a barrister, and another 20 as a judge, I would suggest the rule is more often observed in breach than observance. Barristers' clerks, who make the bookings, are well aware of what work each barrister is willing to do or not. If the work is not to the taste of the relevant barrister, they will be 'unavailable', or the fee will be preposterous. Martin Kurrein, Norfolk How can you repeatedly defend a client you know is guilty? Surely it turns you into a liar as well, but it's what some barristers are known for, and take pride in. And ripping into victims who are already traumatised because it's your job to discredit them, irrespective of the facts. Yet the law is supposed to be about justice. LorLala Everyone is entitled to have a defence. Not necessarily the best defence if they don't have money. Professionals have to deal with offenders no matter what they have done. They are still human beings, even if we disapprove strongly with their actions. Offenders may have mitigating circumstances, which need presenting to the court. One has to put one's personal feelings to one side in order to work with them. scouser58 The age-old answer to this kind of question talks about legal representatives not making value or guilty/innocent judgments against clients accused of horrible things as that's the job of juries and sometimes judges. However, I have a better answer: think 'Testing the system, not defending an accused person.' Barristers represent accused people to ensure that the legal system itself is fair, robust, impartial and following its own rules. With every case they essentially run a legal system MOT, and make sure that if someone is eventually found guilty or innocent they can be assured that the result would have been the same no matter the person involved. That's the theory. But we all know it doesn't always work like that. Ferg Ferguson, by email It should not be for us to predetermine the optics of a particular case and based upon that, decide if we will represent someone. That would be justice in the court of public opinion, where emotion, rather than evidence and procedure, is the driving force. Tasaddat Hussain, barrister, Manchester The cab rank rule is needed to prevent younger barristers from being unable to access more complex and high level cases in order to help them learn – it is almost guaranteed that senior barristers would cherrypick cases if the cab rank rule was not in place. As an aspiring barrister, I would defend the indefensible that the cab rank rule has forced me to take on, even if I know I am bound to lose against the prosecution. Because, through that trial, we will have found the truth, and brought justice to the victims of any indefensible crimes. tacobrit If a defendant cannot secure representation, his trial would not be fair. A legally qualified barrister versus a layperson does not afford equality of arms. A criminal trial of an unrepresented defendant takes considerably longer than a trial of a represented defendant and incurs far greater costs. Moreover, a barrister representing a defendant in a rape trial will know the rules of what questions are not permitted to be put to a victim of rape; an unrepresented defendant would not and, regardless of a judge's attempts to keep the defendant 'in line', the victim would endure a more harrowing ordeal than would otherwise be the case. Gary Blackwell, by email I was always asked how I could defend someone I thought was guilty but never how I could prosecute someone I thought was innocent. For me the whole point of defending or prosecuting was to help the jury arrive at the right verdict. If, having fought my client's case as vigorously as permitted, he or she was convicted, then the likelihood of guilt was increased and therefore justice served. John Maxwell, by email While it may mean that barristers must sometimes defend individuals accused of indefensible acts, this is a cornerstone of a fair legal system. The role of a defence barrister is not to endorse the crime but to ensure that the prosecution proves its case beyond reasonable doubt, a burden that protects the innocent. Defending the 'indefensible' strengthens the legal system. It sharpens the skills of defence barristers and maintains a high standard of scrutiny for all prosecutions. As the saying goes, 'It is better that 12 guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly convicted.' The cab rank rule, therefore, is not only fair, it is essential for justice. Lola Ogunjobi, Kent The cab rank rule is correct and gives barristers, especially younger barristers, the opportunity to improve their experience. Something that cannot be obtained from law books. nlygo My experience was that the so-called 'cab-rank' rule is capable of being avoided by barristers which explains why, in areas of the law such as personal injury or professional negligence, barristers tend to represent either claimants or defendants but seldom both. Much of that is, I suspect, attributable to specific barristers' chambers building up a reputation for either claimant or defendant work. However, I believe it would be a great mistake to abolish the rule. Even though its operation may be imperfect, it embodies important principles which ought to be preserved. Edward Coulson, North Yorkshire If barristers choose who to defend, the public and politicians can accuse them of condoning in some way the behaviour of a person who is ultimately found guilty of a dreadful crime. As it is, the barrister can say with perfect truth 'Everyone, has the right to a defence and I have no choice but to do the best I can to present that defence, irrespective of my beliefs.' Working in IT, I don't get a final choice on what I do. Unless there is a clear conflict of interest or it places the barrister's mental health at serious risk, the cab rank rule should apply. Lewis Graham, Hertfordshire
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Dixon man accused of attempted murder still wants trial moved out of Ogle County
May 31—OREGON — A private attorney representing a rural Dixon man charged with the attempted murder of three police officers said he will be pursuing a motion made by a former Ogle County public defender to hold the trial outside the county. Jonathon Gounaris, 33, is charged with four counts of attempted first-degree murder, three counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm, three counts of aggravated battery and two counts of possession of a firearm without a firearm owner's identification card — all of which stem from a June 12 standoff with police in the rural Dixon subdivision of Lost Lake. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges and is being held in the Winnebago County Jail in Rockford. Originally, Gounaris was represented by former Assistant Public Defender William Gibbs, who left the office in August. Then, the case was taken over by Assistant Public Defender Michael O'Brien, who left the office in mid-April. Gounaris is now represented by attorney William Wolf of Wolf Criminal Law, based in Chicago. Gounaris appeared before Ogle County Judge John "Ben" Roe on Friday along with Wolf and attorney Jack DeBacker of Wolf Criminal Law. Wolf told Roe that he plans to pursue O'Brien's March 6 motion to appoint an expert but needs to amend it and expand on it. The motion filed by O'Brien asks Roe to "appoint an expert and/or reimburse defense costs to assist in presenting a change-of-venue request," according to the motion. A change-of-venue motion typically asks the judge to move the trial to a different location. Those motions usually cite reasons that the filing party believes would prevent a fair trial in the county in which the case was filed. Pretrial publicity often is listed as a reason for a change-of-venue motion. In O'Brien's motion, he argued that the court should allow and pay for a company to "explore the likelihood that this case should be tried" in a different county because there exists "prejudice against" Gounaris, and he cannot receive a fair trial in Ogle County. Wolf also asked for additional time to review the large amount of discovery, with no objection from the state. Assistant State's Attorney Heather Kruse asked for Gounaris' continued detention, and Wolf had no objection. Gounaris has been denied pretrial release as far back as his initial detention hearing June 20. O'Brien made extensive arguments supporting Gounaris' release at a hearing March 17, when he called the June standoff a "paradox of the welfare check." [ Dixon man charged with attempted murder of three police officers seeks release for mental health treatment ] The state disagrees and has continued to argue for detention since that initial June 20 hearing. Kruse said March 17 that police had found Gounaris to be wearing ballistic body armor while armed with two handguns, pepper spray and a knife. On Friday, Roe again ruled to keep Gounaris detained. Gounaris is charged with shooting three members of the Ogle County Sheriff's Office Emergency Response Team after a three-hour standoff when police tried to enter his home at 402 Wild Rice Lane in Lost Lake. [ Sheriff: Rural Dixon resident shoots 3 deputies after barricading himself in home at Lost Lake ] The ERT is made up of individuals from agencies including the sheriff's office, Oregon and Byron police departments, and SWAT medics from the Rochelle Fire Department. Gounaris' next hearing is set for 2:30 p.m. July 17.
Associated Press
7 days ago
- Business
- Associated Press
Wruble Law LLC Expands DUI Legal Services to Felony DUI, First-Time DUI, and Underage DUI Defense in Indianapolis
INDIANAPOLIS, IN, UNITED STATES, May 28, 2025 / / -- Wruble Law LLC, a premier criminal defense firm based in Indianapolis, is proud to announce the expansion of its DUI practice areas to now include specialized legal defense for Felony DUI, First-Time DUI, and Underage DUI cases. This strategic expansion reinforces Wruble Law's commitment to providing comprehensive, aggressive, and results-driven legal representation for individuals facing DUI charges in Indiana. Known for its exceptional client service and strong legal advocacy, Wruble Law LLC has built a reputation as a top Indianapolis DUI attorney resource. With this new development, the firm is now better equipped to meet the diverse needs of clients across Indianapolis and surrounding areas who are facing varying degrees of DUI charges. Meeting the Growing Demand for Specialized DUI Representation 'DUI charges are not one-size-fits-all,' said Attorney Stan Wruble, founding partner of Wruble Law LLC. 'Each case presents a unique set of circumstances and consequences. By formally expanding our DUI services, we aim to offer more targeted and effective defense strategies, especially for those dealing with first-time offenses, felony-level charges, or underage DUI arrests.' The enhanced focus includes: Felony DUI Defense: Representing individuals with prior DUI convictions, accidents involving serious injury, or other aggravating factors that elevate a DUI to a felony. First-Time DUI Representation: Guiding individuals who are facing their first DUI charge, helping them understand the legal process, and minimizing the long-term impact. Underage DUI Defense: Protecting the rights of minors and college students charged with DUI under Indiana's zero-tolerance laws. A Trusted Indianapolis DUI Lawyer for Complex Cases Indiana DUI laws are complex, and the penalties for conviction can be severe, ranging from license suspension and fines to incarceration and a permanent criminal record. Felony DUIs, in particular, carry the risk of long-term imprisonment, loss of driving privileges, and significant fines. Even first-time and underage offenders face potential jail time and a mark on their record that can affect education, employment, and future opportunities. As an experienced Indianapolis DUI lawyer, Stan Wruble has successfully defended hundreds of DUI cases, employing a detail-oriented approach that focuses on procedural errors, constitutional violations, and scientific flaws in chemical testing. His expertise in DUI defense ensures that every client receives a personalized and strategic legal defense. 'Our mission is simple: protect our clients' rights and fight for the best possible outcome,' added Wruble. 'Whether someone made a one-time mistake or is facing felony-level consequences, we're here to provide the legal defense they deserve.' Community-Focused Legal Advocacy In addition to courtroom advocacy, Wruble Law LLC remains committed to community education and proactive legal support. The firm regularly provides informational content, case evaluations, and legal consultations to help residents of Indianapolis better understand their rights and legal options when facing DUI charges. As part of this expanded service, Wruble Law LLC will also begin offering: Free, no-obligation case reviews for all DUI-related cases Educational resources tailored to Indiana DUI laws and defense options About Wruble Law LLC Wruble Law LLC is a full-service criminal defense law firm headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana. Led by experienced trial attorney Stan Wruble, the firm represents clients in a wide range of criminal matters, including DUI, drug offenses, violent crimes, white-collar offenses, and more. The firm's aggressive defense tactics, in-depth legal knowledge, and client-centered approach have made it a trusted name among those seeking a qualified Indianapolis DUI attorney. Whether you are facing a felony DUI, a first offense, or an underage charge, Wruble Law LLC has the skill, experience, and dedication to help you fight back. Contact Information: Wruble Law LLC Address: 1512 N. Delaware St. Suite 201 Indianapolis, IN 46202 Phone: (317) 597-1846 Website: If you or someone you know is facing DUI charges in Indianapolis, contact Wruble Law LLC today for a free initial evaluation. Your future is worth protecting. Stanley F. Wruble III Wruble Law LLC +1 317-597-1846 email us here Legal Disclaimer: EIN Presswire provides this news content 'as is' without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Wall Street Journal
28-05-2025
- Lifestyle
- Wall Street Journal
How a Lawyer in the Hamptons Became the King of DWI Cases
EDWARD BURKE JR. spends most of the year handling drug cases, traffic offenses, larceny and white-collar crime. But during the summer, when this criminal defense lawyer's stretch of eastern Long Island turns into a playground for the rich, his focus is on clients arrested for driving while intoxicated—an offense he calls a 'Deewee.' 'It is,' he says, 'the 'it' charge.'
Associated Press
25-05-2025
- Associated Press
The Role of a Criminal Defense Lawyer: What You Should Know Before Hiring One
05/24/2025, Miami , Florida // KISS PR Brand Story PressWire // Hiring a criminal defense lawyer can be a crucial step when facing legal trouble. Understanding their role helps in making an informed decision. A criminal defense lawyer stands by you during tough times. They provide guidance through the complex legal system. Their role involves three main tasks. First, they analyze your case details carefully. Second, they prepare a sound defense strategy. Third, they represent you in court, ensuring your rights remain protected. Choosing the right lawyer requires knowledge of these responsibilities. Not all lawyers are the same. It is important to find one who aligns with your needs. To aid in this, we will explore the key aspects to consider when hiring a criminal defense lawyer. For more detailed legal assistance, you can visit Understanding these elements can help you feel more confident in your choice and the process ahead. This blog provides the essential insights without overwhelming details. Understanding the Criminal Defense Lawyer's Role A criminal defense lawyer's role is multifaceted. Their primary responsibility is to protect your legal rights through the legal process. They do this by ensuring you receive a fair trial and by challenging any evidence that may be unlawfully obtained or unreliable. This involves: For more insights on legal procedures, consider reviewing resources such as the U.S. Courts website. Qualities to Look For in a Lawyer Choosing the right lawyer involves assessing several key qualities. These qualities can significantly influence the outcome of your case: These traits are essential in ensuring that your defense is both effective and thorough. Comparing Public Defenders and Private Lawyers One of the decisions you may face is whether to hire a private lawyer or rely on a public defender. Here's a comparison to help you decide: Both options have their advantages and challenges. Exploring both can help you make a choice that best suits your situation. Steps to Hire the Right Criminal Defense Lawyer Finding the right lawyer involves careful planning. Consider following these steps: Taking these steps will guide you towards a more informed and confident decision. For further guidance, the U.S. Department of Justice offers additional resources on understanding your rights. Conclusion Hiring a criminal defense lawyer is a decision that should not be taken lightly. Understanding their role, qualities to look for, and the differences between public defenders and private lawyers can help you make the best choice. A well-chosen lawyer can provide invaluable support and advocacy during a challenging time. By following the outlined steps, you can ensure that you find a lawyer who meets your needs and helps safeguard your future. Remember, informed decisions are the foundation of effective legal defense. Original Source of the original story >> The Role of a Criminal Defense Lawyer: What You Should Know Before Hiring One
