Explain to me why in the hell the legal system will appoint someone like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev an attorney?

Question

Why would we allow any American to defend him, or try to lessen his sentence? Why is it a question as to what to do with him? Why would we give him even a fair trial?

Answer 1

Even people who are accused of the worst of the worst crimes are entitled to the same rights under the Constitution as everyone else. Even so, it's sometimes not easy to find an attorney to represent someone accused of certain highly publicized horrific crimes, and many attorneys have turned down these appointments. In most cases, such as those involving murder on large scales, or other crimes that strike at the hearts of the entire country, legal representation becomes less about getting the lightest sentence possible, and more about protecting the accused's constitutional rights. It may not be easy for an attorney to argue on behalf of some accused of a horrible crime, but it is always important to protect the rights of every last person no matter what they are accused of. If we did not protect these rights under every circumstance, we would be no better than the most backwards third world country you can think of.

Answer 2

Explain to me why in the hell the legal system will appoint someone like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev an attorney?You want to live in an Islamic country where 15 year old girls are flogged for having sex outside of marriage......

After they got raped !

Answer 3

Ok, first you asked the question. If you do not want honest answers, DON T ASK ANY QUESTIONS! It s what the USA was founded on, that everyone is created equal no matter what crap they do. And everyone is entitled to be adjudged in a law of court using the same laws as everyone else--unlike in most Arab countries (and other some other non-Arab countries too). It s the US laws which were originally set up to make it equal for everyone but things have changed and the lawmakers of long ago could not foresee all of this mess. Same goes for that amendment that says everyone has the right to bear arms--they didn t mean uzis and whatever automatic weapons of war people are carrying these days; the makers of that amendment were thinking of those flintlocks and rifles from back then, often doubling as hunting tools to provide food for their families. And this is just the beginning of Tsarnaev s long due process. Once a person is adjudged to be guilty, they automatically go to the appeals phase--whether they want to or not, whether they demand to or not. And that goes on forever and ever. Which is why there are so many people sitting on death row for years and years. I do feel real sorry for Tsarnaev. He s a serious misguided, brain washed young man who had visions of glory and probably had no concept of what he was up against. His family is twisted and raised the kids to be twisted and warped. But I don t think pardoning him or letting him off easy will solve anything; what his family did to him is now ingrained in his brain and with witnessing the death of his brother he probably holds a whole lot of bitterness toward America. It s just sad in so many ways. His family ought to be deported since they hate America so much.

Answer 4

Fortunately the US and manyh other countries are able and will give any person who breaks the law, regardless of the crime, a fair and open trial

People who are accused of a crime are not guilty unless a group of peers or chosen jurours have found that

person guilty of the crime for which accused. NO one is above the law in most countries.

It is well to point out there are some miscarriages of justice, and much is done to ensure that does't happen regarless the seriousness of the crime committed.

Why would anyone appoint a lawyer for the accused? Because that is the way fair trials are conducted, and Some lwawyers prefer to work people who areacused of being criminals rather than representing the side that is dealing with the business defense. That is the wary the styestem is suppose t to work

A fair trial; by jury, or judge if need be, and no one is above law. .or in other words

Rule of Law.

Answer 5

Under law an attorney must be appointed.It is ( and part of) the Miranda warning.

A Supreme court ruling gave every defendant the right to appointed legal counsel.Even if the defendant could not afford it.

Unless the person fills out paperwork for pro se. ( with -out a lawyer). This means they as a knowing adult can handle their own defense in a court of law. Not recommended while up on any charges in front of the bench.

If filed and signed then, the defendant can not appeal any sentence. Or use the lack of legal council as a basis for an appeal. That is stated in the court paperwork.

Because of the seriousness of the crime,in this case, the judge would probably have legal council there,if that would had happen.

Answer 6

Because every criminal in this country have a constitutional right and have a right to an represented by an attorney in accordance to the Sixth Amendment. Every deserves their fair time in court and the judge and jury would determine the punishment based on the circumstances and strong evidence. The Soviet Union, North Korea, and other totalitarian states are infamous for conducting kangaroo courts or execute someone without a trial. This is not what our country is founded on. Not only that, you will likely have a chance of convicting an innocent person in prison because he doesn't have someone to represent that person and lawyers know the procedure and circumstances that ordinary people don't.

Answer 7

Because we are a society based on law and due process, which means we don't punish people, even horrible people we know have done horrible things, until we give them a fair trial with a lawyer, whose job is to make sure their rights are protected and the proper process is followed in formally determining their guilt and their sentence. Everyone has a right to that, even those who can't afford to pay for an attorney if they are accused of a crime. It's very simple: if you would want to have an attorney if you were accused of a crime, then you have to grant the same right to someone like Tsaernaev.

Answer 8

Because every criminal with this country have a constitutional right and also have a right to an represented by a lawyer in accordance to the actual Sixth Amendment. Every deserves their fair amount of time in court and the assess and jury would determine the punishment in line with the circumstances and strong proof. The Soviet Union, Northern Korea, and other totalitarian says are infamous for doing kangaroo courts or execute someone with no trial. This is not really what our country is actually founded on. Not just that, you will likely possess a chance of convicting a good innocent person in prison because he does not have someone to represent that individual and lawyers know the process and circumstances that regular people don't.

Answer 9

Because we are a society based on law and due process, which means we don't punish people, even horrible people we know have done horrible things, until we give them a fair trial with a lawyer, whose job is to make sure their rights are protected and the proper process is followed in formally determining their guilt and their sentence. Everyone has a right to that, even those who can't afford to pay for an attorney if they are accused of a crime. It's very simple: if you would want to have an attorney if you were accused of a crime, then you have to grant the same right to someone like Tsaernaev.

Answer 10

until all the facts of the case proved that Tsarnaev actually planted the bomb, legally it was only an accusation. When the government accuses you of commiting a crime the burden on them is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did it. If you remember earlier in the investigation there were several other suspects as well who, with evidence gathered by law enforcement, were not prosecuted and released as innocent people should be...however when they brought in Tsarnaev the government had to prove he actually planted the bombs, because until all evidence is examined for all we knew it could of been the girl scouts, until he confessed to doing it. We all want blood for this act of terror, but everyone gets their day in court before being punished, because no one wants an innocent person to suffer wrongly. I do agree the second he admitted to placing the bomb, the trial should of ended, everyone affected should of not been forced to relive that day and the jury should of deliberated the facts and it be over with. I do not like the part of our judicial system where everyone must talk about how they where affected by the crime, but only what they saw leading up to it, since only the actions that happened are relevant to the preponderance of guilt. fry this terrorist

Answer 11

Because we're just and fair.



Even the worst mass murderer deserves someone making sure that our legal system is working correctly in accordance to his/her prosecution. To prosecute someone unfairly is as much a crime as any other illegality. On the basis of non-discrimination, we see to it that each and every suspect is treaty equally with all due representation.



How could you feel like he was fairly convicted if he didn't get a fair trial including adequate legal council and advice and a knowledgeable attorney who is able to explain the legalities and technicalities of the trial?



We the People intend to know that if he is convicted, his conviction was found through a just and fair process.

Answer 12

Basically it is the fact that we, the people, have hired a top notch gunfighter (Assistant State's Attorney), so he is entitled to a gunfighter. Believe me, innocent people have been found guilty. This case might seem like a slam dunk to you, but, then what should we do? Just single this case out and decide not to give him an attorney? Also, keep in mind that all D.A.'s and all Federal Attorneys are NOT "boy scouts". Some just want to get a conviction and get as many years as possible as a matter of ego.

Answer 13

The U.S. Constitution states that a person is "presumed innocent until proven guilty"--no matter who he/she is, or what the person has presumably done. Since this Tsarnaev was found guilty by a jury and then because of the scope of his crimes, was sentenced to death, the legal process was followed. In times past, there were unfortunately people who were convicted wrongly and served long sentences for crimes they didn't commit. Now DNA has found some of them innocent, and they have been compensated monetarily. That won't happen in this case. He was caught at the scene and with weapons that matched his victims' injuries.

Answer 14

In the USA, every citizen has certain rights, which in theory, protect us from being falsely accused by our enemies and simply executed, whether or not we are guilty. You may not see the point, when you are angry about Tsarnaev's actions, and you have no doubt he is guilty. But we INSIST that EVERY person can have the right to a fair trial, in order to protect the rest of us from false accusations and unfair imprisonment.



Think of it- in a world where only some people are allowed to have a trial, who can have one? Will it be the rich people only? Will it be only the ones who belong to whichever political party is popular right now? In such a world, you might go to prison some day just because somebody wants your house, or your job, so they tell the police a lie about you in order to get you out of the way.

Answer 15

Because even the worst of criminals have the right to an attorney to represent them, based on the constitution.



And, the next question is, "Why on Earth would anyone represent the likes of this guy?" The answer is, "It's a job." Another answer could be "Because they believe in the system of giving everyone fair legal representation."



The REAL question is, "Why in the world would anyone do what this guy did?" Only people like him can answer that.

Answer 16

In America you are entitled to legal counsel, since you are presumed innocent until proven guilty, even if you are unable to pay for counsel. Unlike some countries, we don't start taking a US citizen's liberties away until there has been (one hopes) a trial. Denying someone counsel or persecuting the counsel you have is kind of like putting a thumb on the scale of justice. It just makes a mockery of the whole legal system. if we do that then why even bother with a trial, just take them out and shoot them. That's kind of what they did in Nazi Germany and in the Soviet Union.

Answer 17

So you want to be a country where it is just assumed that you are guilty and you don't deserve a fair trial? Makes me glad I'm not in the USA.



EVERYONE deserves the chance to argue their case. It's in the Constitution. You can hardly claim to be civilised if you don't allow that. Or do you really want the USA to be like North Korea, where you can get sent to a concentration camp without trial if you look at an official in a funny way?

Answer 18

You must be a republican with an IQ below 40. Have you ever heard of the constitution? Have you ever heard of innocent till proven guilty? And by the way, just because he got a lawyer doesn't mean he is going to get off easy? But a teabagger like you has no respect for our laws. Just like Ted Cruz who doesn't understand that he Can't and won't be president because he was born in Canada.

Answer 19

It is the right to all here in America as everyone said. Even when they know a client is guilty, a lawyer must work to get his client the best possible outcome, even if they find that human despicable.They may even agree you are lower than the dirt you walk on, but still that is their job to fight for you.Thinks that's tough. wait till you are on a jury and decide another humans destiny, in this case, it would of not taken me 14 seconds to decide, let alone 14 hours, but due process you must listen, go over evidence and hopefully you give the victims some sense of comfort how ever small that may be.In my opinion, hell is right here on earth, don't need to look far.

Answer 20

Even the worst people to have ever lived deserves a fair trial, even Hitler would. Why? well because if we don t give certain people fair trials because of their crimes, the government could easily take advantage of that. They could accuse anybody of having done something like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev even if its not true just to get rid of them. It would turn into 1984 pretty quick at that point.

Answer 21

Because as far as the law is concerned, any defendant is innocent until proven guilty. That principle is even more important for a defendant accused of an egregious, high profile crime.



And we've seen way too many wrongful convictions to abandon the appeals process. Better to make sure we get it right. He isn't going anywhere in the meantime.

Answer 22

All suspect are innocent until proven guilty in the court of law. That a human right implemented to protect innocent. Also the court can not discriminate even if he is not from here. The international law watch all case involving people from different nationality. As we may have an American in trial in a different country. And he will be best serve buy a lawyer from that country. Law are very different in different country. It will be unwise to send and American lawyer to another country to defend and an American. He will not do good. And vice versa

Answer 23

Actually, the SCOTUS in Gideon v Wainwright determined that not only is everyone entitled to counsel but effective counsel. They must also be Mirandized so that they are fully aware of their rights under the law. To fail to provide counsel or to fail to make anyone under arrest aware of their rights just begs for a mistrial or dismissal of the charges. So, if you don't like the rules, then scare up a Supreme Court case and have it heard. There sessions always begin the first Monday of October in any given year.

Answer 24

THe USA has always allowed people to have an attorney and if you can obtain one yourself, the courts will give you one. The other side has an attorney so it's fair for the defense to have one as well.



What I think is completely unfair is that criminals get to appeal for years. I think they should get just one appeal, no matter what the crime was, and what the sentencing was. They can use it right away or 5 yrs later. But just one.

Answer 25

We don't need a police state! We just need to kill the SOB! Put him and everyone else out of their misery! Firing Squad after the Penalty Phase of the trial ended! But he should have had an attorney so we can say we gave him justice before the trigger was pulled! We want a clean conscience even thought we're capping the turd!

Answer 26

Everyone deserves a fair trial. Tsarnaev got a great attorney so he can't use inadequate defense for an appeal. In theory.

Answer 27

Because it is required as part of Due Process. In our country, a suspect cannot be imprisoned or suffer the penalty of death except following a fair trial, which means in part that the government must provide for legal representation if he cannot afford to provide for his own. The Supreme Court has imposed this requirement on all courts nationwide and it is through the courts that this requirement is implemented.

Answer 28

Unfortunately, America has been allowing terrorists and extremists into the USA. Once they are here, they are accorded certain rights.



Look at the story of Ali Mohammed, who assisted Al-Qaeda while training with US Special Forces at Fort Bragg. The Egyptian government warned America about him, but was ignored.



The question ought to be not the legal rights of terrorists residing in America, but why are they here in the first place?



In Ancient Rome it was illegal to treat a foreigner with the rights of a Roman citizen.

Answer 29

1. The basis of AMERICAN legal system is that you are believed to be innocent until proven guilty

2. That the accused has a right to be judged by his peers (the Jury)

3. EVERYONE is entitled to a fair trial.

To not provide these basic rights to him would be to prove that the AMERICAN justice system does not work and send one hell'va a message to the rest of the world.

As you apparently are a resident of the US you have a right to your opinion, no matter how incorrect it may be and you even have the right to express it, it is protected by the same Constitution that protect legal rights of criminals.

Answer 30

The U.S is under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) treaty which entitles the rights of the public and that includes (The right to a fair trial). It would be a human right violation to not give him a fair trial. Secondly, it is a basic human right to have an attorney (UDHR).

So basically this all revolves around human rights and and the country not violating them.

Answer 31

We have a legal system and we use it. I will agree that it has flaws but it is the best we have. The system seems to have worked in this case. He will have countless more trials and that will keep him alive. But...he is where he is supposed to be...at least for awhile. My personal opinion is that when getting a death system and then you have to go through countless trial but know that you will be put to death...the waiting is an appropriate bit of justice. When I start to feel how sad it is that a man this young will die, I simply remember the picture of them putting the bombs behind those kids.

Answer 32

Everyone deserves an attorney. John Adams defended the soldiers tried for the Boston Massacre.

Answer 33

It's because the 6th amendment gives defendants the right to a counsel. Plus, if they didn't, the LEGAL system wouldn't be LEGAL anymore. And listen to me retard. You're the imbecile that asked us the question. We have the right to free speech so if we want to bicker, we will. That's the first amendment. Now before you ask any other stupid question, go read the CONSTITUTION first. In this case, BILL OF RIGHTS.

Answer 34

Would you have a legal system where anyone who is generally seen as guilty by their community can be convicted of a crime without even having a chance to speak in their defence. Libellously accuse you of being a rapist, pay an actor to pretend that you assaulted him, and convince the world that you're guilty. You would be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law without ever having the chance to prove your innocence or even provide evidence of mitigating factors to reduce your sentence. In the current system, you would be found innocent of rape, and probably sue me and the actor I paid for defamation. That's justice.

Answer 35

I can not believe the answers I'm reading, and can not believe how fickle we Americans are. For over 10 years we Americans have been throwing around the word terrorists. We have justified invading and destroying an innocent country because we were "looking for terrorists". We have been involved in several wars, attacks, drone planting, the death of millions of people and spending TRILLIONS of American dollars because we were "looking for terrorists". The reason we captured people and sent them to Guantanamo Bay was because they were Suspected terrorists and therefore they had NO RIGHTS. They did not have the right to remain silent, did not have the right to an attorney, did not have the right to not be tortured, to not be starved, to not be beaten, to not be raped, to not have his home seized and sold ... etc. All these rights were gone from SUSPECTED terrorists and collectively we Americans went along with it. We would say "thank you for your service": for Suspecting people of terrorism and doing anything and everything to them because there could have been a chance that they were, or know of, or one day could become terrorists. But now the United States DID catch a terrorist! Dzhokhar Tsamaev was CAUGHT RED HANDED committing an act of terrorism in one of our cities, and that act did kill and injure Americans, and now we are saying that this Real Life terrorist deserved to have rights?!?!?! So he deserves a lawyer, he has the right to remain silent,he has the right to not be tortured, starved, beaten, raped ...etc. You all believe Tsamaev has rights because he ACTUALLY IS a terrorist? And we only take rights away from who we consider SUSPECTED terrorists? What is the logic Americans???

Answer 36

In the Eye of your American Law, as in Canadian Law, up here. Everyone has the right to council (lawyer), and have to be proven guilty, under your American Law. Each Country has a different Legal System. For example, here in Canada, we do not have the Death Penality, But most up here will agree to this persons Sentence, pending on outside views. Personally I do not believe in it. Why make him a Maytar to his Cause would be my question. Let him sit and riot for his crimes.... *sorry for the spelling errors*.... touchy subject..

Answer 37

You get a fair trial before they hang you. If you need an attorney in order to have a fair trial and you can't afford one, like they promise when they arrest you, they appoint one for you. A deal is a deal.

Answer 38

We have to pretend to give him a fair trial, even if he doesn't deserve one. Otherwise, he could appeal and get the verdict thrown out on the grounds that we failed to pretend to give him a fair trial. It would be much more efficient for the cops to simply shoot him instead of arresting him in the first place. But that would set a bad precedent, because then in the future cops might start shooting people for not voting right or something.

Answer 39

Everyone has to have a fair trial, and that means a lawyer.



If you don't apply the principle universally, then limits have to be drawn, and any such limits must of necessity be arbitrary. So that would lead inevitably to breakdown of judicial principles and, ultimately thereby, of democracy itself, resulting in anarchy.



It is simply one of the prices that has to be paid for the existence of a cohesive legal system.



I think the appropriate US saying would be something like "You just have to suck it up" (I hope that's not anything rude).

Answer 40

Under the American legal system, the accused have the right to an attorney. If you can't understand that, then you obviously learned NOTHING in civics class.

Answer 41

We don't need a police state! We just need to kill the SOB! Put him and everyone else out of their misery! Firing Squad after the Penalty Phase of the trial ended! But he should have had an attorney so we can say we gave him justice before the trigger was pulled! We want a clean conscience even thought we're capping the turd!

Answer 42

Sadly enough, since he's technically a US Citizen, he gets to have an attorney of his choice and if he can't afford one, he will get one paid for by taxpayers.

Turns out, he had a defense TEAM of lawyers working to keep him free. High profile cases often get top volunteer attorneys.

Answer 43

In America we have a legal document called the constitution, and no matter what political ideology or belief system you have, it's your duty as a citizen to uphold the truths and virtues of that document. If you disagree with that document, feel free to leave the country.

Answer 44

Haven't sat in court for 3 hours yesterday to plead not guilty & have the clerk say "might as well pay now. You're gonna lose anyway", I'd say it's the money.



the legal system is not fair.

Answer 45

Supreme law of the land.

The American Constitution.

I don't have a problem with him having/having counsel provided for him.

The problem I have is with the finalizing of the sentence handed down.

The jury justifiably gave him the death penalty. He should have been walked out of the court house to his waiting executioner.

Bullet to the base of the skull. BANG! Done!

Answer 46

If one person, no matter how dreadful their crime, if any one could be accused and punished without a fair trial then everybody would be less safe. It is most important that emotions do not take over and that a perpetrator of evil does not get condemned and justice meted out without trial (eg with lynch mobs). This is NOT to protect the evil-doers, but everyone in society.

Answer 47

They made the mistake of not continuing to shoot until he was dead. There were 100 bullet holes in the boat. What are a few more going to cost you, but would have saved everyone millions of dollars in wasted productivity while the whole trial circus unfolded, with segue into the whole appeals circus. Just keep shooting next time, okay guys?

Answer 48

As far as "due process" has it, as well as bureaucracy, an attorney is an integral part of it.



It seems ironic and backwards, but objectively it is just right.



I don't really think bureaucracy and objectivity should determine everything, though.



They seem a bit too prone to relying on tangible things, and the universe itself is full of activity without explanation.

Answer 49

I dont think he deserves an attorney. Yes most people do I know, but he obviously did the crime right? what else is there to talk about? He killed 3 people and injured over a hundred. He deserves whatever punishment is given.

Answer 50

As it is necessary within Thanks Method. Inside our region, any suppose is not caught or perhaps experience the particular fee regarding dying apart from after a good test, this means to some extent the authorities need to look after legitimate manifestation when he or she who have found themselves unable to offer regarding his very own. The particular Great The courtroom provides charged this specific need in just about all tennis courts across the country in fact it is from the tennis courts that need will be integrated.

Answer 51

To give everyone a fair chance, that is how our system works. Innocent until proven guilty, appointed legal defense if needed, jury by peers. I agree that these were unique circumstances, and that guilt was obvious, and he had his day in court, so the system works.

Answer 52

I m no expert on these matters, but my understanding is that those laws are in place to make absolutely sure they aren t prosecuting an innocent person. And because those who made those laws, made them to give all Americans a chance to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, so that government can t just throw you in prison and forget about you.



An American defends him because it was a crime in America, by an American. As far as I know, the suspect is an American citizen.



Like I said, I m no expert, that s just my understanding of the situation.

Answer 53

Not only are we supposed to be a nation of laws, we are supposed to be a nation which respects those same laws regardless of how deplorable the crime may be. Once we start going down the path from accused to guilty, without a true trial, then we are no better than the monsters which execute those simply because they are different.

Answer 54

Because of people like you. By the tone in your question you feel that it is justified to treat a human being badly because of his horrible actions. That s the first instinct any human may have after this guy s horrible actions. But if law enforcement violates his rights, where do you draw the line? How about when they violate your rights?

Answer 55

People get defensive when the Constitution of our country is challenged. Even more so when the question seems like an ignorant one. And most of the people here have ETHICS. And several of your statements (Like "Why would we give him even a fair trial?") indicate that your ethics are severely challenged, which could be indicative of a twisted mind or perverse ideologue. People tend to get upset when they believe that they are talking to someone who is evil. Your statements are patently Un American and indicate that you either hate our Constitution or know nothing about it. Either way, I hope you are not a U.S. citizen.

Answer 56

There's quite a lot of people who don't believe in a "tooth for a tooth." Growing up hating life, I've finally realized that being spiteful is not the correct way to live.

Answer 57

Because we're a nation of laws, and each one of us deserves the right to defend ourselves from the government.



What if the government decided to prosecute you for whatever reason it wanted to, and you couldn't afford a lawyer, and you were right and the government was wrong. Would you want to be left defenseless?

Answer 58

It's called the U S Constitution. You may have heard of it?



Now how come you believe that Tsarnaev will be punished worse if you take away his lawyer?

Answer 59

Well, while his legal status was because of Obama and the Democrats specifically bringing his family here to the U.S. he IS still technically legal, thus subject to our laws and customs, which include the protections of the Constitution and our legal system.

Answer 60

If the client can't afford one the court will appoint one of the hungry lawyers that need to feed their 5 kids.

Answer 61

I encourage you to read the Constitution, sweetie.



Here, I'll help you out

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Answer 62

Some argue that's the bad thing about having Constitutionally guarantted rights: Either they apply to EVERY citizen, or they apply to NONE. Apparently you don't realize that, in advocating the abridgement of somebody else's right to cousel, you are throwing away your own.

Answer 63

It's his constitutional right to be represented by an attorney.

Answer 64

But, usually that representation is not very good. That is why our prisons are full of poor black people because their shiester representation gets them to take pleas for lesser sentences.It saves money and gets wins for DA's making them look good. It also helps to keep whole towns and cities employed in the mass incarceration business. Then we need to feed and clothe them - KACHING.

Answer 65

Even if you witness someone commit a crime, only an impartial judge & jury can declare their guilt, therefore every accused person must be protected by the Right of Counsel. One law for all.

Answer 66

Everyone deserves a fair trial

However in this case the lawyer was not appointed but volunteered because she is very anti death penalty

Answer 67

A court appointed Attorney need only see your rights are not violated. Not defend you.

Answer 68

One law for all, not the ones you personally like. You either have a legal system that is fair and equal for all or you give up any pretense of being a just society.

Answer 69

So the attorney can get a lot of money without doing anything productive silly.

Answer 70

Why would an attorney take his case: Publicity to make him another house hold name and to help him in the end get richer, by more scumbag clients seeking help

Answer 71

Because every criminal defendant has the constitutional right to an attorney.



Are you opposed to the Constitution?

Answer 72

it isn t a dumb law. trust me, there are MANY dumb laws in place, but the one that protects the individual until it is PROVEN they did something wrong is one of the most important ones.



how would you like it if everyone had turned on you and would not listen to reason, and nobody would defend you?



this is why America is called the land of the free. even the bad guys get a chance...

Answer 73

You could take him out to quiet place, make him kneel and cut his head off with a sword and post a video of the same on the Internet. Do you see why now?

Answer 74

you are obviously a TROLL......

why do we waste our time trying to explain such a simple concept to someone like you?



we (the USA) like to tell the world we are better, more just, more fair, more accepting, which they majority of us are... so we have to live by the standards that we think the rest of the world should learn to follow and what we claim make us different.

if we do not follow our laws, and treat everyone the same we are no better then those we claim to oppose.

Answer 75

We are a nation of laws. Everyone has a right to a fair trial. Everyone has a right to be represented by legal counsel.

Answer 76

Wahh! Why don't I get to do whatever I want whenever I want. I know what's right! That's what democracy is all about... me knowing what's right and doing it before it turns into a pointless argument and worrying about being fair to people I dislike. I know what to do with people I dislike.

Answer 77

In the way America used to work, everyone was guaranteed a fair, impartial trial, regardless of the offense. Nowadays, many are of the lynch-mob mentality, which is what i hear in your post ...

Answer 78

Because this is civilized country, and neither you nor me would want to live in the kind of country that doesn't have fair trials of guilty people.

Answer 79

Even if we hate a person so much doesn't mean we can do anything we want with him. In the Miranda Rights, People are also granted a lawyer if he doesn't have one.

Answer 80

Explain to me why in hell you live in the United States if you disagree with the fundamental tenets of our judicial system?

Answer 81

He's entitled to legal representation, even if he can't afford it. If you want complain about something, how about the government flying his parents to the US and putting them up at government expense.

Answer 82

Because the whole thing is screwed up. I think that people want him to win because it because it mean they get justice for there rights. You know what honestly they shouldnt. People like that who do that and who cause things like the BB should be given no mercey. He ruined the lives of family members and the family members family. so that is my answer.

Answer 83

our constitution demands that everyone deserves a defense, no matter how bad it looks. actually I agree with you but don't forget the man is innocent until "proven " guilty. I think I would hang him with a new rope but that would make me as barbaric as the idiots in the news these days. cooler heads prevail.

Answer 84

Because this so called system is phucked up, broken. I wish someone would explain to me, why Dr.s (in Calif.) pays for mal practice insurance, the DR. screws up your surgery, seriously has ruined our lives, and you can't sue...it is set up that way...a person has to die, the cap for collecting in Ca. $250,000.00, that is NOTHING! Attorney's are scum!

Answer 85

Because the law says a person is innocent is innocent until proven guilty, and therefore entitled to counsel. Unless you want trial by newspaper and lynch law...

Answer 86

We must. With freedom comes evil. We would not know the difference otherwise. That is why when we see evil we loathe it. To deny rights to one person and we deny rights for ourselves. We must be vigilant so an evil act is not followed by an evil response. Freedom must be retained at all costs.

Answer 87

While I agree that it was pointless since it was so obvious that he was guilty plus he already pleaded guilty, it's his right as a US citizen to an attorney and to deny him that would be illegal.

Answer 88

You see it is a very confidential file in which such decisions are taken. I am sure they will not show me that file pertaining to his appointment as an attorney.

Answer 89

Because we're the Good Guys, and this is the sort of thing Good Guy Countries do.

Answer 90

It's called "The US Constitution", specifically the Sixth Amendment; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution



That same document, in its 14th Amendment, protects YOUR right to be ignorant of the US Constitution yet still be a US citizen!



https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv



(It's kinda sad that an IMMIGRANT like me needs to explain this to a "natural-born" American like you! Maybe you skipped the day at school they explained all this?)

Answer 91

So they can come up with a reason to not punish him, but making out he is insane, not his fault, as he was interfered with by some old religious leader, you wait, religion is the cause of this boys behavour !

Answer 92

< an attorney?>>



Everyone is ENTITLED to a fair trial and judgment by a jury of peers. this means the government-appointed attorney for anyone who does not have an attorney of their own.





< lessen his sentence?>>



Again, the Constitution. . . . ? You have heard of said document, have you not?





< do with him?>>



It isn't, not really, as that is for the jury to decide what to do with him; ie the death penalty.





< a fair trial?>>



Don't be dense. That would be unconstitutional.

If we can find any reason - any reason at all - to not grant someone a fair trial, then reason can be found to deny ANYONE their right to a fair trial. Think about it. Besides, it wouldn't just be the bomber whom you'd be denying justice to. What about the families of those who were killed and injured? Don't they deserve justice too?





< so defensive people?>>



Say something stupid, expect some backlash.





< a while ago.>>



Is that your call? Were you on the jury?





< yourself feel better.>>



Stop saying stupid things and people will stop bickering at you. it's that simple! Wow, honestly!

Answer 93

Because it's Constitutionally guaranteed.

Answer 94

Because unlike the terrorist tsarnaev we are not a bunch of monsters.

Answer 95

He's entitled to legal representation.

Answer 96

It's the American way although an expensive one. The appeal process is next.

Answer 97

as offensive as it may be for some people to understand, EVERYONE in the United States is entitled to legal representation!..and if they cannot afford a lawyer, we are LEGALLY obligated to provide one FOR him!..I have no problem with that!..I want there to be NO avenue for a moronic Leftists to claim he was murdered by the state!

Answer 98

It's his legal right, that's just the law.

Answer 99

We give him a fair trial because we're the good guys.

Answer 100

they have to, its the law. someone has to advocate for those charged with a crime and if they are destitute the court appoints an attorney.

Answer 101

Even the most heinous criminals deserve a fair trial, do you really want to start taking that right away?

Answer 102

This soo stupid. The answer to this question is because he has the right to an attorney.

Answer 103

Rule of law. If you don't like it you can move to saudi arabia or north korea.

Answer 104

Everyone has the right to an attorney.

Answer 105

In relation to the constitution: "The laws must apply to everyone, or they mean nothing." That is what the US ia about and it is worth defending.

Answer 106

Its the law for any criminal to have an attorney no matter what they did

Answer 107

Because all criminals just have the right towards a constitution since it is the sixth amendment.

Answer 108

EVERY criminal is offered a lawyer - it is up to the criminal if he or she wants one or not, therefore, this has NOTHING to do with the legal system....just an individual choice.

Answer 109

My understanding is that the brothers were patsies and not the culprits. The controlled media has led us to believe this young man is guilty and his throat was shot which assures he will not speak and he was placed in

the control of Israeli personnel sent from Israel. It is not unlikely that the Mossad was involved. Even with

an attorney, the rules of evidence in Federal Court were changed some years ago to allow the judge great latitude in deciding what evidence can and cannot be admitted into the courtroom making the Federal Courts

more readily useful for political cases where in the past pesky juries proved unreliable when a conviction was

absolutely demanded by the power-establishment.

I wonder where the author of the query is from as the answer, innocent until Proven Guilty, should be known to any American whether or not he agrees with it.

Answer 110

Why, you are not worthy of an explanation ... nor the time it would take to explain, the answer is very simple, too simple for you and your kind !

Answer 111

Because we are Americans and citizens of an exceptional country

Answer 112

Well we have the rule of law and a constitution which should be followed. That is the answer to your question.

Answer 113

Because we aren't fascists. Pay attention in your civics class, for god's sake!

Answer 114

Just because someone is an asshole does not mean we have to throw out the US Constitution.

Answer 115

I think he's an amazing individual, ti's am tter of perspective

Answer 116

It's in the Constitution and that even applies to scum.

Answer 117

Do you even understand what due process of law is ? Or that it applies to everyone without exception ?

Answer 118

If anyone had KNOWN it was him at the time, police COULD WELL have shot him dead to save others, but we hadn't known, yet. Once he was arrested, he couldn't kill anyone just then, so we couldn't kill him.

Answer 119

Should be shot on site. Black people are seeing this and say to themselves hey...I am represented and will keep on doing bad things.

Answer 120

Fair trials, impartial courts, are the backbone of our civilization. If you disagree, than GTFO of my country.

Answer 121

I always thought that it was something called the Sixth Amendment, but I could be wrong...

Answer 122

why would you appoint anyone a lawyer ? After all ...everyone is guilty ? ..thats why they been accused n'est-ca pas?

Answer 123

because it is a right, guaranteed by the Constitution, and we give that to everyone, regardless of how guilty they might be.

Answer 124

becuz he s innocent until proven guilty? But It might not work that way in your state.

Answer 125

We are supposed to be a nation of laws that is why.

Answer 126

Because we live in the world where dumb people make the rules :)!

Answer 127

that's a troll question or asker is mentally ill

Answer 128

Because those are the rules

Answer 129

Because this is America!

Answer 130

we are a nation of laws and despite his crimes, he is entitled to legal representation.

Answer 131

I thin its because everyone is created equal

Answer 132

Cause he has a cool name.

Answer 133

Hello? Hello, somebody in there?

Answer 134

good thing they transfused him blood after they shot him so that he could stand trial

Answer 135

Because its the law... that s it!

Answer 136

So that Money can flow.

Answer 137

dk

Answer 138

because he is a human being. God made him.

Answer 139

yea

Answer 140

call up my good friend anne arky....she will explain

Answer 141

the law.

Answer 142

"Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done."

we are obsessed with it.

Answer 143

I have no idea what this question is about..

Answer 144

it is his right as an american citizen.

Answer 145

He my be innocent, all or in part.

Answer 146

Bad b8 m8. :P

Answer 147

people who defend him should die with him .

Answer 148

Because its the....law?

Answer 149

because he is sexy and has a nice ***

Answer 150

i dont know

Answer 151

no idea

Answer 152

.

Answer 153

Idk