How do defence lawyers live with themselves

There is pressure, excitement, and responsibility in being a criminal defendant's only protector and support. To get a better understanding of this often emotionally draining work, Mental Floss spoke with three high-profile defense lawyers. Some defendants have clearly committed terrible crimes, but they still have constitutional rights—so attorneys don't let their personal feelings about a crime get in the way of a client's defense. But McVeigh has to be protected and his rights have to be protected.

Lichtman became friendly with Gotti by discussing family; Tritico found McVeigh to be amiable. Examining a potential juror, known as voir dire , is an art. Both defense and prosecution want people in the jury box who can be swayed, though circumstances are usually stacked against the defense. Once in court, Lichtman focuses on finding the one person in the box of 12 to connect with.

Lichtman says body language can tell him a lot. Jurors who laugh or smile at his jokes are on his side. Jurors turning away from him are not. Evaluating how jurors are reacting allows Lichtman to make real-time adjustments to his arguments. The image of an attorney standing up next to their client as the verdict is being read is usually interpreted as a sign of solidarity, but lawyers may have another reason.

Tritico says that early in his career, he took on a client charged with aggravated robbery. His sentence was 40 years. Whether you hope to become a criminal lawyer or enter another practice area, your career path will begin to take shape once you enter law school.

It all starts with a first-year course covering the foundations of criminal law required by virtually all accredited law schools. The class also covers potential defenses to those crimes as well as mitigating factors. At the end of all that course work, the big prize is your Juris Doctor JD. For most students hoping to pursue criminal law, the JD is what they need to practice—after passing the bar exam, of course.

The realities are often more subtle. To gain a better understanding of the real-world practice of criminal law, students should take advantage of internships, summer programs, and experiential course work in law school.

The real issue is number two: can the lawyer defend you properly? This is because a lawyer's true duty is to provide you with vigorous defense for the crime of which you're being accused. For this reason, the most important thing when seeking criminal defense counsel is to find a lawyer who takes their legal responsibility seriously, and will do all they can to mount a thorough defense in your favor.

The answer is two-fold. First, there is a difference between "legal guilt" and "factual guilt. The job of a criminal defense lawyer is to defend you against the charges that are presented. When charges are brought, there only has to be "probable cause" that you might have committed the crime. At trial, the prosecuting lawyer's job is to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that you've committed the crime for which you're being charged.

The government cannot deprive you of your life, liberty, or property until they've established your clear legal guilt. Putting the burden of proof upon the prosecution means the point of trial is all about either proving or failing to prove that you're guilty of the crime that's been charged - not knowing whether or not you're actually guilty.

In court, we distinguish between "factual guilt" and "legal guilt. What's being discussed at trial is legal guilt: can the prosecution offer enough evidence to prove the charges presented against you "beyond a reasonable doubt"? The defense also has the option of not having the defendant testify.

There is no burden upon the defendant to prove that they are innocent. It is the government's responsibility to prove the defendant committed the crime as detailed in the indictment. The fact that a defendant did not testify may not be considered by the jury as proof that the defendant committed the crime.

The defense may also waive his case. If the defense does not put on any evidence, the jury cannot assume that the defendant is guilty simply because they did not put on a defense.

The decision to put on a defense is solely up to the defendant and the defense attorney. However, the defense will usually present its own version of the case. Objections During direct or cross examination, either attorney can make an objection to a question or a piece of evidence to the judge. For example, a prosecutor or defense attorney may object to the wide range of the direct examination because it is beyond the knowledge of the witness, the attorney may be arguing with the witness rather than asking questions, or the witness may be talking about things irrelevant to the case.

The judge decides the outcome of an objection, sometimes after allowing attorneys on both sides to comment before making a ruling. Closing arguments are the final opportunity for the prosecutor and the defense attorney to talk to the jury. These arguments allow both attorneys to summarize the testimony and evidence, and ask the jury to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty.