I am afraid you are right. Reminds me of this Feldman(?) who defended the pedophile Westerfield. Even though he knew his client was guilty and tried to get the death penalty dropped in exchange for telling the location of the body, he accused innocent people of the horrific murder of a little girl and lied in court. O'Reilly was steamed and wanted action taken against this blatantly disregard of ethics. Yet even the prosecutor in the case was okay with Feldman accusing innocent people. As far as I know, nothing was ever done to Feldman.
Yet even the prosecutor in the case was okay with Feldman accusing innocent people. I won't argue that it's right, but defense attorneys are allowed far more latitude, than prosecutors.
One reason is that it is a defense attorney's job to get the best result for their client, while the prosecutor is employed by the people, and is supposed to seek the truth and a just verdict.
Another reason is that the prosecutor has the force of government available to ruin people's lives (as Nifong has so aptly demonstrated).