Do you think that lawyers should only defend someone who is innocent?
> Do you think that lawyers should only defend someone who is innocent? <
I didn’t say that. Consider the Simpson case. Dershowitz couldn’t have known at the start of the trial whether or not Simpson was guilty. Like I noted earlier, I don’t fault Dershowitz much for taking that case.
Now let’s consider a hypothetical bank robber who, for some reason, Dershowitz knows for sure is guilty from the very beginning. I wouldn’t fault Dershowitz for taking that case either.
Then there’s Jeffrey Epstein. He’s a special case because he was a serial rapist of youngsters. No question mark involved. The damage he did, and would continue to do, far exceeds that of Simpson or a bank robber.
Did Epstein deserve a competent defense? Yes. But I have zero respect for anyone who stepped forward to defend him. That’s a serious contradiction, I know. I’m okay with that. A free Epstein was a monster on the loose.