It's the law?????

[Arvon]

Strange Legal Defenses

In 1996, a Californian judge ruled against James Pflugradt's estate and in favor of the deceased's former landlord. The judge allowed the landlord to keep Pflugradt's $825 security deposit because he died without giving 30 days notice.

Troy Matthew Gentzler confessed to tossing rocks at cars from an overpass on Interstate 83 near York, Pennsylvania. But his lawyer claimed he was the victim of "Roid rage," erratic emotional swings caused by steroid use.

In October 1996, Charles S. Shapiro begged the Montgomery County, Maryland, court to allow him to change his plea to not guilty of hiring a hit man. He claimed his judgment had been impaired because he had ingested tranquilizers along with a bottle of Tums before confessing.

A Saint Louis, Missouri, man argued that the reason the jury found him guilty of stealing court documents wasn't that it had been prejudiced against him. The man claimed he was demonized because the judge allowed the jury to learn he was a lawyer.

[coyote696]

the st lewis man should be predjudiced against.
arent all lawyers supposed to be? only difference between them and their clients most times is they havent been caught yet......lol

[aleph_null1]

Welcome to the boards, coyote696 [img]smile.gif[/img]

I know the St. Louis case -- I grew up there -- and, for what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree with the accused.

Whether it was relevant that the jury know he was a lawyer is arguable, to begin. Second, and the judge should have known this, a lawyer is one of those jobs that communicates strong feelings: either of respect, disdain, &c. In either case, the accused deserved a trial based on evidence alone...

[coyote696]

This is true. my jokes are a bit short with lawyers as i used to be a police officer I have a really hard time trusting attourneys as they weren always working against me and my partners or so it seemed. but in truth all defendants should be given a fair trial by thier peers and only judged by the evidence presented in the case

[JrKASperov]

This once more shows that a system with a subjective jury is NOT right.

[Lauren]

Court cases are not judged right.
The jury are civilians who do not wish to do jury duty therefore they will say anything to finish up the case quickly.

I once watched a movie in my legal studies class that showed that exact same thing, except there was one person who believed that the charged was not guilty and did everything in his power to prove it. He got the guards to bring in witnesses into the room with the jury, brought in the evidence pieces and everything.
He staged what happened in that room to prove that the person was not guilty.

We need jury's like that.