Shooting at TDKR Midnight Premiere in Aurora, CO. Multiple dead.

[Priest31kc]

At least 10 moviegoers were killed and 39 injured at a cinema in the Colorado city of Aurora in the Denver suburbs. They were attending a midnight showing of the new Batman film, The Dark Knight Rises.

The theater was packed with a lot of people, many of them young fans, at the time the shooting started, 9news reports. The violence erupted some 15 minutes after the movie started, witnesses said.

Some say that when they first heard the shooting, they thought it was some new type of special effect.

Local media reports that two gunmen were involved in the rampage. An explosive device was set off during the shooting, injuring several people.

Witnesses said the gunmen were probably wearing body armor and gas masks and used some kind of a tear gas bomb in the attack.

Some reports say police have apprehended one of the assailants while the second one is still at large.

Police have cleared people from the scene over fears that another explosive device might be on the premises.

Aurora medical services were alerted to attend to the large number of injured

http://www.rt.com/news/shooting-dark...er-aurora-654/

WOW

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Frankie

I don't know if your post is specific to this thread or not, as I have not followed it. But if you are talking society wide, then this is not what I see on the tube or hear on the radio.

Wrong. Go back to the DC hole with this shit.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by DaFace

To contradict my sentiments from above, there are pics here if anyone's curious.

http://photos.denverpost.com/2012/07...rt-appearance/

Side note: Man...I don't have any idea how you could possibly be a public defender in a case like that. Sheesh.

Not much smirking now, is there?

While I find some aspects of the law interesting, I don't think I could be an attorney that deals with conflicts. It seems like you have to yield your own ethics sometimes to be your client's advocate. While I understand why it has to be that way, I think I'd have trouble doing it.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Frankie

I don't know if your post is specific to this thread or not, as I have not followed it. But if you are talking society wide, then this is not what I see on the tube or hear on the radio.

I'm not talking about the clowns on TV and radio. That doesn't represent mainstream thought. That's the mistake you always make.

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Not much smirking now, is there?

While I find some aspects of the law interesting, I don't think I could be an attorney that deals with conflicts. It seems like you have to yield your own ethics sometimes to be your client's advocate. While I understand why it has to be that way, I think I'd have trouble doing it.

Lawyer? Ethics?

[Deberg_1990]

Why sooo Serious???

[lcarus]

Here comes the insanity defense.

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Why sooo Serious???

It seems as though his face isn't even battered or bruised. What kind of saint made that arrest?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by lcarus

Here comes the insanity defense.

First thing I thought when I saw they had left his hair red and unkempt.

[Dayze]

"I hereby sentence you to LIFE, ina Federal 'Pound Me In The Ass' prison"

[verbaljitsu]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Not much smirking now, is there?

While I find some aspects of the law interesting, I don't think I could be an attorney that deals with conflicts. It seems like you have to yield your own ethics sometimes to be your client's advocate. While I understand why it has to be that way, I think I'd have trouble doing it.

I really don't feel that way.

Every once in a while you get a total shithead that doesn't deserve a lick of compassion. But it is very rare. If I were to flip through the stack of files on my desk right now it would go something like: overcharged, overcharged, arrested for doing something that shouldn't even be illegal, overcharged, shithead, innocent, overcharged, trapped in system because poor, overcharged, poor, arrested for something that shouldn't be illegal, dumb kid, dumb kid, poor, etc.

But I've never really thought that defending that one shithead was going to compromise my ethics. My ethic is really twofold: zealously advocate for my client, & defend the Constitutional rights guaranteed to all Americans. My client is a vehicle for defending the Constitution.

And if I/you don't defend the Constitutional rights of the shitheads, then that one innocent guy in the stack of files is going to pay dearly for it. And the 10 people who probably committed some crime, but are not guilty of what they have been accused of because of rampant over charging are going to pay for it too.

But most of the time, you don't have time to think about it anyway, because the government is trying to cheat so bad.

Originally Posted by verbaljitsu

I really don't feel that way.

Every once in a while you get a total shithead that doesn't deserve a lick of compassion. But it is very rare. If I were to flip through the stack of files on my desk right now it would go something like: overcharged, overcharged, arrested for doing something that shouldn't even be illegal, overcharged, shithead, innocent, overcharged, trapped in system because poor, overcharged, poor, arrested for something that shouldn't be illegal, dumb kid, dumb kid, poor, etc.

But I've never really thought that defending that one shithead was going to compromise my ethics. My ethic is really twofold: zealously advocate for my client, & defend the Constitutional rights guaranteed to all Americans. My client is a vehicle for defending the Constitution.

And if I/you don't defend the Constitutional rights of the shitheads, then that one innocent guy in the stack of files is going to pay dearly for it. And the 10 people who probably committed some crime, but are not guilty of what they have been accused of because of rampant over charging are going to pay for it too.

But most of the time, you don't have time to think about it anyway, because the government is trying to cheat so bad.

Isn't overcharging part of the game so they can negotiate a plea settlement?

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Not much smirking now, is there?

While I find some aspects of the law interesting, I don't think I could be an attorney that deals with conflicts. It seems like you have to yield your own ethics sometimes to be your client's advocate. While I understand why it has to be that way, I think I'd have trouble doing it.

It's not like they enjoy it. I did criminal law in the Navy - mostly it was just kids who ran away or got popped a piss test for drugs. But every now and then we'd get some real lowlifes. There was this one guy who was accused of molesting his own prepubescent children. Big, hulking guy who just radiated evil. Made my flesh crawl to be in the same room with him. He was eventually convicted and I don't think anybody ever had any doubt he did it from the start. The guy who represented him was a good man who had two young children himself. I asked him once how he could stand it. He said he hated it, but he had sworn an oath to provide his clients with a defense, whether they were guilty or innocent, good people or bad. He wouldn't do anything beyond that, though. Certainly not all of them feel that way.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by verbaljitsu

I really don't feel that way.

Every once in a while you get a total shithead that doesn't deserve a lick of compassion. But it is very rare. If I were to flip through the stack of files on my desk right now it would go something like: overcharged, overcharged, arrested for doing something that shouldn't even be illegal, overcharged, shithead, innocent, overcharged, trapped in system because poor, overcharged, poor, arrested for something that shouldn't be illegal, dumb kid, dumb kid, poor, etc.

But I've never really thought that defending that one shithead was going to compromise my ethics. My ethic is really twofold: zealously advocate for my client, & defend the Constitutional rights guaranteed to all Americans. My client is a vehicle for defending the Constitution.

And if I/you don't defend the Constitutional rights of the shitheads, then that one innocent guy in the stack of files is going to pay dearly for it. And the 10 people who probably committed some crime, but are not guilty of what they have been accused of because of rampant over charging are going to pay for it too.

But most of the time, you don't have time to think about it anyway, because the government is trying to cheat so bad.

Understood. When I posted it, I thought, "That's not really coming out the way I intend", but by that point it had already been quoted, so que sera sera.

I'm a little tainted right now because I'm dealing with a business issue that may be headed toward legal action, and the attorney on the other side has looked me in the eye and said, "My client is perfectly correct and did absolutely nothing wrong, and we will not negotiate with you on a peaceful resolution at all." And we both know that her client really behaved very inappropriately and completely did the wrong thing. In fact, this attorney has actually told other people that her client is wrong, and word has gotten back to me that she's said it. So I'm not sure if what she's doing is unethical or not, but it seems to me that she knows the truth and is lying to me as I try to resolve it peacefully.

So from that perspective (one of the few times I've dealt with attorneys on a conflict) it seems to me that she's setting aside her ethics to defend behavior that she knows is incorrect. But is that what she's supposed to do? I really don't know. I always thought that if she knew her client did wrong, she should attempt to resolve it.

[verbaljitsu]

Originally Posted by Phobia

Isn't overcharging part of the game so they can negotiate a plea settlement?

If by game, you mean screwing with people's lives. The prosecutor's job is to "do justice."

Prosecutor's (and it isn't every office, but it is a growing phenomenon) overcharge because sometimes no one will put up a fight and they can pad their stats, sometimes because of a goofy campaign promise or other political concerns, sometimes as leverage to negotiate plea deals, sometimes because they are sadistic tools, and an awful lot of times just out of craven careerism.

There are an awful lot of good prosecutors in this state who don't pull that crap, but there are an awful lot of bad ones too.

[verbaljitsu]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Understood. When I posted it, I thought, "That's not really coming out the way I intend", but by that point it had already been quoted, so que sera sera.

I'm a little tainted right now because I'm dealing with a business issue that may be headed toward legal action, and the attorney on the other side has looked me in the eye and said, "My client is perfectly correct and did absolutely nothing wrong, and we will not negotiate with you on a peaceful resolution at all." And we both know that her client really behaved very inappropriately and completely did the wrong thing. In fact, this attorney has actually told other people that her client is wrong, and word has gotten back to me that she's said it. So I'm not sure if what she's doing is unethical or not, but it seems to me that she knows the truth and is lying to me as I try to resolve it peacefully.

So from that perspective (one of the few times I've dealt with attorneys on a conflict) it seems to me that she's setting aside her ethics to defend behavior that she knows is incorrect. But is that what she's supposed to do? I really don't know. I always thought that if she knew her client did wrong, she should attempt to resolve it.

I didn't take it as anything offensive. You are a reasonable and funny poster, so I am always going to give you the benefit of the doubt. It is a common question. I hope I didn't sound defensive, my intention was to try and answer the question as it relates to me.

I will say this about the attorney you are dealing with right now: I wouldn't assume that he/she knows what you think he/she knows. I've had a couple sleepless nights when I found out I was just wrong about everything in a civil case. Due diligence only takes you so far. I've had a stack of documents in front of me that led me to believe one thing, only to find out that those documents weren't real. And just about every client lies or misrepresents something to me. Even the really good people. They get embarrassed. Sometimes it is as simple as their seething anger starts to change their memories.