Originally Posted by
Square & Compas
If the defense attorney isn't slime or a slime ball, then why did the judge have to admonish him to allow Stoehr to finish answering before he rushes into another question? It seems to me he is trying to confuse, trip up and rush the 2 cyclists to make it better for his client, the slime ball doctor.
It doesn't bode well with the judge or in the court when a defense attorney, slime ball or not, gets himslef in trouble right out of the gate where the judge has to admonish him when he is questioning a witness or victim.
The lawyer's job is to defend his client to the best of his ability, within the confines of the law. If he does something with which the judge disagrees, the latter has right to silence him. The sentiment against the attorney, here, in my view, comes from his defending a person by whom we easily feel repulsed — my argument is, the lawyer's fighting this defense is an integral part of our legal system. Attorneys often will have to discredit witnesses who harm their case, and it then is opposing council's job to make appropriate objections, and the judge's duty to keep things proper. None of us is watching this trial — we've all just read a few sentences about a handful of things that have occurred in it. From this position, I believe none of us can rightly condemn the defense lawyer as being a "slimeball."