a quote from lawabidingbahamian:
stop jumping at an opportunity to criticize our fine officers for every allegation.....while there are bad apples in every organizations lets be thankful for those who watch over us at night while you sleep....and are paid chicken feed for it.........while blood sucking lawyers make a living from criminals

The statement (above) was written by lawabidingbahamamian - someone who a1000/clint should perhaps add to his evergrowing list of 'blockheads'...but "I digress" (in the infamous words of Tadfadhali)... Lawabiding indirectly brings up a point.

Why is it that people see lawyers as liars? As the lawabiding says: "there are bad apples in every organization", so why is it, the profession as a whole always suffers for those corky apples?

Criminal lawyers in particular are viewed as "blood-sucking", but why can't people get their heads around the fact that in the legal profession, a lawyer will present his case based on the evidence presented. Therefore, if, in a crimnal case, the police botch up an investigation, or present inadmissable evidence, the case will collapse! Its also important to consider that in the legal profession, lawyers are sworn to confidentiality and it is only in rare circumstances this confidentiality can be broken. This has nothing to do with "lying", but everything to do with defending your client to the best of your ability - afterall, we have to swear an oath to do that!

Furthermore, in a democracy, two important principles of the judicial system are fairness and equality. A suspect is innocent until proven guilty. That's why there is a Judge/jury...too often we presume people must be guilty based on whatever personal prejudices we may harbour. Even cases involving 'ex-cons' or 'known criminals' the legal system provides protection for that person until he/she is found guilty of the charges brought against him/her. Why do we not blame the police when people presumed innocent go scot free? If the police do there jobs efficiently and effectively, the charges they bring will have sufficient supporting evidence, and the jury can base their decisions on that...what are you thoughts?

I believe that there is a general perception that all lawyers are liars because most of our politicians are liars and lawyers?
:cool:

a quote from lawabidingbahamian:
The statement (above) was written by lawabidingbahamamian - someone who a1000/clint should perhaps add to his evergrowing list of 'blockheads'...but "I digress" (in the infamous words of Tadfadhali)... Lawabiding indirectly brings up a point.
Why is it that people see lawyers as liars? As the lawabiding says: "there are bad apples in every organization", so why is it, the profession as a whole always suffers for those corky apples?
Criminal lawyers in particular are viewed as "blood-sucking", but why can't people get their heads around the fact that in the legal profession, a lawyer will present his case based on the evidence presented. Therefore, if, in a crimnal case, the police botch up an investigation, or present inadmissable evidence, the case will collapse! Its also important to consider that in the legal profession, lawyers are sworn to confidentiality and it is only in rare circumstances this confidentiality can be broken. This has nothing to do with "lying", but everything to do with defending your client to the best of your ability - afterall, we have to swear an oath to do that!
Furthermore, in a democracy, two important principles of the judicial system are fairness and equality. A suspect is innocent until proven guilty. That's why there is a Judge/jury...too often we presume people must be guilty based on whatever personal prejudices we may harbour. Even cases involving 'ex-cons' or 'known criminals' the legal system provides protection for that person until he/she is found guilty of the charges brought against him/her. Why do we not blame the police when people presumed innocent go scot free? If the police do there jobs efficiently and effectively, the charges they bring will have sufficient supporting evidence, and the jury can base their decisions on that...what are you thoughts?

Thanks for cutting and pasting a quote from a previous thread....which clearly confirms what am saying about you....you just took out the part to suit your arrogance and know it all attitude.........with half way facts ...why didn't you post the comments in its entirety...so people can get the true feeling as to what i was saying.....your are still a blood suckingg wanna be lawyer.....there i said it again i will be monitoring your posts when ever you make them to share light in them for you:hammer:

Thanks for cutting and pasting a quote from a previous thread....which clearly confirms what am saying about you....you just took out the part to suit your arrogance and know it all attitude.........with half way facts ...why didn't you post the comments in its entirety...so people can get the true feeling as to what i was saying.....your are still a blood suckingg wanna be lawyer.....there i said it again i will be monitoring your posts when ever you make them to share light in them for you:hammer:

Oops! I was going to block you, but I'm itching to respond to this! Plus, you're so cute! you keep popping up all over the board like an unwanted maggot! :fly:

anyway, of course i cut and pasted it you ninkumpoop! i never said i didnt!!! And with it, I've started a *n e w* thread - and you're in it...so listen closely, my purposes for importing your quote from another topic, was because (like I already pointed out underneath your clever statement): YOU ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT!!! I agree with you, in that, this is an enormous accomplishment (for you)...and I thought I was use this monumental achievement to FORM ANOTHER TOPIC....whew!

PS: why do you think I'm arrogant? I certainly don't think I am. :angel:

Thanks for cutting and pasting a quote from a previous thread....which clearly confirms what am saying about you....you just took out the part to suit your arrogance and know it all attitude.........with half way facts ...why didn't you post the comments in its entirety...so people can get the true feeling as to what i was saying.....your are still a blood suckingg wanna be lawyer.....there i said it again i will be monitoring your posts when ever you make them to share light in them for you:hammer:

Ok...so after saying all of that why didn't you simply post the comment in its entirety so we could see the statement in its proper context if the context is wrong. It doesn't help the argument to simply sling mud. If she took you out of context, then post the entire statement to prove it. If she didn't, then I don't see what your point is. Personally I am always skeptical about excerpts from a conversation and would like to read the comment in its entirety.

Oops! I was going to block you, but I'm itching to respond to this! Plus, you're so cute! you keep popping up all over the board like an unwanted maggot! :fly:
anyway, of course i cut and pasted it you ninkumpoop! i never said i didnt!!! And with it, I've started a *n e w* thread - and you're in it...so listen closely, my purposes for importing your quote from another topic, was because (like I already pointed out underneath your clever statement): YOU ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT!!! I agree with you, in that, this is an enormous accomplishment (for you)...and I thought I was use this monumental achievement to FORM ANOTHER TOPIC....whew!
PS: why do you think I'm arrogant? I certainly don't think I am. :angel:

For the record, I don't think you are. I would also say that starting a new thread makes quite a deal of sense.

For the record, I don't think you are. I would also say that starting a new thread makes quite a deal of sense.

thanks finekameo - i always did like you! you can see the quote in its entirety on the thread "Couple Beaten By Cops"----amidst the 'war of the words' /page 3....I can feel the 'cross referencing' going on already :cutie:

if abiskan is quoting someone and only using the part that suits the arguement i find it fitting that a pic of W accompany's her post because that is how the lying republicans won their last election

if abiskan is quoting someone and only using the part that suits the arguement i find it fitting that a pic of W accompany's her post because that is how the lying republicans won their last election

AGAIN - there is an excerpt of the quote because we're on a NEW topic and that particular section of the quote is WHAT THE *N E W* topic is about. OMG...there are some seriously d i m people on this MB..then you all call me 'arrogant'...well what do you expect when there are comments like this???:dunce: we're WAY of topic now...so LAWYERS...WHY DO WE THINK THEY ARE LIARS????:hammer:

because the majority of our bahamian politicians are lawyers and liars:hammer:

AGAIN - there is an excerpt of the quote because we're on a NEW topic and that particular section of the quote is WHAT THE *N E W* topic is about. OMG...there are some seriously d i m people on this MB..then you all call me 'arrogant'...well what do you expect when there are comments like this???:dunce: we're WAY of topic now...so LAWYERS...WHY DO WE THINK THEY ARE LIARS????:hammer:


duncy....see i told you:dgi: :duh: :cop:

because the majority of our bahamian politicians are lawyers and liars:hammer:
:dancer: NOW we're getting somewhere...except, it not that good an explanation, I mean, some fish fly, but we dont consider all fish flying fish do we? :gi:

Well my brother is a lawyer. He started as my honest brother until they started throwing money at him and now even he sounds like the rest - the keep talking and talking and they may not be lying but they are charging you by the hour for talking and talking whether they're lying or not.
Gov't repo'd land from my family and says sure we'll pay you, 7 years ago? Thanks for nothing one gov't or the next it don't make a difference yeah we'll pay you then oh what's that you want to put a dock in? No you can't put a dock in there becuase 75' out in the water is the gov't road reservation see that road running through your property, that public road, it doesn't actually exist the roads out in the water you can't build a dock on a road can you????even if the road is in the water.
PLP says they have all this reserve money they been doing good. We gat plenty off shore reserves whatever the hell they called it. Perry said he didn't raise taxes??? we pay more for bec, we pay more for fuel, we pay more for dock licenses, we pay more for vehicle licenses, we are paying more property tax, what else?? We are paying more for business licenses. These costs have all increased in the last 5 years right?
I may seem to have drifted off the subject here in the above rant but I believe it proves my point of the politicians (plp/fnm/bdp/ubp) what ever you wanna call yourself are a bunch of lying lawyers using politics and lies to line their pockets with the money that me and the rest of the middle and lower class bahamians have to work or asses off for.

stagalee_abaco

Well my brother is a lawyer. He started as my honest brother until they started throwing money at him and now even he sounds like the rest - the keep talking and talking and they may not be lying but they are charging you by the hour for talking and talking whether they're lying or not.
was he honest until they starting throwing money at him, or was it simply a matter of gaining knowledge and experience. And yes, well hourly rates - you (supposedly) pay for professional service - although I admit, sometimes its not so professional at all!

Gov't repo'd land from my family and says sure we'll pay you, 7 years ago? Thanks for nothing one gov't or the next it don't make a difference yeah we'll pay you then oh what's that you want to put a dock in? No you can't put a dock in there becuase 75' out in the water is the gov't road reservation see that road running through your property, that public road, it doesn't actually exist the roads out in the water you can't build a dock on a road can you????even if the road is in the water.
PLP says they have all this reserve money they been doing good. We gat plenty off shore reserves whatever the hell they called it. Perry said he didn't raise taxes??? we pay more for bec, we pay more for fuel, we pay more for dock licenses, we pay more for vehicle licenses, we are paying more property tax, what else?? We are paying more for business licenses. These costs have all increased in the last 5 years right?
I may seem to have drifted off the subject here in the above rant but I believe it proves my point of the politicians (plp/fnm/bdp/ubp) what ever you wanna call yourself are a bunch of lying lawyers using politics and lies to line their pockets with the money that me and the rest of the middle and lower class bahamians have to work or asses off for.
im gathering the remainder of this post requires a totally sober mind - see you'll tomorrow! :shhh:

a quote from lawabidingbahamian:
The statement (above) was written by lawabidingbahamamian - someone who a1000/clint should perhaps add to his evergrowing list of 'blockheads'...but "I digress" (in the infamous words of Tadfadhali)... Lawabiding indirectly brings up a point.
Why is it that people see lawyers as liars? As the lawabiding says: "there are bad apples in every organization", so why is it, the profession as a whole always suffers for those corky apples?
Criminal lawyers in particular are viewed as "blood-sucking", but why can't people get their heads around the fact that in the legal profession, a lawyer will present his case based on the evidence presented. Therefore, if, in a crimnal case, the police botch up an investigation, or present inadmissable evidence, the case will collapse! Its also important to consider that in the legal profession, lawyers are sworn to confidentiality and it is only in rare circumstances this confidentiality can be broken. This has nothing to do with "lying", but everything to do with defending your client to the best of your ability - afterall, we have to swear an oath to do that!
Furthermore, in a democracy, two important principles of the judicial system are fairness and equality. A suspect is innocent until proven guilty. That's why there is a Judge/jury...too often we presume people must be guilty based on whatever personal prejudices we may harbour. Even cases involving 'ex-cons' or 'known criminals' the legal system provides protection for that person until he/she is found guilty of the charges brought against him/her. Why do we not blame the police when people presumed innocent go scot free? If the police do there jobs efficiently and effectively, the charges they bring will have sufficient supporting evidence, and the jury can base their decisions on that...what are you thoughts?

Let me see if I can take a crack at this. Yeah, lemme see if I can be my usual self and bend over backward and try to be fair!:angel:

One analogy to this could well be (from a strictly common-sense/street wise standpoint) pretty much how you, personally, find it difficult to understand how or why persons could or should be Christians. Bear in mind, I am NOT knocking or criticizing you, just trying to come to grips with this misunderstanding of your profession!

But I believe one of the main reasons the public in general would think of lawyers as liars is because we know next ot nothing about the law. Its been my experience that anytime someone does not know anything about a subject/profession, unless that person is very intelligent, chances are he will come to all kinds of off-the-wall conclusions about the subject/profession that are wrong.

If we can't or don't put ourselves in the lawyer's or the defendant's shoes, then eeen nothing happening! I mean, there MUST be empathy on our part for us to have some kind o balanced perspective of the situation!

For instance, anytime someone begins to think of a lawyer lying or being unscrupulous to win a case, just let them put themselves in the shoes of the defendant -- in other words if they were the defendant, would they still think that the lawyer was lying to save their life or stop them from getting a long stretch in jail??? Therein lies the rub! Many of us just can't see and understand these things unless its happening to us!

Then there are some things about the legal profession that perhaps very few of us laymen would understand unless we study law. A famous Bahamian lawyer once said that the law has nothing to do with justice (to be fair, I am not too sure whether it was a lawyer or a journalist who said this). But to me, this statement is very strange!

Then again on a local talk show a lawyer spoke about the time how when he was an acting judge he sentenced a person to serve a jail term. Shortly after that when he started practising law again, he represented that person and freed him from prison! Now to the general public this would look as if something is not right, but to one who knows the law, it would probably be fair (?). And I would guess its because of our lack of knowledge of the law we would not be able to see the fairness of it!

There is one thing that I personally don't think is too fair about the law, that is when a person gets off on a technicality. Maybe you can explain the fairness of this, but I always feel that if there is hard evidence against the defendant, he should be penalised!

But my take is that I will never knock something until I have a good understanding of it --- thus one of my signatures: "Seek first to understand....."

Hope I have shed some light on this situation.