I don't hate the attorneys. The sixth amendment guarantees the defendant the right to effective counsel. I would rather the defendant receive a rigorous defense and be found guilty, then have ineffective counsel and be grounds for appeal. Remember, the lawyers are basing their defense on what they are being told by the defendant. We don't know what went on behind closed doors, or if they tried to have their clients plead to lessor counts. They are doing their job.
If no lawyer takes on these defendants as their clients, they would never go to trial. They have rights under the constitution.
As far as Nurmi goes, I wish he wasn't so slow when speaking. He puts me to sleep.
You are right, in a class in High School (Human Development) the teacher was talking about the harmful effects of pot one day and I told her that pot was no worse then alcohol. Which since I have never tried pot in my life and I have never been drunk to be honest either, (both by choice) might seem like an odd stance for me, but I had seen the harmful effects of Alcohol my whole life as my parents are both alcoholics.
She said if I could find a few people to join my side in the class we could have a debate and so I did convince a couple (which was tough cause I was not very popular).
Long story short the kids there were so brain washed into thinking pot was bad and Alcohol was ok (When IMO it is one of the biggest problems in America today, just look at that High School Football Rape case) that I lost in spectacular fashion (the fact that one of the most popular guys in class debated against me did not help either). However I made sure to let everybody in that class know that because of me taking the unpopular stand they got watch a debate instead of do bookwork that day, because without me there would of been no debate, to which the teacher (who did not even like me much) even agreed.
Point is somebody has to stand against popular opinion, because sometimes popular opinion is wrong and it is not until someone forces you to look at it for what it really is that people can see that sometimes.
That said I believe most of the time the police arrest the right people and the prosecution is right to try and get the best conviction they can, but even if that is true, there are times where it is not and the defense becomes the hero then because they save an innocent person.
In this case clearly Jodi is not only guilty, but guilty of murder 1 and premeditated murder (I think enough has been shown to prove that to me and most clearly), still it was right for her to be defended because everybody has the right to a fair trial and that is how it should be. Like you said I would rather a criminal's lies unravel so there is no doubt then have a person convicted on public opinion alone.
I really like Snapped but haven't seen that one. Hopefully I can catch it in reruns.
Disgusting.
This is pretty much what I wanted to state
