Why must lawyers defend the most heinous? First, three prerequisites: Second, do not believe that the judicial organs are always fair and just Third, it is the criminal defense system, the good and evil of criminal defense lawyers:

Recently watched a Taiwan drama "The Distance Between Us and Evil", which is very wonderful and recommended. In the play, the male protagonist is a criminal defense lawyer who, despite all kinds of pressures and difficulties, insists on defending the criminal suspect who committed indiscriminate homicide in the cinema. The reason for this is that it is meaningless to simply kill the suspect, and we should try our best to understand why he did it, so as to help prevent the tragedy from repeating itself.

I agree with that. However, I personally believe that the reason for the existence of the modern criminal defense system, the reason why lawyers must be allowed to defend the most heinous people, is to prevent the power from running away and to protect the freedom and security of the general population. A brief discussion is as follows:

<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="3" > one or three premises:</h1>

Premise one: We are not gods and cannot know the truth with 100% accuracy. If everyone knew the full truth of the incident with 100% accuracy, it would be unlikely that innocent people would be convicted, and the lawyer system could be abolished.

Premise two: We are not angels, and we can slide into evil at any time. The righteous man today may become the evil one tomorrow; he is very righteous in this matter, but he may be extremely unjust to other things.

Premise three: Power always tends to run wild, and the consequences of power runuging are more terrible than other evils.

<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="7" > second, do not believe that the judiciary is always fair and just</h1>

Based on the above three premises, it can be concluded that the judicial organs cannot all decide whether a person has committed a crime, whether he should be punished, and what kind of punishment he should impose, and do not believe that the judicial organs are definitely fair and just.

1. We cannot know the truth 100% accurately, and the judicial organs naturally cannot find out the truth of the facts 100% accurately, and they may also mistakenly determine the facts. In addition, judicial personnel such as criminal investigation police, due to the nature of their work, tasks, positions and other factors, they always tend to look for evidence of guilt and ignore evidence of innocence.

2, the investigation is not the worst, the most terrible thing is to deliberately distort the facts. The judiciary is not angels, and they cannot be just at any time and in any matter. They may become unjust and evil at some point in some events due to external pressures, inducements, their own thoughts, the need for interests, and so on.

3) Power always tends to run amok, and if today the judicial organs are acquiesced in forcibly punishing the most heinous people in the absence of clear facts, insufficient evidence, and illegal procedures, tomorrow they may punish innocent and good people in the absence of clear facts, insufficient evidence, and illegal procedures. If someone thinks that this situation is unlikely, or that he cannot be the one who has been wronged, it must be because he knows too little about history and real life.

Interestingly, some people have been ravaged by power for thousands of years, but they are particularly superstitious about power, keen on deifying power, and always self-brainwashed to ignore the harm of power, perhaps this is also a Stockholm syndrome.

<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="13" > third, is the criminal defense system, criminal defense lawyers good and evil:</h1>

Because the judiciary can also make mistakes, or even deliberately commit evil, it needs external forces to confront it and supervise it to prevent it from running wild. The criminal defense system and criminal defense lawyers are one of these external forces.

Criminal defense lawyers proceed from the position of safeguarding the interests of criminal suspects to seek evidence of innocence and lightness, which is the opposite of judicial organs. Through the confrontation of one positive and one negative, it is more likely to restore the truth. Criminal defense lawyers will also analyze and review the evidence collected by the judicial organs and the procedures for collecting evidence, so as to verify whether there is false evidence or procedural violations, etc., so as to prevent the judicial organs from arbitrarily planting stolen goods and framing them. Finally, the criminal suspect is defended according to the law and evidence, and the judicial organs are prevented from arbitrarily convicting.

Generally speaking, the more perfect the criminal defense system, the stronger the ability of criminal defense lawyers to oppose the rights and abilities of judicial organs, the less likely it is that unjust, false and wrongly decided cases will occur, the less the general public will have to worry about being framed by judicial organs, and the more personal freedom and rights will be guaranteed.

The more perfect the criminal defense system, the more criminal defense lawyers have the right and ability to oppose the judicial organs, and the more they will lead to the guilty people escaping punishment. This has nothing to say, but can only think that this is the price we must pay, the evil that we must accept. It is better to let the guilty go unpunished than to let the innocent be wronged. Compared with the judicial organs arbitrarily planting bribes to convict, it is much less evil to let the guilty people escape punishment. Logically, when there is a situation in which a criminal defense lawyer allows a guilty person to escape punishment, we should not blame the lawyer, but should blame the judicial organ; in this way, the judicial organ will learn from the failure, improve the ability to handle cases, and pay more attention to fully collecting evidence, investigating and clarifying the facts, and strictly abiding by legal procedures when investigating, arresting, and prosecuting, so as to prevent the guilty person from escaping again. As a result, the judicial authorities' ability to handle cases has been enhanced, and the corresponding likelihood that innocent people will be wronged (of course, this is idealism, and in reality there are always pros and cons to doing so).

All of the above is a cold truth. If it is the victim's relatives and friends (and even the general public), seeing the murderer escape punishment, it will certainly be extremely confused and angry. Cold truths, whether right or wrong, cannot soothe their sadness and anger.

If a criminal defense lawyer is complacent about successfully getting the murderer out of punishment, he must be a cold-blooded person without a conscience. However, his profession also requires him to work hard to specialize in and hone such a technique, tempting him to be complacent when he succeeds. After a long period of temptation, will a hot-blooded young man whose mission is to protect the freedoms and rights of the people become a complacent cold-blooded person? Things in the world are so contradictory. The movie Devil's Advocate, starring Keanu Reeves and Al Pacino, is brilliant and well worth a look.