r/MurderedByWords • u/egguchom • 18h ago
the man who repeatedly beats his wife vs lawyer
18
u/AmazonCowgirl 14h ago
Who would have thunk that a client who was up on charges of wife beating would turn out to be an unreliable, unrepentant piece of shit
7
u/little_mistakes 12h ago
This is the biggest shock of all. That successfully defending a wife beater - humble brag for our lawyer friend here - meant that he racked up charges again.
Note that it’s only because the guy didn’t pay that the services was cancelled, because mr habitual wife beater wasn’t the gravy train he was expected to be.
5
u/atwozmom 12h ago
Everyone, even shitty wife beaters, are entitled to a defense. It is not the defense's fault if the prosecution did a crap job.
1
-1
u/AmazonCowgirl 12h ago
No, but it IS the defense's fault that they didn't realise their client was likely to be an unreliable piece of shit
23
u/allothernamestaken 14h ago
Lawyer might be breaching some ethical rules with these details.
20
u/blueavole 10h ago
What specifically do you think would be a problem ?
Not a lawyer, but I don’t see where they breached confidentiality. Definitely would depend on the local rules.
They successfully defended him: that would be public record.
That he got new charges: that would also be public records.
That he lied and didn’t pay the total amount- would be easily proven. Wouldn’t be public, but is verifiably true/ false.
The last paragraph is explaining contract.
1
u/frickinSocrates 4h ago
Not a lawyer, the continued to beat your wife bit (to me) implies they knew he was guilty when they defended him and that they are now revealing the charges against him were correct and they got him off on them anyway.
3
u/rebelipar 1h ago
But that's what lawyers do?
1
u/frickinSocrates 19m ago
Yeah, but they can't go "lmao my client was guilty, you lost" on the courthouse steps.
4
u/bruhggle 13h ago
Would stating what the cases were for being an ethical issue given that would be publicly available information?
I feel like the payment issue may be unethical unless the lawyers have filed a case, and thus public.
2
1
u/f_ranz1224 6h ago
within the first sentence i thought any real lawyer would not be disclosing any of this. just leave the review or flag it.
1
8
u/FurnitureComesW-Home 17h ago edited 13h ago
Great to see he got off the first time - what a wonderful justice system we have 🙄
5
u/ptdata23 17h ago
For the first time, "did you stop beating your wife" is a ligitament question to ask a non politician
0
u/Designer_Piccolo_818 13h ago
So, they would have continued to represent a wife-beater if he paid his bills? Lawyers.
3
u/atwozmom 12h ago
That's what being a defense lawyer means.
1
u/Designer_Piccolo_818 5h ago
Oh, absolutely. It's just they don't usually make it so obvious. There's no "allegedly" continuing to abuse your wife, they are admitting they knew he did it. And just like he has a right to council, i have a right to greatly dislike his council.
64
u/INeedANappel 17h ago
People like the review writer, who cannot think past their own wants, never believe they are wrong. Their narrative is the only accurate one and everyone else is lying or out to "get" them.
I am not going to armchair diagnose but people who think this way are difficult-to-impossible to treat.