If a attorney is asked to clutch a criminal crust do they own to?

I hear that if someone approaches a lawyer and wants them to represent them they enjoy to take the case on. Is that true?

If near was unquestionable evidence you wouldn't really want to represent a rapist etc would you.
Answers:
I don't know anything about UK law (which is where on earth this question is posted), but in the US, no.

That is, unless the legal representative is a public defender and/or the court has appointed him as counsel.
Im in England, so Im going to look right through the yankie answers and tell you how it is here.

Number 1, there are no lawyer in England, you are a solicitor or a barrister. The client approaches a solicitor, and if your case go to court, the solicitor gets you a barrister.

Number 2, the rule you are alluding to is that you cannot just drop cases because you don't similar to the client, or because something better, i.e. higher paid, have come along. What you have to do is give a relevant and tolerable reason as to why you cannot represent the client. If for example it is a criminal case and you are not surrounded by the criminal field, that would be quite a suitable reason.

Similarly "lawyers" dont get involved contained by who they want to represent. As a member of the law society you trust the system. That finances you think that everyone is entitled to a valid defence REGARDLESS of the evidence against them, be it overwhelming or not.

And Im curious as to what the "unquestionable" evidence is? If you indicate your client admits to you that they did it, then you can still represent them if they want to plead guilty. But if they bring up to date you they're guilty but want you to say in court that they not guilty, you, as an officer of the court, cannot sprawl in court, so you have to slip away them off to someone else, who doesnt know that piece of information. And when you pass them over, you wouldn't report to the next solicitor what they said if the client didnt want you to, because is considered privileged information. Perhaps that's what your referring to?
Absolutely not, would you want someone representing you lower than duress?
No. If they have any doubts as to that person's version of events, they SHOULD drop it. It doesn't arise mind you because they'll just swear blind they bought what their client told them but there is money to be have.

Strictly speaking though, no. They're not obliged.

*I'm in the UK by the opening - not sure about other countries. Source(s): Previously a legal secretary surrounded by Criminal Department.
You don't "approach a lawyer" - you call and bring in an appointment - after you have established that this particular attorney has experience in the helpful of work you need done (defending a plaintiff - suing a company or person for damages, legitimate estate law, etc) At the appointment *usually an initial consult is free - 30 minutes) You explain your case, and ask the attorney if he/she is willing and able to help yourself to it on - if they decline - then you ask for a "recommendation" which most lawyers will impart you to a another competent attorney who either owes this one a favor - or has room surrounded by his/her schedule to take on another baggage.
No attorney is ever underneath any obligation to represent any individual. A public defender can be assigned to an indigent defendant, but can be relieved for valid mete out under certain circumstances. Source(s): 35 yr atty
Your question raise a number of interesting issues.

A criminal solicitor can decide whether or not to represent ny client who seek to instruct him. It's a matter of choice. If you think the solicitor basis that decision on whether he 'believes' the client or whether the client is guilty or innocent, your naivety is quite charming.

A criminal barrister is govern by the cab-rank rule and must represent the next client who is assigned to him/her.

As to rapist/murderers etc. - who represents them? I think you may be confusing a legal representative with a priest or a campaigner for a mete out.
The people that no-one wants (the Guildford Four for example) are exactly those that necessitate representation. Source(s): I'm a lawyer


Related Questions: