I defend guilty
I do not know yet difficult to understand
I consider it something not only legitimate
but also necessary and today I ‘m going to
try to explain
the main reason is that the culprits
they are innocent as the innocent
as long as there is no firm ruling that
condemn them
presumption of innocence we followed
so many times but it does not sound like
formality we did not believe it
how will he be innocent if I have seen him
on the TV that the police just
handcuffed from his house
we move by prejudice if gypsy
if it is Arabic
if political junkie if it
sure they will have done it
the big bad wolf will always be bad if
we only hear Little Red Riding Hood
there are some that from the beginning
we have very clear that they are guilty but
That’s not the case , we do not even know it.
lawyers
I can count on the fingers of one hand
the people that have come into my
I’m in the office and they told me
guilty
they tell you their truth because there is no
a truth with capital letters
and the lawyers are the ones that we have to
tell them I do not doubt your words but the
judge has to understand why your footprint
I was in the safe
there are no criminals there are
people who commit crimes and the
border between guilt and innocence
it’s much more diffuse than we think
initially
you are not always guilty of everything that
accuse you neither of the way in which
they accuse you and also come into play
extenuating circumstances
that reduce the responsibility of the
person
It is not the same to hit a person in
the street because yes because I feel like it
to do it because he suffers a disorder
mental the damage is the same and therefore
reparation to the victim will have to
be identical
but the punishment should not be the same
the lawyers we do not have to do a
morality trial does not touch us nor
judge or condemn
nor justify our task is another
I ‘m going to tell you
the only time I’ve told him not to
client
my second child has just been born and this
man his ex-wife accused him of having
sexually abused his four children
I have to confess that the fact
disgusted but the reason for not assuming his
defense was not because I thought that this
man had no right to her but
because he considered that in my
circumstances was not the person
adequate to defend you
and so I told him, I ‘m not going to do it like
you deserve
he did not understand
but it is that our work requires everything
our commitment and all our conviction
because although it seems simpler
many times it is more complicated than
judge and defend
in any case the lawyers do not
we have to worry about justice
of the fact but of the legality of
process that has a fair trial
and if everything goes well
and that has killed
will be condemned and the one who has not done it
will be acquitted
in this case our work becomes
in something much more determined in this
sense the lawyers we are technicians
we are tools
and who is to judge is the judge but a
judge does not have superpowers is not a
superheroine like that of the talk
previous one needs help because in the end
it is not more than you nor that I a judge is not
more than a person who has studied
and he can not read neither the mind and the
heart
and that help to make a decision
just receives it from the process with all
the guarantees
imagine
that someone kidnaps a member of
our family
it encloses it between four walls pulls the
key
and does not let him go out for years
terrible truth
sure it would be hard for us to understand and
forgive the kidnapper
Well that ‘s what happens
when the state
in sierra to the people who commit
offenses
what gives legitimacy to the performance of the
state
it is precisely that it applies a punishment
legally established
the fruit of a fair trial
and a trial will be fair when there is a
series of conditions
Right to know what you were accused of
right to plead innocent right to
a lawyer and the right to be shown
your guilt is to say that you try
that you have done it and not the other way around is a
process that guarantees as much as possible that
no innocent is going to be condemned
although that supposes that once a
guilty leave free
that honors our system even so I
I consider it a system
excessively repressive often the
prison ends up being the only answer and
the national statistical institute
says that in Spain
the penalties are the toughest in Europe
when the crime rates are of
the lowest ones you did not have that image
I had a client
that was drugged
and that he stole to buy his doses
He entered prison several times
and as there was still consuming as
when he left, he would steal again
we decided to
that measures will be taken and a
when a judge sentenced him but
not prison but condemned a
detoxification treatment
from that day though it was hard and there was
relapses
It stopped consuming when stopped
consume also stopped stealing
because defending is not always defending
the innocence that the offender leaves
free
Sometimes the penalty is applied
fair
and also that they come into play
alternatives to prison such as
works for the benefit of the community or
the therapies
our constitution says
that the penalty of deprivation of liberty must
serve to reinsert
but experience tells us about
failure of the prison and is that who
can be so naive to think
that you can learn to live in
freedom
precisely deprived of freedom
marianne moore told us
what is our innocence what is
our guilt no one is safe and it is
that when a person scam
cheat kills
but also fails fails the state and
society because he has not been able to
foresee and avoid that crime
Arendal conception told us to open
schools and they will close prisons
always better to avoid than punish
and there you all have a role
began my intervention by saying
I defend guilty
is not quite as well as lawyer should I
play with the words
I do not defend guilty I do not defend either
innocent
saying people thank you very much
[Applause]
ah
I do not know yet difficult to understand
I consider it something not only legitimate
but also necessary and today I ‘m going to
try to explain
the main reason is that the culprits
they are innocent as the innocent
as long as there is no firm ruling that
condemn them
presumption of innocence we followed
so many times but it does not sound like
formality we did not believe it
how will he be innocent if I have seen him
on the TV that the police just
handcuffed from his house
we move by prejudice if gypsy
if it is Arabic
if political junkie if it
sure they will have done it
the big bad wolf will always be bad if
we only hear Little Red Riding Hood
there are some that from the beginning
we have very clear that they are guilty but
That’s not the case , we do not even know it.
lawyers
I can count on the fingers of one hand
the people that have come into my
I’m in the office and they told me
guilty
they tell you their truth because there is no
a truth with capital letters
and the lawyers are the ones that we have to
tell them I do not doubt your words but the
judge has to understand why your footprint
I was in the safe
there are no criminals there are
people who commit crimes and the
border between guilt and innocence
it’s much more diffuse than we think
initially
you are not always guilty of everything that
accuse you neither of the way in which
they accuse you and also come into play
extenuating circumstances
that reduce the responsibility of the
person
It is not the same to hit a person in
the street because yes because I feel like it
to do it because he suffers a disorder
mental the damage is the same and therefore
reparation to the victim will have to
be identical
but the punishment should not be the same
the lawyers we do not have to do a
morality trial does not touch us nor
judge or condemn
nor justify our task is another
I ‘m going to tell you
the only time I’ve told him not to
client
my second child has just been born and this
man his ex-wife accused him of having
sexually abused his four children
I have to confess that the fact
disgusted but the reason for not assuming his
defense was not because I thought that this
man had no right to her but
because he considered that in my
circumstances was not the person
adequate to defend you
and so I told him, I ‘m not going to do it like
you deserve
he did not understand
but it is that our work requires everything
our commitment and all our conviction
because although it seems simpler
many times it is more complicated than
judge and defend
in any case the lawyers do not
we have to worry about justice
of the fact but of the legality of
process that has a fair trial
and if everything goes well
and that has killed
will be condemned and the one who has not done it
will be acquitted
in this case our work becomes
in something much more determined in this
sense the lawyers we are technicians
we are tools
and who is to judge is the judge but a
judge does not have superpowers is not a
superheroine like that of the talk
previous one needs help because in the end
it is not more than you nor that I a judge is not
more than a person who has studied
and he can not read neither the mind and the
heart
and that help to make a decision
just receives it from the process with all
the guarantees
imagine
that someone kidnaps a member of
our family
it encloses it between four walls pulls the
key
and does not let him go out for years
terrible truth
sure it would be hard for us to understand and
forgive the kidnapper
Well that ‘s what happens
when the state
in sierra to the people who commit
offenses
what gives legitimacy to the performance of the
state
it is precisely that it applies a punishment
legally established
the fruit of a fair trial
and a trial will be fair when there is a
series of conditions
Right to know what you were accused of
right to plead innocent right to
a lawyer and the right to be shown
your guilt is to say that you try
that you have done it and not the other way around is a
process that guarantees as much as possible that
no innocent is going to be condemned
although that supposes that once a
guilty leave free
that honors our system even so I
I consider it a system
excessively repressive often the
prison ends up being the only answer and
the national statistical institute
says that in Spain
the penalties are the toughest in Europe
when the crime rates are of
the lowest ones you did not have that image
I had a client
that was drugged
and that he stole to buy his doses
He entered prison several times
and as there was still consuming as
when he left, he would steal again
we decided to
that measures will be taken and a
when a judge sentenced him but
not prison but condemned a
detoxification treatment
from that day though it was hard and there was
relapses
It stopped consuming when stopped
consume also stopped stealing
because defending is not always defending
the innocence that the offender leaves
free
Sometimes the penalty is applied
fair
and also that they come into play
alternatives to prison such as
works for the benefit of the community or
the therapies
our constitution says
that the penalty of deprivation of liberty must
serve to reinsert
but experience tells us about
failure of the prison and is that who
can be so naive to think
that you can learn to live in
freedom
precisely deprived of freedom
marianne moore told us
what is our innocence what is
our guilt no one is safe and it is
that when a person scam
cheat kills
but also fails fails the state and
society because he has not been able to
foresee and avoid that crime
Arendal conception told us to open
schools and they will close prisons
always better to avoid than punish
and there you all have a role
began my intervention by saying
I defend guilty
is not quite as well as lawyer should I
play with the words
I do not defend guilty I do not defend either
innocent
saying people thank you very much
[Applause]
ah
Please follow and like us: