Evaluate the view on the choices by the prosecutor and defense attorney might affect the search for justice in the future.

Evaluate the view on the choices by the prosecutor and defense attorney might affect the search for justice in the future. For example, if the defense attorney's actions are acceptable, what could that mean in cases next year?

The circumstances undergoing a criminal court proceeding is extremely varied and circumstantial tender to the different situations. In response to the first question, I cannot imagine that it would be appropriate for a prosecutor to destroy any evidence at all. It's beyond the thought of withholding information if the prosecutor intentionally destroys evidence that proves guilt. Also it goes without saying that is an illegal action.Secondly, my thoughts on a defense attorney letting their client be found guilty is an inappropriate action. Starting from a legal perspective, a defense attorney should understand his/her job and what is required of it. If something such as a plea bargain is taken, then that attorney's function would be to support and coordinate and ensure their client understands what bargain they are taking and make sure it is agreed upon in their clients best interest. If this question is referring that the attorney purposely allows them to be found guilty and doesn't DEFEND their client, then what is the point of their job? Morally, yes the defense attorney may be concerned of the public's opinion on their stance, such as defending a notorious criminal. However, the whole purpose of a proceeding/trial is to find justice and our policy that we have read in the textbook is that we have adopted the "innocent until proven guilty" if the defense attorney have proper education and experience then he or she will understand their job and regardless on their personal opinion, must defend their client whether they are assigned by the court or not. In a journal article I read by David Rosenthal, he outlined a scenario that you, as a defense attorney, are tasked with defending a subject who admits to you that he is guilty of a murder, and that the innocent party has been convicted of the crime. This scenario is a harsh situation to deal with. If you as a defense attorney are getting paid, then it is your job to serve your client. However, in a situation as extreme as this, I would say it is morally right to speak outside of your clients interest. In response to this situation, Rosenthal stated," Regardless of the ultimate decision, any decision will undoubtedly result from an intense internal debate as the attorney struggles to develop a justifiable hierarchy of the duties owed to the client, to society, and the attorney's own sense of morality." (Rosenthal,1993)

Reference:

Rosenthal, D. (1993). The criminal defense attorney, ethics and maintaining client confidentiality: proposal to amend rule 1.6 of the model rules of professional conduct. St. Thomas Law Review 6(1), 153-172.