The Impossible Defence

translation services usa

DSC_0764How on earth would anyone defend Anders Breivik, the Norwegian serial killer?

It is good and just that he is allowed a defender (actually, he’s got four), and it is good that he is allowed to speak out in his own defence, however disturbing his testimony might be.

However, if you were his lawyer, how on earth would you argue in your plaidoyer?

I don’t think insanity, or being influenced and misguided in some way, can explain or excuse the fact that he carefully planned and executed the killing of 77 people, with his only regrets being now that he didn’t kill more.

I suppose your task as a defender is to ensure that he gets a fair trial, to make sure that he’s been given the benefit of the doubt where applicable, to make sure judges and jury see the case from all sides, and that he is not given a sentence harsher than appropriate.

The mind boggles.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

One thought on “The Impossible Defence

  1. That’s completely right. The lawyer is “only“ needed form the fairness of the trial otherwise we would not be any better.

Comments are closed.