On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:52:13 -0500 Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
writes:
> loupaulsen at attbi.com wrote:
>
> >And yet you would agree, I hope, that the issue in the case may
> transcend your
> >personal evaluation of the client? A lot of constitutional law has
> involved
> >unsavory defendants and plaintiffs, no? In the cases of Milosevic
> and of
> >Ntakirutimana, you have issues of due process and of the legitimacy
> of the
> >court itself.
>
> Yes, but a politically motivated lawyer should choose his cases
> because they signal something about his judgment and principles. And
>
> this choice says that Clark is a reckless slut.
>
> How would you have felt if Clark had volunteered to defend Pinochet?
>
> Similar principles would be at stake - the validity of the
> international jurisdiction, etc. Regardless, it would stink to high
> heaven. This stinks more and higher.
OK Doug, explain what would be wrong with Clark choosing to defend Pinochet, if he so decided? In fact, I know of a number of people, who were by no means sympathetic towards Pinochet, who found the circumstances of his arrest in the UK to be very troubling. After all, presumably, somebody like Fidel Castro could be arrested on grounds similar to the ones that were invoked against Pinochet.
Jim F.
>
> Doug
>
________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com