So that when he's found guilty, there won't be any appeal based on incompetent lawyering. Then I want him to go to prison for a very long time.

She believes deeply in the right of anyone to competent counsel, even while knowing that many of the people she defends committed the crimes they're being tried for. It's stressful, and she said she sometimes had to explain to her little niece why she took these cases. She certainly left me with an appreciation for the work public defenders do - and of course, many people who need a public defender aren't guilty at all. I don't think she's necessarily trying to get the defendants sent back out into the streets, she's just ensuring that the trials are conducted in a fair manner.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Clarke

...I understand how people might wonder why I chose to defend people arrested for crimes, even the ones who do not claim innocence. When I am defending a client, I do not necessarily need to "like" that client (though it helps). Rather, I appreciate all the protections enshrined in the Constitution. That is where I draw my energy from in situations where I am defending an abominable and vile client.

they are still entitled to a fair trial. That's how it's supposed to work.

After a multitude of failed 'defenses', could a defendant have a reasonable claim of incompetence about their lawyer?

Competent defense counsel are essential if we are to have any confidence in the criminal justice system.

John Adams is a hero among American lawyers for his defense of the British soldiers' in their trial following the Boston Massacre. He was convinced to take on the defense by Samuel Adams, who (at least in part) instigated the protest that lead up to the events.