ON DEFENDING AN ACCUSED [Are lawyers liars?]

I have been asked for several times, “Aren’t lawyers liars? They defend an accused in court even when they know that the accused committed the crime.” Well, defending an accused is not tantamount to lying. It is a right safeguarded no less than by the fundamental law of the land.  The accuser, the State or the People, has all the resources at its disposal to establish the guilt of the accused. The accused has only his/her lawyer to defend him/her.

I do not say that all the clients whom I represent are innocent. What I say is that his/her innocence is presumed.  No matter what the accused has done, he/she is not legally guilty until a prosecutor offers enough evidence to persuade a judge to render a judgment of conviction. By our legal standard, proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt is required in criminal cases. It means moral certitude.

Not only that. Yes, the accused might have committed the act/s as charged, but it does not end there. We need to make sure that a judgment is in accord with all the attending circumstances and that the appropriate penalty is imposed. What if there is a justifying circumstance, such as self-defense? How about exempting or mitigating circumstances or other circumstances that would affect the criminal liability? Even an incomplete self-defense can lower the penalty by a degree and that matters a lot. It can downgrade a crime from murder to homicide and lower its penalty as what has happened in the recently decided case that I handled. Because of that, my client is now free. A successful defense does not always mean acquittal.

Lawyers are duty-bound to defend their client, regardless of their opinion on their guilt or innocence. Section 20 (i), Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court states that “(i)n defense of a person accused of a crime, by all fair and honorable means, regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to present every defense that the law permits, to the end that no person may be deprived of life or liberty, but by due process of law.” A similar mandate is found under the Code of Professional Responsibility.