Lizzie Borden Society Forum

A short chapter on Lizzie's trial, and a plethora of others from Colonial times to the present. Good read.

kash

OK.
Is that a Library book?
I think we have the chapter but not the book.
Any more info?

It's available at any bookstore, Kat. Dershowitz published it in 2004, now available in paperback.


k

The obvious question is: was that story correct or misleading or wrong?

Sorry, but I don't care for The Dersh. He's defended too many people who were probably guilty and I highly question his ethics.

I can't figure out if we have it or not and that is making me crazy!

I agree Augusta, I don't care for some of his clients. However, they are allowed their defense and the fact that a Dershowitz can and does defend clients of dubious character (albeit the rich and high-profile) makes ours a better working system, although far from perfect. If I were ever in a situation where all circumstantial evidence pointed to my guilt, I would want the Dersh in my corner.
However the book itself is a great read.

kash

augusta @ Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:42 pm wrote:Sorry, but I don't care for The Dersh. He's defended too many people who were probably guilty and I highly question his ethics.

Bad thinking. To quote "Perry Mason" - I defend the accused, the jury alone decides who is guilty.
WHO are you to decide ahead of the trial and verdict who is guilty?

(Not that we all haven't done this at one time or another; but then we are just regurgitating the force-fed corporate media's solution.)

PS You are also assuming that the rich and powerful are squeaky clean!

I agree, Kash. Of course he's a brilliant attorney and every one is entitled to a fair defense. I'd say you'd be wise to have him in your corner.

RayS: Did you see the word "probably" in my post? I said "probably" - not "were definitely guilty".

This is the first time I've felt insulted on this Forum. "Bad thinking"???

I only said I don't 'care for' Dershowitz. That's my opinion. I've seen him in action and I don't care for him.

And I am "assuming that the rich and powerful are squeaky clean"??? YOU are assuming that I am assuming.

augusta @ Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:17 pm wrote:I agree, Kash. Of course he's a brilliant attorney and every one is entitled to a fair defense. I'd say you'd be wise to have him in your corner.

RayS: Did you see the word "probably" in my post? I said "probably" - not "were definitely guilty".
This is the first time I've felt insulted on this Forum. "Bad thinking"???
I only said I don't 'care for' Dershowitz. That's my opinion. I've seen him in action and I don't care for him.

And I am "assuming that the rich and powerful are squeaky clean"??? YOU are assuming that I am assuming.

"Probably" is a weasel-word; you must think they are guilty or you wouldn't have said that. IMO "Don't care" is another weasel-word that implies hatred, IMO.
"Bad thinking" is a description of anyone whose personal prejudice leads them to question common sense and Common Law.
I apologize if my probing questions made you feel insulted. I will apologize if you explain how strictly following the Ten Commandments etc. will make you very wealthy. I thought or assumed that breaking them made you wealthy. I won't list them, since they vary according to your Bible.
PS Do you believe that it is sinful to commit usury? Doesn't the Bibile forbid it?

Some years ago I saw a TV movie about the Claus Von Bulow case. It had a Harvard professor who represented Alan Dershowitz (now on the Massachusetts University Board of Trustees?).
Did you care for him then? If so, when did you not care for him?

RayS: STOP IT. STOP IT NOW.