The Defence

Defense lawyers are appointed by the state to defend any accused to establish a reasonable level of doubt that the defendant did not commit the crime. This is not because the defendant who may be a criminal should be protected, but it is to ensure that the prosecution is able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the authenticity of the crime and the accused persons role in it.To ensure the burden of proving the crime is paramount as much as it is a burden of the state to protect all accused unbiasedly until proven beyond doubt that the person s absolutely guilty of the crime. The defense attorney has the complete burden of the state to defend an accused,  however genuinely he or she may have committed the crime to prove and ensure the prosecution has all the facts to convict a person beyond all reasonable doubt.

This may make a defense lawyer nervous day in and day out as this is a battle to bring one to the book of the constitution and get him/her to agree. The legalese is great for a story, but in real life the dichotomy of the attorneys profession ensuring 'not guilty until proven' but his own system of justification might be swift judgement of the crime and immediate punishment! Life of a defence lawyer is quite extra ordinary..!  Some times immoral. Some times the law will have to break its own boundaries...sometimes....

I wouldn't be surprised if one day a defense lawyer who efficiently defends a criminal by day in the court of law and even wins his cases might be conflicted in reality through his own knowledge that he defended a criminal and won and hence need to pass the real judgement to get things even as per his moral compass. Successful defense lawyer by day, vengeful killer by night, interesting backdrop for a thriller...well, will keep it for another day!

The Dichotomy of Opposites...Virodhaabhasam!

Can a person do something very intensely even if totally disinterested it and do it very well. I think humans are capable of that even if there is no incentive to do that. It is the human ability for excellence while being dispassionate or disassociated...Example ..did man's scaling of the everest do anything for mankind? nothing..but man did it and is even respected for it. Man is capable of such things..aplenty. And even vice versa. Superior intelligence or great action doesn't guarantee great outcomes .. at best it indulges in inertia , and do nothing or just enough to get by but revel in the clear awareness that doing and accomplishing isn't everything and the gain from accomplishment of meagre things based on the selfs world views is not necessary and is for lower beings. But, take this example..if a drowning man knows how to swim but doesn't, he will die...many times intelligence is self-defeating unless used ...so why do humans indulge in it like the proverbial ostrich...well we are mere humans aren't we!   This is the conflict...to be intelligent but not indulge in it because no one deserves to be at receiving end of it it or is it pain freaking laziness or stupidity, in which case it isn't intelligence!what else!Amen!