the SS officers and soldiers who tortured and killed thousands during the war were just doing their job, are you saying that after the war all repercussions are off?
and you have to remember Harley relishes in his victories when he gets a scumbag off the hook, for him its getting one over on the system.
Go read his posts.
The argument of "just doing their job" is only applicable within certain parameters. There is a huge difference between a soldier fighting in the trenches, and a doctor Mengele conducting human trails. Personal accountability comes in when individuals go beyond 'reasonable' activities associated with their job. Hence why individuals who were deemed to have peformed despicable acts were prosecuted in subsequent Nuremberg trials.
A soldier in the trenches taking shots at the 'enemy' is vastly different from a camp security guard pooring Zyklone-B into the gaschambers.Despite what role the SS may have played, individuals still have the right to a fair trail. And as such also have the right to an atterney.
Now you might think; who the hell would defend a Nazi, much less an SS officer?. Well, how else will you get to the truth? How else will you ensure the proper functioning of the judicial system? How else will you prove that in the bigger picture, you were indeed right to intervene and take action against the Nazi regime?
Ensuring a fair trail, making sure the proper proceedings are followed, to reach the right verdict. Has many, many implications. It ensures innocent people are not victimized by the judicial system, it in turn provides legitimacy to the judicial system, legitimacy to democracy, the proper functioning of the state and not least providing closure to those affected.
Not discounting scumbags do indeed sometimes get off. Which is regrettable. But this is an intrinsic part of a flawed system. Which becomes a little less flawed everytime a case reaches the 'right' verdict, and procedures and individuals working within the system become more efficient.
He does tend to represent quite a few pieces of shit though doesnt he?
The trial of the guy accused of raping the 5 year old for example.
Seems he felt that guy was deserving of his services.
Maybe he needs to have an affinity with the people he represents, not sure how else hes going to base his choices.
There are good apples, bad apples, and questionable apples. Only by investigating, analyzing and assessing will you know which is which.
But for that you will need a system to ensure that;
- that good apples are labeled as good apples
- bad apples are labeled as bad
- and the questionable apples are sorted in the applicable boxes.
You need people on both side of the fence, to make sure that each player does their job. This is basic checks-and-balances.
Whether Harley has ensured proper proceedings for "quite a few pieces of shit", I honestly wouldn't know, as I did not have a look at his case history, nor do I care for it. However, it is clear your opinion about individuals is shaped prior, without having full-disclosure.
The trails are a process to find the truth, to both protect the innocent, while handing out appropriate punishment to the guilty. Yes, sometimes the system fails, which may be especially hard to swallow for some. But a criminal is only a criminal for the law if found guilty and convicted. That's how it is. And so long as people are finding loopholes, and bad protocols, there is a chance to improve the system.
