- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Thu Jul 21, 2016 11:26 am
#27484
Passage Discussion
VIEWSTAMP Analysis:
Two Viewpoints are represented in this passage: that of “some legal scholars,” beginning on line 3, and that of the author, beginning on line 20.
The Structure of this passage is as follows:
This passage is nicely structured, starting with the presentation of a question, followed by discussion of two different responses to that question.
The Arguments presented are those of “some legal scholars” who believe that the lawyer is only there to provide the best defense without judgment, and of the author, who believes that the lawyer’s larger obligation to society dictates that the lawyer should believe in the merits to accept a case, and never knowingly present false evidence.
The Main Point here is to present the author’s answer to the question in the opening lines. The author believes that the lawyer’s obligation is not simply to the client (to provide the best defense possible), but also to the court and to society, meaning that lawyers should not undertake to prove the innocence of clients whom they believe to be guilty.
VIEWSTAMP Analysis:
Two Viewpoints are represented in this passage: that of “some legal scholars,” beginning on line 3, and that of the author, beginning on line 20.
The Structure of this passage is as follows:
This passage is nicely structured, starting with the presentation of a question, followed by discussion of two different responses to that question.
- Paragraph One: In the introductory paragraph the author present the question of whether lawyers should defend only clients whom they believe to be innocent. The first perspective presented is that of “some legal scholars,” who argue that the only responsibility of the lawyer is to provide the best possible defense for his or her client, acting as an advocate without judgment.
Paragraph Two: Here, the author’s perspective is presented: that the lawyer has an obligation not only to the client, but to the court and society in general. For this reason, the author asserts, the lawyer should not present evidence which he or she knows to be false, and should not attempt to prove the innocence of clients believed by the lawyer to be guilty.
Paragraph Three: The closing paragraph continues from the author’s perspective, with the assertion that the best defense can only be provided by one convinced of the merits of the case. Thus, lawyers should not necessarily take every case offered to them, and should act as advocates for the defendants rights, given the specific facts of the case.
The Arguments presented are those of “some legal scholars” who believe that the lawyer is only there to provide the best defense without judgment, and of the author, who believes that the lawyer’s larger obligation to society dictates that the lawyer should believe in the merits to accept a case, and never knowingly present false evidence.
The Main Point here is to present the author’s answer to the question in the opening lines. The author believes that the lawyer’s obligation is not simply to the client (to provide the best defense possible), but also to the court and to society, meaning that lawyers should not undertake to prove the innocence of clients whom they believe to be guilty.