Affirmativ Case November December Essay

Submitted By Einsteinium3472
Words: 887
Pages: 4

I affirm the resolution that in the United States criminal justice system, truth seeking ought to take precedence over attorney client privilege. My value for the round is justice and the winner of the round will be the one who can supply the best form of justice to the American people. Thus, my value criterion for the round is supplying the best form of justice to the American people.
To offer clarification in today’s debate I offer the following definitions:
The criminal justice system, as defined by the National Center for the Victims of Crime is “the set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. There is no single criminal justice system in the United States but rather many similar, individual systems. How the criminal justice system works in each area depends on the jurisdiction that is in charge: city, county, state, federal or tribal government or military installation. Different jurisdictions have different laws, agencies, and ways of managing criminal justice processes.”
Justice, as defined by Merriam Webster, is “the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments”
Attorney-Client privilege, as defined by Cornell University Law School, is “A legal privilege that works to keep communications between an attorney and his or her client secret. The privilege is asserted in the face of a legal demand for the communications, such as a discovery request or a demand that the lawyer testify under oath. Contrast with attorney's duty of confidentiality.”

Contention 1:
The attorney client privilege prohibits seeking the truth. Allowing the privilege of confidentiality in an attorney-client relationship gives a place for the truth to be let out. (find card on how evidence given in attorney client privilege sessions are valuable) We allow attorney-client privilege because without it the client would feel pressured into falsifying their information, or even creating an absolute fabrication. This makes in harder to get sound legal evidence if we can not tell in the client is speaking the absolute truth, but attorney-client privilege is confidential. This means that extremely important information is kept from the jurors. In an episode of 60 Minutes….(insert article) Attorney creates obstacles to ascertaining the truth. (exclude evidence, exclude justice article) Attorney client privilege is inconsistent with obtaining the truth, which is , after all, the point of a court system. Thane Rosenbaum, Law Professor at Fordham University writes
(cite)
With this essentially immoral, albeit perfectly legal arrangement, we have surrounded ourselves with lies, and locked ourselves up within a system that perpetuates further lies. Our jails are filled with people who are incarcerated for all the wrong reasons, a miasmic haze of generalized guilt-- unspecified and totally disconnected from the actual events themselves. They sit in jail, and the story of what happened sits with them. And no one seems to care, as long as jails have low vacancy rates. We have bargained away the sanctity of truth for the certainty of a jail sentence. Indeed, the official courthouse records of criminal dispositions are distorted, because they reflect false punishments. A rape is reduced to an assault. Something that is felonious suddenly, magically, becomes merely mischievous. A first-degree offense is lessened to a crime with a lower degree of culpability, stripped down to something less ominous--and less…