Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Cusefan95, post: 71702, member: 173"]
Adams was a Patriot that believed in the right to a fair trial strongly, and was willing to defend British soldiers in spite of the high probability it would damage his career.  Plenty of Patriots were outraged at the time that Adams was defending the British soldiers, but he did it because he believed it was the right thing.  We have far too few politicians and people in general today that are willing to withstand public outrage to do what is right, but that's getting outside the scope of this discussion about the defense of Joe Sandusky.

Let's presume Sandusky doesn't have enough money to pay a private defense attorney.  He would have to use a public defender.  I'm arguing that the use of a public defender in a high profile case will not result in a fair trial, and therefore a private lawyer would be required for a fair trial to proceed.  Therefore someone choosing to support Sandusky's legal effort is, in fact, supporting the right to a fair trial - which as a commenter above noted is one of the most important thing in a democracy. So in a way by getting so outraged about someone contributing to Sandusky's defense, you're fighting against democracy...

OK, that's reaching pretty far - but my bottom line is I still am not even a little bit bothered by someone contributing to Sandusky's defense, there's just far too many other things in the world to get outraged over.  If the facts bear out what we believe (and based on the grand jury I'm feeling pretty confident they will), Sandusky is going to be found guilty.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?