I think a lot of what is going on is being caused by the confusion or refusal to acknowledge that there is a great gap that lies between the SPIRIT of the law and the LETTER of the law; both of which involve lawyers that have bought into the idea that egos and credentials have replaced a sincere practice of the law by a lack of truly moral application of the letter of the law. Guilt or innocence is not the question that many lawyers use to guide their practice. They seem to think that they must be amoral to survive the challenges the practice of law presents to them at every turn. I'm sure many lawyers actually search for truth and justice and what the rewards for practicing the must and should. I think the burden would be impossible for me to bear. I have a profound dislike for the phrase that comes up so often that says, 'The system works and it is the best we can do. The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth is something that is demanded by the court and serves as a means by which a person can hope that justice serves us all if we tell the truth. I have been advised by a lawyer to just keep my mouth shut and ask for the best deal I could. The end result was astonishingly the only way to save me leaving me to wonder why a lawyer would offer this advice to a client involved in a case that had nothing by way of evidence, witnesses and corroborating testimony for the prosecutors witnesses. I fired my lawyer and stood before the court and admitted my guilt and got a much better deal that anyone could have ever offered me. Six months later I was free. Go figure!