An attorney involved in a local legal issue whom we will not name because, well, we don't like doing that and also as we fear attorneys (you simply never know what one of them will come up with if tread upon) has pronounced that his client is innocent, and what's more, she did nothing wrong. "My client is innocent, and she did nothing wrong." So he says.
Wasn't there a time when we assumed that innocent meant 'did nothing wrong'? Yet lawyers wonder why they are frowned upon. Well, it would seem that, after a K-12 education, 4 years of college and three years of law school, as well as having to pass the bar exam, any given attorney might recognize redundancy, at least as well as an a Blogger columnist might recognize alliteration. Still, no. His client is innocent and, what's more, she did nothing wrong.
Perhaps it is we who do not understand. Perhaps there is a legal distinction between being innocent as well as having done nothing wrong. To be sure, we can imagine it in a certain vague manner, as in the difference between a legal issue and personal stupidity on something unrelated. Yet even that insinuates two separate questions, doesn't it? Especially as most cases of personal stupidity aren't illegal.
We can hope that this is but one attorney as is not reflective of the entire legal profession. It likely as not is, too. Still, we see far too many people across all professional professional fields afflicted with a lack of basic skills of expression that we cannot help but wonder. Sometimes the smallest things rather than the large show us the true colors among individuals, and even within career fields.
We hope that we're innocent of presumption here, but if guilty, are quite sure an attorney will point it out to us.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment