Reading Comprehension

PT116 · S4 · P1 · Q4 Defense Lawyers

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Is it necessary for defense lawyers to believe that the clients they defend are innocent of the charges against them?

Topic

Do defense lawyers need to believe their clients are innocent? What ethical limits or responsibilities should guide their defense?

Framework

Challenge Position

Main Point

The passage challenges the view that defense lawyers should provide the best possible defense regardless of their client’s guilt, arguing instead that lawyers have a dual obligation: they should not present falsehoods to the court or defend clients they know to be guilty as if they were innocent. Instead, lawyers should strive for honest advocacy based on the facts and present extenuating circumstances where appropriate. (The key pivot and main point appears at the start of P2: )

P1: Standard View – Lawyers as Pure Advocates

Some legal scholars argue that a lawyer's only job is to offer the best possible defense, regardless of their personal belief about the client's guilt. According to this view, it's the court's job to determine guilt or innocence, and the lawyer’s role is to advocate for their client using any available facts and legal arguments, not to act on their own opinions.

P2: Author’s Critique – Lawyers Owe Courts (and Society) Honesty

The author pushes back, saying that this approach ignores another big responsibility lawyers have: serving the court and society, not just their clients. Lawyers shouldn’t make arguments they know are false, nor should they work to prove a known-guilty client is innocent. Instead, if a lawyer knows their client is guilty, they should focus on presenting extenuating circumstances and arguing for fair sentencing, not false acquittal. If the lawyer isn’t sure about guilt, but sincerely believes in the client’s innocence, they can argue innocence.

P3: How Honest Advocacy Ultimately Benefits All

Lawyers who fulfill their duties to court and society—by taking cases they truly believe in and advocating honestly—end up serving their clients best. The passage emphasizes that lawyers aren't supposed to accept every single case and simply parrot what a client wants, but should provide real advocacy based on the actual merits of the case.

According to the passage, the legal scholars mentioned in the last sentence of the first paragraph believe that it is a defense lawyer's role to be

a source of legal information
Unsupported: source of information
Our eligible support ideas are 1. provide best defense possible 2. don't judge defendants 3. say what you think the client would say if they possessed your legal training and expertise None of these relate to the lawyer being a source of information.
3% picked this
a thorough investigator of all
Too Strong: thorough / all
Our eligible support ideas are 1. provide best defense possible 2. don't judge defendants 3. say what you think the client would say if they possessed your legal training and expertise None of these relate to the lawyer being a thorough investigator of all relevant evidence. We're not expecting the lawyers to go crawling around the suspect's apartment trying to find fingerprints.
1% picked this
Correct
a diligent representative of the
Why this is right
Our eligible support ideas are 1. provide best defense possible 2. don't judge defendants 3. say what you think the client would say if they possessed your legal training and expertise The one that the text explicitly identified as the lawyer's role was the 3rd one, but this answer choice blends 1 and 3 together. To act as an advocate, saying only what defendants would say, is like being a "representative of the client's position". To provide the best defense you are capable of is to work "diligently".
Skill tested: Locate Detail · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
86% picked this
a facilitator and expediter of
Out of Scope: facilitate justice
Our eligible support ideas are 1. provide best defense possible 2. don't judge defendants 3. say what you think the client would say if they possessed your legal training and expertise None of these relate to the lawyer facilitating justice. If a client is guilty, then justice would be that client being convicted. But these scholars don't think the role of a defense lawyer is to get a guilty client convicted.
1% picked this
an energetic advocate of the
Out of Scope: right to representation
The scholars think that a defense attorney's role is to be an energetic advocate of the client's position. If the client's position is, "I did not break the terms of that contract", then the defense attorney should be an energetic advocate of the idea that her client did not break the terms of that contract! This answer is saying that the attorney should be an energetic advocate of the idea that her client has a right to legal representation! That's silly. If you're this client's defense attorney, then your client has legal representation. Why would you need to energetically advocate for something the client already has?
10% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free