Defense Lawyers

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct89% picked this

   should sincerely believe that the client may

   Why this is right

   This is what we anticipated, based on the available author text about "claiming innocence". She gave this rule, in the middle of the 2nd paragraph. If convinced that → then don't argue that defendant is guilty client is innocent By contrapositive, A "defense attorney who argues in court that their client is innocent" should not be convinced the defendant is guilty. If you're not convinced the defendant is guilty, they you sincerely believe it's possible that the client may be innocent. This answer also echoes language at the end of the 2nd paragraph.

   Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   89%
2. B

   Contradicted5% picked this

   would be right to do so even if the attorney knows that the client

   This contradicts the rule the author provided in the middle of the 2nd paragraph: Lawyers who are convinced that their clients are guilty should not undertake to demonstrate their innocence .... when lawyers know with certainty that a defendant is guilty, it is their duty not to deny this.

   5%
3. C

   Contradicted3% picked this

   is assuming that role of mouthpiece for

   The final sentence of the passage is saying, Lawyers should not be mere mouthpieces for a defendant but instead advocates for the rights of the defendant given the facts of the case. In other words, if you were representing a client who was clearly guilty but wanted to plea not guilty, you would assume the role of the client's mouthpiece by saying, "Your Honor, my client is innocent! (not guilty)" But the author is saying you shouldn't declare innocence when you know the client is guilty. Your job is not to merely be their mouthpiece but to advocate for their best interests given the facts of the case (i.e. you need to talk them into pleading guilty so that they get a less severe punishment, because it works against their interests to plead not guilty, lose the case, and suffer the larger punishment).

   3%
4. D

   Too Strong2% picked this

   has favored the obligation to the client over that

   If we asked the author, "is a lawyer who claims their client is innocent favoring their obligation to the client over that to society?", the author would say, "That depends --- does the lawyer believe the client is guilty?" If the lawyer thinks the client is innocent, then the lawyer should be claiming that the client is innocent, so the author definitely wouldn't say in such cases that the lawyer is favoring client > society. That's enough reason to get rid of this answer, since it's saying that "in all cases when a lawyer claims her client is innocent, they are favoring the obligation to the client", which is definitely a massive overstatement. (Technically, though, when the lawyer thinks the client is guilty, the author says that being honest about that and being an advocate for the rights of the defendant given the incriminating facts of the case will ultimately benefit the defendant. So really in neither case would saying a client is innocent be favoring the obligation to the client.)

   2%
5. E

   Too Strong0% picked this

   has typically not researched the facts of the

   Too Strong: typically Out of Scope: not researched According to this answer, the author believes that more than 50% of the time that a lawyer claims their client is innocent, the lawyer hasn't researched the facts thoroughly. That's a strong idea! We don't have any support for the author believing such an unflattering generalization about lawyers who claim their clients are innocent.

   0%