Guilty, Beyond Reasonable Doubt: A Close Examination of a Lawyer’s Dilemma in Defending a Perceived Offender

Abstract

This study focused on answering the following questions: Do lawyers experience moral dilemma in cases, wherein the offender is perceived guilty by moral standards of the society? What are the factors that contribute to the acceptance of these cases? How do they feel before, during, and after such cases? How do defense lawyers cope with the emotional and the psychological drawbacks of defending such cases? This study made use of the mixed methods design. Because of a small sampling frame, a major part of the study was qualitative, phenomenological in nature. The 31 study participants who were selected through purposive sampling, were lawyers with knowledge and experience in defending clients who were perceived guilty by moral standards of society. To gain a wider perspective about the phenomenon, non-lawyers such as academic professionals from the fields of philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and sociology were also interviewed. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and context and thematic analysis. The results showed that the respondent-lawyers were subjected to moral dilemma every time they experienced conflicts between their personal set of morals and supposed legal ethics. These set of morals stemmed from their personal experiences while growing up, cultural norms and expectations, and other factors found in the home, school and social environment. Before accepting such cases, lawyers usually felt some hesitations, feelings of competitiveness, and worry and nervousness, although others reported excitement and feelings of being challenged about handling the case. As the case is being processed, the lawyers felt protective about their client, while the usual extreme emotions of gratefulness or disappointment were felt after a case is won or lost, respectively. The factors that contributed to the acceptance of the case varied, but the consistent primordial factors were fulfilment of duty and attorney-client relationship. Monetary compensation was less cited although was more common among younger, beginning lawyers. Coping mechanisms were used more often and the study recommends professional debriefing for lawyers in need.