"Are lawyers entirely corrupt?
Reading a lawyer’s brief demanding that a case be dismissed reveals the same integrity as Jane Fonda’s orgasm in “Klute”. Too often the lawyer cherry-picks alleged facts out of context and puts them together out of order to create a prejudice that looks plausible if one didn’t know any better. Regardless of the facts, the lawyer routinely and automatically denies evidence and argument presented to allege that “no case has been stated”, “no claim has been made”, “no grounds for relief has been shown”, “no law has been cited”, yada, yada, yada. Apparently the legal definitions for such ordinary English words as “case, stated, claim, made, grounds, cited and relief” are so elevated and abstruse as to be as invisible to ordinary eyes as the Emperor’s new clothes.
Nor is rank prejudice out of bounds. One recent brief chided the complainant for citing foreign medical journals. The term “foreign” is used as a pejorative, in the same character as a man refusing a suitor for his daughter because the suitor has a single drop of black blood. Conveniently failing to mention that most of the journals and articles cited in the case were American, and nearly all from pubmed.gov, the database of U.S. National Library of Medicine. I cannot vouch for and do not care if all the authors of those articles are white.
One can, for example, cite and apply over thirty legal precedents, many if not most from the U.S. Supreme Court, and they will be utterly invisible even to a U.S. District Attorney. As were medical x-rays and scans of dying bone in a previous case. Why if one didn’t know how honorable they all are, one might begin to think that lawyers lie, defame and slander for a living. And perhaps have their tongues surgically split in order to pass the bar. "