Affording an attorney...

Trei, Peter ptrei at rsasecurity.com
Thu Apr 5 08:11:42 PDT 2001


> Jim Choate[SMTP:ravage at ssz.com]
> The last sentence most certainlly DOES say the state must pay for it, and
> in ALL criminal cases. That 'compulsory process' clause guarantees it.
> 
>                                 Amendment VI
> 
> In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
> speedy
> and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein
> the
> crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously
> ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the
> accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have
> compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the
> Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
> 
> Since there is no clause which states that I as the accused must pay for
> my own defence (which if you think about it for half a second goes against
> democratic philosophy in the first place, the burden is always on the
> accuser) I claim the right, under the 9th, that the state must pay.
> 
> The state wishes to disagree?
> 
> 
Much as I hate dirtying my hands by dipping into our current Choatian
Black Hole, my reading of this is not that they *must* supply you with
an attorney, but rather that the State cannot *deny* you one - if you 
show up with a lawyer, they cannot tell him to take a hike.

Peter Trei





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list