Cerebral Shangrila

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

The difference between right & wrong

The decision by Ram Jethmalani to defend Manu Sharma in the high profile Jessica lall case has been drawing lots of criticism from the Public. The more I think about this issue, I see myself arguing for both sides of the case.

On one side , a lawyer's duty and privilege is to defend an accused. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial. On the other side, the "morality" issue of siding with the high and mighty has estranged Ram Jethmalani from his own family members. The press has also taken up the law into its hands by pronouncing its verdict even before the trial. There are rights and wrongs on both sides.

Btw, I have never seen a more fiery and belligerent interview than this. Watch this IBN live interview of Ram Jethmalani.


  • I wonder how can we say RJ's professional and to a great extent personal decision to argue for someone is "wrong"- I think he deserves to take his own decision and if he is able to prove his case, then that is his caliber.

    If we cant prove Manu Sharma's guilt and get him to justice, We can't blame RJ for our(the police's inability to prove) incompetence.

    By Blogger Krish, at 11:05 PM  

  • Ram Jethmalani could have defended Saddam Hussein..

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:32 PM  

  • The same Judiciary has acquitted Manu. Now what is wrong in proving that it was right thru RJ. Media did a good job in bringing such a incident to attention of people, they should stop there and just tell the court precedings of this incident to the Indian citizens so that they dont forget it.
    But it is ridiculous for anyone to say Manu sharma did the crime other than the court for their cheap publicity and kindling emotional reactions.

    By Blogger gormandizer, at 10:51 PM  

  • krish , gorm - perfectly agree.

    ishu - :-)

    By Blogger Cogito, at 1:03 PM  

  • a lawyer is doing his job.
    But isnt this sad that no jethmalani came up for jessica .


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:10 AM  

  • rjs decision was personal and right to him because he has been made to believe that man is not a "seasoned criminal". and that he was charged up by jessica.no Wonder what more we will hear in the future.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:29 AM  

  • I recently seen that some of the people supporting Ram decision on the basis that He has right to defend Manu. Ram argue on the basis that Every body has right to get proper defend and according to his professional oath he must defend his client. Very well but let me put a question to you.

    Are you defending somebody because he is innocense? or defending because he is your client. Becasue I dont think Professional Oath says you should defend person because he is your client and use whatever means possible to prove a criminal as innocense.

    Now who will say person is innocense? We can argue its on court to decide? well we already have seen that prviously on many occassion court has faile terribally in this. What about Santosh sing (killer of Priyadershani?) he got aquitted. was he innocense? No due to media pressure on retrial it was proven that he was not? So even judeciarry have to accept that they were wrong many many time.

    Anyway back to Ram Jeth Manali? Well are he trying to prove Manu innocense because he is? No he is using his skills and all the loophole to prove him innocense by defaming Jessica, by putting kahani main twist and by using his high profile connection to get manu out. It is getting more clear day by day by his action. And he has no right to prove a ciminal as innocense. If manu is innocense Ram jethmanali do not require to play games with judiciary system and does not need to give so many different statment in court.. from shikh man to manhood...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:38 AM  

  • anon - There is nothing overtly wrong in it but I think his opening argument was an extremely prejudiced and improper approach.

    By Blogger Cogito, at 9:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home