Sample Law Paper on Hypothetical Situation

Both the adversary system and the attorney-client privilege may place a lawyer in a position
where he knows he is defending a guilty person. Would you represent a murderer under those
circumstances? (1-2 paragraphs) (200-350 words)

When we speak of adversarial system, it refers to a legal system practiced in common law
countries where two competent representatives, called advocates, lawyers, attorneys or barristers
depending on the jurisdiction, while representing their clients argue out their cases before an
impartial third party, which may include more than one persons, often referred to as the jury,
who access the arguments of such parties and issue a suitable judgment. The advocates are at
liberty to choose which issues they are to address, the kind of evidence they will adduce before
the court or the jury and the number of witnesses they will call in order to substantiate their case.
In this system, a person who has an issue, and in particular in criminal matters, is represented by
an advocate who speaks on their behalf before the jury. Due to such circumstances there exists a
relationship between the client and the advocate in the sense that they are to exercise full
disclosure while the advocate has a duty of care to ensure that such evidence as they collect from
the client is not leaked out to a third party. The question of whether I would represent a murderer
under such circumstance is met with the answer, by all means yes! The law does not only
function to establish who is right and who is wrong but to also ensure that the rights of all parties
are respected. In as much as a party may have committed a crime under law, it is also important
to appreciate that their rights are protected by the same law, and that they are presumed innocent
until proven otherwise. There are many circumstances that surround a case, and operating in the

preconceived idea that a party is guilty is an infringement on their right to a fair hearing. A party
may have committed a crime but after both parties argue out their case, the court finds that there
were justifiable reasons as to why such a crime was committed.