Anyone charged with a crime is entitled to legal representation. Largely, this job falls to a public defender, either st

[answerhappygod]

Anyone charged with a crime is entitled to legal representation.
Largely, this job falls to a public defender, either state or
federal, who is generally overworked and unable to give the
attention to the case that he or she should. Because of the
caseload, many cases are pled that maybe should not be. But then
there's another side of the issue—public defenders that do not seem
to care about their clients.
Take the case of Mychal Bell, a member of the Jena Six. The Jena
Six were so named because their case occurred in Jena, Louisiana
(in 2007). There had been a racially charged atmosphere at the
school where the Jena Six and those involved with them attended.
There were accusations back and forth, but the arrests of the six
black youths, ages 17 and 18, followed a battery committed on a
white boy which allegedly occurred after at least two nooses were
found hanging from a tree frequented by white students the day
after a black student sat under the tree with the principal's
permission. Tensions grew after the white students who
allegedly hung the nooses were given what some considered light
discipline involving in-school suspension. When matters escalated
and an altercation ensued and a white male student was involved in
a fight with several black male students, the black students were
arrested.
Mychal Bell, age 17, was charged as an adult. The white
prosecutor who handled the case charged Bell with aggravated
battery—a charge that required the use of a deadly weapon. The
prosecutor alleged that the sneakers Bell wore when he kicked the
victim were the deadly weapons. At trial, Bell was represented by a
public defender. Despite witnesses who would testify that Bell was
not involved, Bell's public defender urged Bell to take a plea.
Bell refused. During trial, Bell's public defender rested his case
without calling a single witness or offering any evidence on Bell's
behalf. Even though the jury pool consisted of 50 venire, none was
black. Bell's public defender never challenged the venire. The jury
found Bell guilty. Facing 22 years in prison, Bell secured a new
set of attorneys privately hired on his behalf. Eventually, his
case was resolved on time served on other unrelated charges
The question is, what made the difference in the case? Do you
think most lawyers would have challenged an all-white jury in a
jurisdiction that was 10 percent black? Do you think most lawyers
would have put on a case for their client where there were willing
witnesses to challenge the prosecution's witnesses? What makes the
difference? Where do ethics come into play? If lawyers are bound by
their code of professional ethics, do you think the prosecutor and
public defender abided by them here? What is the impact of such an
occurrence on the defendant as well as on society viewing the
situation? Should the judge viewing this situation step in? Would
it be ethical to do so? Who are the stakeholders and what are their
issues? Does this appear to be equal justice under law as promised
by the U.S. Constitution?