gitana1
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 29,421
- Reaction score
- 230,532
I've been thinking a lot of about this conflict of interest thing. McGee may feel or know Merritt is guilty of the murders. If he has any moral standards, which I believe he does as an officer of the court, he can't represent a client if he knows his client is in fact guilty. It could have been something Merritt said or admitted to like driving the truck to the border (which Merritt may have stated).
"In a court filing, James E. McGee said a conflict of interest has emerged that prevents him and a lawyer in his firm from continuing to represent Merritt: “Counsel is informed and believes that the motions Mr. Merritt wishes to bring has created an actual conflict of interest.”
McStay family slaying: Lead defense attorney seeks withdrawal from case, delay of Merritt’s sentencing – San Bernardino Sun
If these motions are about a new trial, how is it that McGee would be against that? Wouldn't this be an ideal outcome if ruled in favor of the defense? If Merritt wants a new trial I could see how McGee would want to withdraw as his defense attorney if he thought he was actually guilty.
Thoughts?
@mrjitty
@gitana1
You can ethically represent someone you believe is guilty. But you can't put them on a stand and present testimony you know is false. Except perhaps through a narrative which be objected to.
It seems to me it's either he wants to claim ineffective assistance of this particular counsel or maybe wants to pursue a course of action this attorney can't get behind ethically.