Reply #19: I've talked with lawyers about this over the years...

[punpirate]

... and virtually all say that their code of ethics allows them to recuse themselves from a case in which the defendant has admitted guilt but still wants to pursue a not-guilty plea. The next question, of course, is, "has it happened to you and what did you do?" About half went to the judge and requested to be removed from the case before trial. Those who found out during a trial felt they had an obligation to pursue an adequate defense, but several said their heart just wasn't in it.

I know one guy in Illinois who's regularly defended poor clients, and those he suspected were guilty, based on their private conversations or their pleadings, he stayed with so that he could negotiate a reasonable sentence for them and once doing so, convinced them to plead guilty. Sometimes, though, even though there was apparent guilt, he would stay with the case because he thought there was unexplored territory in the law, if the case involved an overreach of the authorities regarding speech or privacy or due process.

The big-money lawyers representing the very wealthy are a class unto themselves, and their ethics might well be suspect. But for the largest number of cases, ordinary lawyers take ordinary clients and do the best they can if they have a chance to. From what I've heard over the years, that latter group doesn't have any illusions about the system, and few of them harbor delusions about their clients for the sake of monetary gain.

Cheers.