Here is a vital article on where the candidates stand on Bear issues from our friends at Bearmageddeon. You might find some cogent commentary by a certain Bear Celebrity.
Trump's Shameful Exploitation of a Victim & Denigration of the Constitution
Speaking of the debate, Trump is making it really hard to support him. Hillary is making it slightly harder. Here is Bear's beef with Trump.
Parse it however you wish, but Trump flat out played the demagogue with his pathetic exploitation of the poor woman who was sexually abused by someone Hillary defended. Yes, Hillary represented him. She was appointed, but, so what? The Bear would have happily represented him if he could afford the Bear's fee. Guilty or not. Nearly all of them are guilty, anyway, so how does a Bear earn salmon by turning away 99% of his clientele?
The Adversary System: Even the Guilty Get Trials!
It is the glorious Anglo-American adversary system. Them's the rules. If you want an inquisitorial system, go to France, or Italy. Here, both sides make their absolute best cases, and a jury of twelve good and true decides if the prosecution has met its burden: guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It has much more drama, and gives scope to a flair for the theatrical.
That's the theory, anyway. Most of the time, the Bear thinks it works. Not all. But enough to say there's no better system.
Problem Evidence Gets Suppressed - It Keeps Everybody Honest
Hillary got evidence suppressed. Yes. Defense lawyers do that when their clients' rights have been violated. It was inexcusable for the lab to discard important evidence without allowing the defense to have it independently tested. The Bear would have done the same thing. And ten more things Hillary didn't think of. Don't blame the defense for that. Blame law enforcement, and prosecutors when evidence is successfully suppressed. It's called the exclusionary rule, and is meant to keep law enforcement professional and honest by taking away illegal evidence.
Unless, that is, you trust agents of the state - say, Obama's or Hillary's DOJ - to just do the right thing because their consciences tell them to? Hmm?
Hillary Did Not Laugh at Victim, but Some Aspects of Case
Hillary did not laugh at the complaining witness. She laughed about a few aspects of the trial like losing faith in polygraphs after her guilty client passed one. First of all, she should have known polygraphs are interrogation tools, and are not "lie detectors." Junk science. Inadmissible. Okay, maybe that was not as evident as it is today. Should she have laughed?
The Bear does not think laughing in an interview about a case shows the sober respect one hopes (but, sadly, these days) cannot expect from the legal profession. Too often, it is less Perry Mason and more Better Call Saul. (The Bear cringes at many lawyer ads.) The Bear doesn't think it is the best policy to discuss details of cases, anyway. Otherwise, this ephemeris would be one ripping yarn after another from the Bear's fabulous, indeed embellished, legal career. (Click on Bear's dubious novel link in the sidebar if you want to read all about that.)
The Bear knows you will dismiss Snopes as biased, but they have this one right. It all rings true to the round, fuzzy ears of a veteran defense lawyer.
The Bear did not revel in complaining witnesses' suffering. The last thing a defense lawyer wants to do is be seen doing anything to stress a sympathetic witness. The defense lawyer's access to the witness is nil in Illinois. The only time we have with the complaining witness is when they're on the stand. (The psych eval would not happen today.) Unlike civil cases, we don't get to do depositions ordinarily. (Death penalty exception, when there was a death penalty; a few states allow depos - Florida seems to come to mind, and maybe Indiana.)
The Bear, at least, once a case was over, was able to see the victims as persons, dead or alive. He still is, some of them. Some ghosts the Bear will take to his grave. Without making any comment whatsoever on the guilt or innocence of the defendant (who was found guilty) Sheri Coleman and her two boys are foremost among those victims who make the Bear heartsick to this day.
Sure. Trump's victim is sympathetic. Trump knows the average person is not going to have the Bear's perspective. Deep down, most people do not want criminals to have trials. The Bear knows this because he has done opinion research in connection with change of venue motions. And lived among humans. You think Bears are bloodthirsty? The Bear wishes he had a salmon for every time he has heard, "They ought to just find a tree and hang the S.O.B. instead of wasting money on a trial." (Maybe it's just Illinois.) Trump knew that "she represented a man she knew was guilty!" would sound bad to people.
A Liberal Is a Conservative Whose College Kid Has Been Arrested for Rape
There is one big exception to this.
A liberal is a conservative whose college kid has just been arrested for rape. Amazing how those "technicalities" everybody complains about become the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments, once it is someone you love facing prison time. And, well, not one of those cases ever went to trial. No class of cases is fraught with more doubt than sexual abuse or assault cases.
It is never a good idea to just assume someone is guilty because he is charged with something. Sometimes prosecutors feel compelled to file charges. They are elected officials, after all.
The Bear had maybe one straight up forcible rape case, to his recollection. All the rest were cases where only consent was at issue. Invariably complicated by conflicting stories, alcohol, delays and other obstacles to learning the truth. This isn't a defense lawyer only perspective. Prosecutors know this too. When a case starts with, "We were all all pre-drinking..." and ends with "..." well, some uncertain scrum on the floor of a crowded apartment, that is not even remembered until a week later, and that goes unreported for two more weeks, the Bear must really indict the culture at his alma mater, Southern Illinois University.
Bear is Proud of his Career as a Defense Lawyer
The Bear could not be prouder of his career representing citizens accused of crimes by their government. He could have made far more money in nearly any other kind of law. But something about defending the underdog against the behemoth of the state appealed to his rebellious streak. He had remarkable success. One innocent young man who faced the death penalty had his shackles removed, and walked out of the courtroom upon being found not guilty by the jury.
The Bear was the only defense lawyer who could actually fit the prosecutor's head in his mouth. Could have had something to do with his success.