Last Word: How can you defend these people?

a lot of times defense attorneys represent clients who they know are guilty...with experience they can judge if there is enough evidence.
they make up these ridiculous theories of the crime . a lot of defense attorneys are in it for the bigger money

Good and fine. I agree everyone deserves a fair trial. Everyone deserves fair representation as well, but that doesn't happen either. Wax patriotic if you will, but the justice system doesn't consider all persons "equal in the eyes of the law". Indigent people have to rely on often inexperienced, overworked and overwhelmed public defenders, and are more likely to receive jail time. The rich, however, can pay an experienced lawyer to handle their case exclusively. Criminal lawyers often take cases just for the publicity. It gets their name out there, and if they win, big firms will offer them high-paying jobs defending rich criminals. Sacred role? Please. Level the playing field or start working pro bono...then we'll call the Pope and have you considered for sainthood.

I don't have a problem with people getting a fair trial . It is a right of every American citizen . I do have a huge problem with some of these outlandish defenses that seem to be more and more commonplace . It's a real eye opener to watch these televised trials . I understand throwing reasonable doubt into the mix , but come on . Plain and simple it's an insult to most people's intelligence . It seems more and more that the defendants story does a 360 after ' lawyering up '. And that is my last word !

I am a "defense" oriented person and get so upset with folks who are so very quick to say "guilty" it's obvious so no trial needed! How many times I check the 13th juror question which asks a question that cannot possibly be answered because the question has not yet been covered in the trial, yet, In Session viewers are answering the question and always with the answers supporting the prosecution view It the right of every American to have a fair,speedy trial and to be adjudged innocent until proven guilty! Thanks,Jami, for your strong support of the Constitution.

Jamie, I don't agree with you all the time but this time you are right -on. The same people that are asking the defense attorney's " how can you defend them" will look for the best defense attorney when it's them or their loved one that breaks the law. Just depends of if it hits them personally. I saw this with my neighbors. They wanted everyone that drank and drove to be sent to prison whither they had one beer or a case. Didn't matter if they were at or above the legal limit, never be able to get a license to drive again. UNTIL their 24 year old daughter got popped for a DUI. Then they spent thousands of dollars to get the best defense attorney they could find to get her off the charge with just probation. They told me she only had less then 4 beers and had to drive 'cause she had to get home to get to work.

I can see how this case could actually be in self-defense. I mean, if he was really in danger then the stabbing is understandable. But, the fact that he cut the head off, burned the body, and then burned the body doesn't make sense. When you're not guilty, you wouldn't act with such brutality. Unless they can prove other wise that he was 'mad' then I'll take a jump and say 'maybe he could be innocent', but with everything that's been said so far I can't see it at self-defense.

Only 3 people actually know what happened and 1 is dead and 1 of them got a deal to "tell his side of the story" and we all know how that goes....

He who is without sin..... or

Walk a mile in my shoes.....

Whichever makes ya feel better....

By the way... I am a believer in the death penality...but without 100% proof and I've not seen all the evidence in this and the one who gets a deal to say JP did this and that and "I just went along and helped" that we are suppose to believe does not make a reliable witness.,,,I'm not so sure it wasn't provoked...if you've never been a victim of a bully, walk a mile in my shoes.

I'm glad I live in a country where everyone gets a defense...and is SUPPOSE to be INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY.

AMEN! thank goodness someone will take the case and the constitution can still protect us!

It must be clear that any accused must be properly defended, no matter of the crime's nature.

In the case of the defendant Orlewicz, the current witnesses are painting a brutal murderer, no matter the circumstances and age of the individual. This is no kid–it is a brutal creature with disregard for human life and the country, the parents (if they have no reasonable and negligent guardian based guilt) and peers and the law of the land.

I am already worried though, that even if found guilty on all charges that the system is restricted to properly deal with it. The US needs to make electric chairs for children and use them on individuals of that brutal nature –maybe some of the other peers may feel the law of the land better. However, the US is experiencing a meltdown from allowing the free hand to do whatever for decades. This is a symtom of something much larger–the guilt goes way beyond.

The US only accepts winners and heros at all cost, it is the best nation, the best people, the best military. Finally even the children start to believe it and they think they can fly and walk on water as they were told through the news, in school, by the parents and peers and Hollywood–no heart for anyone else not at Home and not abroad.

Ron Schmid

The co-defendant/friend of the primary defendant may not be showing the kind of emotion that you expect because he is reliving the images that he witnessed. We are just imagining it.

I respect your work Jamie but don't always agree with the defense of people like JP. I just get angry when defense lawyers make up these ridiculous scenarios. They blame the victims. It can't possibly be a crime of self defense. It was too set up. We as a scociety always want to blame someone or someonething else. When I was that age the worst thing I could think of was skipping school. Where are the parents. I get angry when the defense team dresses up defendants so they look like little angels. Why does he keep his back to the judge. Would you allow your defendant to do so. Keep up the good work. I realize you wear a defense hat. but sometimes you have to step back and see the defendant is guilty. Thanks.

This case is crazy!! These boys seem to show NO emotion at all for the horrific murder. Even the boys who helped show NOTHING!! I don't understand. As a society, I think the younger video gamers are making murder, robbery and assault often words with no true meaning. I see on some games the more you kill.... the higher the score!! And they look so real. I miss the Mario days where the most violence you saw while playing was jumping on a turtle's back to get you to the princess!! No blood.

What Ms. Floyd said: our justice system can only work as well as it works in maintaining the rights of the least of us. As a journalist who used to cover a police beat, I'll tell you that "presumption of innocence", rights of the accused, etc. sometimes turn into nothing but empty words.

The instant someone gets noticed for a crime like murder – even without evidence – statistics show most people will immediately assume/decide a person is guilty because "cops wouldn't arrest the wrong people" and "wouldn't break the rules".

Now, when we're the victim of crime, we may not really want to see someone prosecuted for it who seems to enjoy more rights than we do. But sometimes, a very thin thread separates victims from accused. Everyday, innocent people are told to take a plea bargain that renders them guilty because the odds are stacked so far against them. Juries too often aren't a good cross section of the population and often encouraged to group think.

Also, again and again, we're seeing cases thrown out YEARS later not due to "technical issues" but to evidence that was exculpatory yet NOT supplied in Discovery and purposely kept from the trial. So yeah, while I'd want penalties for someone who commits a crime against me, I have to respect that this person has rights; if I don't, if you don't, then we are ALL at risk of being accused, convicted, and penalized without any system of checks and balances.

I am always amazed at how many people would be willing to ignore the rights our Constitution give us simply because they have, in their mind, already acted as judge, jury and executioner for someone else. It would be interesting to see them in the same position and see how quickly they are willing to give up those same rights when their life or freedom is in jeopardy. And they call themselves "Americans."

Irene, I think you raise a few good points, but the way I look at it is like this:

No one is purely evil or purely good, even the worst monsters you can think of have redeeming qualities. It's the job of the defense to make sure the jury sees the entire picture, beyond just the bad things any good prosecutor will paint.

It's the job of the jury to decide whether those things mitigate the crime or affect the defendant's guilt. People don't give juries enough credit, they're reasoning people, they'll see cheap attempts to deflect blame for what they really are.

As a regular citizen, and a teacher with some experience in "reading" kids, I was convinced that J.P. thought he was better than everyone else, his attitude was defensive, and he is certainly not who he appears to be. I believe that some teens really do think that they are invincible and J.P. is one of them . I do not believe that he will get away with this, because it is his words against the words of many. I just do not see why all of his friends would have a reason to lie. Also, what type of person would try to steal money from a supposed friend by making him think that he was going to die? What does this say about J.P.'s character? This is not normal behavior, and if anyone should be credited for casting doubt on the testimony of J.P., it is J.P. himself.