When the government accuses you of a crime, it must prove its case “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
But who are they proving it to? This burden of proof is only as high as the jury says it is.
And who is that jury? You are entitled to a trial by a jury of your peers. But are these people really your peers? How many times have you been to your local retailer and taken a good hard look at the people with whom you shop? (Yes, I used the word “whom”. Not only is it a reasonable choice, it’s correct.)
Your peers aren’t the people you text message every day. They’re not the people you think are your friends on Facebook.
Go to the mall. Watch your local news.
Are these your peers?
Do they share the same moral and ethical standards you do?
Would the way they treat their children seem reasonable to you?
Would the decisions they make about how to live their life seem reasonable to you?
Would the life-choices they make seem reasonable to you?
Would their personal hygiene habits seem reasonable to you?
Would that pair of see-through fluorescent green hot pants be a reasonable choice for you?
Would their political views seem reasonable to you?
Would their grammatical choices seem reasonable to you?
Yet, these are the people who will determine your future if you are accused by the government of committing a crime.
A criminal case is something that no one wants, yet no one wants to lose. If the government accuses you of a crime, you need someone in your corner that will tell your side of the story.
You need a lawyer who will put the jurors in your shoes and put all the events in the proper context.
You need a lawyer that will make wearing those see-through fluorescent green hot pants seem as reasonable as wearing a jacket on a cold day.