How, we often ask ourselves, can an attorney and advocate, defend someone whom they believe to be guilty?

Do you remember those debating competitions of your school days?

Each of two competitors was given opposing arguments in relation to a proposition. They then had to argue their side of the debate and the one who was most convincing would be the winner.

Did the competitors have to agree with their own argument? No. What was being tested was not their beliefs, but their ability to debate an issue.

When an advocate argues in favour of his client, he is doing exactly the same. He doesn’t have to believe the person’s innocence, he simply has to argue in his or her favour in order that if there can be shown to be reasonable doubt of guilt then justice will have been done.