Press Freedom is most important> But after seeing some (most) of the interviews, I feel some are taking this freedom for a ride. Many cases they never allow the person to complete his views. They just turn over to the next. This is not only irritating the person but also ill-treating the viewers. If time is a concern, they should tell the person being interviewd in advance before going on LIVE.
Every citizen has his own freedom to express, but without affecting other's freedom....
( Posted: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 11:50 )
Dr.K.S.GURUMURTHY
The Court will not take into account the views of the people in the matter. Court goes by the evidence which is produced before it and the arguments of the lawyers. It is easy for people like Manu Sharma to get hold of an advocate like Ram Jethmalani-a showman to get the evidence turned around by 180 degrees by sheer money power.
The whole country including Jetmalani knows that Manu Sharma is guilty. I am asking Mr.Jethmalani, a simple question as to what he would have done had his daughter in Jessica's position? Would he have entertained Manu Sharma as his client? I dono't endorse his style of advocacy under any circumstance.
( Posted: Tuesday , November 21, 2006 at 20:28 )
hari
If lawyers like jethmalani start defending people like manu sharma then next time nobody will have a fear before killing anybody especially people who are financially sound and well connected
( Posted: Tuesday , November 14, 2006 at 12:50 )
SJ
Mr. Jethmalani - before lashing at media you should have understand media as the pillar of democracy besides judiciary. And to show your solidarity for the right trial, can you lash the judiciary for its failure to act timely, can you express your anger for corruption in judiciary, can you ensure that poor and unpriviledged citizens too get fair trial, can you fix fees of lawyers, can you ensure timely justice for all, can you be transparent with your wealth and assets. If yes, then show your anger in public or else cry in private.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 19:39 )
Demo-crazy
Jethmalani has a right to defend anyone he wants. But, why, does that need a change of a Judge? What was Mr. Jethmalani hinting at? Is the Judge too smart for him, or is it that he considers him pre-judiced against his client?
We hope the prosecution will stand up to the tactics of Jethmalani and disprove that only the defence can get smart lawyers. A fair judge will be able to see through any tactics of the lawyers and the media that are aimed to off balance a judge. So, I do not really agree with the view (attributed to the CJI by some TV channels)that judges get biased by media coverage.
Let us not even talk of the fee that these high profile clients pay their lawyers. As long as the lawyer declares his income and pays income tax, we have no issue.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 12:53 )
SIDDHARTH BHALLA
IT CLEARLY SHOWS THE MENTAL ILLNESS MR. RAMJETHMALINI. I AM SURE HE WILL TAKE SUCH CASES TO GAIN ONLY POPULARITY. ONCE AGAIN HE LOSSES AGAIN, WHICH HAPPENED AGAIN & AGAIN RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING LIKE INDIRA GANDHI MUDER CASE & LOT ARE MORE.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 07:56 )
Dr.G.Srinivasan
One of the fundamentals of civil society is to see to it that the accused also gets a fair trial if not the best lawyer.This right is there for the accused. We cannot alienate.Mr.Jethmalani is right in this. i am a doctor being a doctor doesnot prevent me from treating the poor or criminals .In the same vein he is a professional and any civil society should allow him to do so. If he does not get a fair trial this will be a blotch on the system. This also means that prosecuation should put up the best lawyer and not mess up the case.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 07:51 )
DR VK BANSALmedicolegal
-firstly-let jethmalani do war dance against media which is merely projecting the grave public disgust at nonjustice for jessicalal heinous murder in front of many eye witnesses who have lied shamelessly in court for their own mean malicious selfish reasons. Police as usual have been incompetent.NOBODY- EXCEPT MEDIA- HAS EXPRESSED ANY CONCERN FOR THE SHOCK HORROR OF GRIEVING JESSICA LAL FAMILY. WHAT IS FAIR TRIAL?? IS IT WHERE LAWYERS LIKE JETHMALANI UNPROFESSIONALLY UNNECESSARILY RAVE AND RANT AGAINST MEDIA AND IN COURTS AGAINST THE PRESIDING JUDGE like RS SODHI WHO IS WELL KNOWN FOR HIS NO FEAR OR FAVOUR JUDGEMENTS..JETHMALANI IS SPOUTING IN ANGER AS IF HE IS ON SOME SORT OF PUBLIC TRIAL!! IS HE??SURELY JETHMALANI CAN REPRESENT HIS CLIENT(AT WHATEVER FEE OR FOR NO FEE CHARITY)-BUT RAVING AND RANTING IN PUBLIC IS CERTAINLY SERIOUS PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT. JUGEMENTS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE JUDGES AS PER LAW STATUES..DOESNOT JETHMALANI KNOW THAT SIMPLE LEGAL PROCESS?? WE HOPE JESSICALAL MUDER/MURDERS/WITNESSES WHO COMMITTED PERJURY BY GIVING FALSE TESTIMONIES GET JUSTICE AND ANY PUNISHMENTS DUE.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 06:48 )
Alex
Jethmalini has the the right to take up any case.He wants to earn big money! Lawyers have no conscience.They take up any case for the sake of poularity or big money.Look at his remarks.Media has no business! Who is he to say this.
Today media is playing a proactive role and it should go ahead.Let the injustice in this country be exposed.We have had great respect for justice system. But this has become another centre for corruption.The very foundation of Justice system itself has become unjust and unfair!!Only media and peoples voice can save our country.
( Posted: Sunday , November 05, 2006 at 04:46 )
Gope Lalwani
Ram Jethmalani has taken up the case of Manu Sharma, alleged killer of Jessica Lal and has lashed out at media for declaring Manu Sharma guilty even before the Court's judgement.
Media feel that he should not have taken up this case in view of the vast public opinion that thinks that Manu Sharma is guilty. However, the Court will not take into account the views of the people in the matter. Court goes by the evidence which is produced before it and the arguments of the lawyers.
Now, even if Manu Sharma is guilty, he is entitled to defend himself through a lawyer and Mr.Ram Jethmalani is a lawyer who defends a client who pays his fees. So, we cannot ask Mr. Ram Jethmalani or for that matter any other lawyer to choose his client carefully and go by the public opinion. It is a lawyer's right to choose his client.
It is true that rich and influential persons like Manu Sharma are in an advantageous position as they can hire best lawyers to defend themselves and go scot free even if guilty while a poor man who is not guilty may not be able to escape punishment because his case is not likely to be defended by a competent lawyer.
So, what is to be done in such case? The simple answer is that we should have elected judges on the pattern of USA so that they could take the public opinion into account while deciding the case.
Do not be rude to other users/authors or disrupt an ongoing conversation/debate. Do not use ethnic slurs, engage in personal insults or use objectionable language. Criticism, when constructive and non-disruptive is always welcome. Comments with links in them won't be published other than in cases of rare exceptions. Comments that include personal details such as postal addresses and telephone numbers will not be published. Keep the comments relevant to the topic as much as possible. Do not impersonate another reader or a public figure. Do try to use English to write your comments.
Please enable javascript in your browser to use this form.
Disclaimer
All the content posted under the 'Comments' category are made by the readers of CNN-IBN, unless specified otherwise. CNN-IBN is not responsible for the opinions of the readers and the content posted by the readers are not representative of the views and opinions of CNN-IBN.
Do not be rude to other users/authors or disrupt an ongoing conversation/debate.