>>17188753
Pic not related. Although she is hot.

>>17188753
How hard is to get into Canada being a lawyer from another country ? I'm guessing you have to get some sort of license to practice law in Canada, right? Do you know if there's any process to get this license for foreign lawyers? I'm really thinking about fucking off my country and Canada seems nice.

>>17188906
I'm no immigration expert, but I believe that "lawyer" isn't an occupation /profession which gives one an advantage to come to Canada.

Once you're here you'd have to check with the provincial law society. If you're law degree is recognized as valid in Canada then you should be able to do the "bar admissions" program and write the exams to get a license in your new province.

Canada is nice, I think. But to practise you need a license from your provincial Law Society, and getting that will depend on whether your law degree is recognized in the first place.

There's always the option of becoming a paralegal, or applying for a job as a Justice of the Peace, I've known some who were lawyers in other countries and jurisdictions.

I don't know if that helped. Good luck?

>>17188932
Thanks m8. Yes, that helps.

>>17188753
Have you ever hated the outcome of a case you won.

Please share story

>>17188753
Cyber law makes good money in the future?

What is the best area to work at as a lawyer? One that doesn't keep you locked in the office all day too..

>>17188944
Good question! Sure, I've plenty of outcomes that I thought weren't ideal. I've lost trials that I think I should have won, and I've won trials that I think I should have lost.

A hard part of family law is when the client wants to settle and I know that they are settling for less than they are entitled to, just because the client wants it over with or feels intimidated by the other party. It happens all the time.

The worst is when I'm representing a mother of young children, and she's left the father because he's an abuser. Then she agrees to joint custody or even shared custody (kids half time with each parent) because she's hoping that by appeasement she'll make her own lives and the lives of the children easier. It didn't work for Chamberlain and it doesn't work in real life either.

I do child protection work a fair bit, and had my fair share of trials against my provincial child welfare authorities. Sometimes when I win those, the kids go back to my clients and right back into an bad situation. That sucks, but it's not for me to decide that kids should be adopted out rather than go back to a home with parents who are less than ideal. In those situations I'm there for the parents not the children. It's like when I defend a criminally accused whom I know is guilty, although the accused is more likely to learn a lesson from the process.

>>17188948
Intellectual property has been a growing field for a long time. However, those lawyers I know who practise in that field are extremely frustrated because the legislation is always decades behind the technology.

A big problem I see with aiming for this field is that too often there are conflict of international law issues, as so much work is now done online by people and corporate entities in different countries. So wanting to do that kind of law seems to mean working for a large international firm, and those jobs can be hard to get if you don't already have an "in".

Having said that, if you have already got a degree that's cyber related then you're a natural to pursue that by going to law school. Most lawyers have undergrad degrees in the humanities because they suck at math, and law is about the only profession one can get into without any math or science. So if you have a math or hard science background then you're already among an elite few with a law degree. I know of a couple of engineers who got into patent law, and some serious math/accounting majors who then went into tax law. They are naturals.

You don't have to choose a specialty of law when you go to law school. If you know what you want to do then you can focus on that, but a law degree itself is just as good as any other.

If you don't want to be at a desk all day, then maybe you're a litigator. If you want to be in court all day shooting off your mouth and getting paid for it, then criminal and family law are good for that. It depends on where your skills lie.

Have you knowingly represented a divorce client who wanted to absolutely destroy their ex? Have you successfully done so? Did you feel guilty about it?

>>17188753
Lets say, hypothetically, a guy with a known and well-documented history of alcoholism, drug abuse, and domestic violence was mugged and ended up dying in a high-crime area with a notoriously understaffed police force. How much time do you think the investigation would get?

Do you have an obligation to tell a client what is best for them... or do usually attempt to win them what they think they want?

>>17189048
Many of my clients want to destroy their ex. I still take them on and then over time I mold their expectations and get them to lose their revenge mode to settle for something that everyone can live with.

If the client won't take my advice in this regard then I will drop the client. I'm not just a mouthpiece for their rage.

Sure, sometimes it's a slam dunk. Let's say I'm working for the dad and mom keeps getting arrested for drugs or getting into fights at bars because she's drunk. I destroy mom at trial and dad gets the kids. I feel bad for mom, maybe she has undiagnosed mental health issues, and without her kids she's unlikely to be motivated to get help. But I didn't create those facts. I simply use them to persuade the court that what my client wants is more in line with the children's best interests. Dad might hate mom, but that's not the issue.

However I don't go after the client's ex like a pit bull unless there's very good reason. If the client wants me to simply exact revenge, I drop the case. Doing that earns good money but one's reputation among peers and especially the judges is worth more than that.

Is it legal to tribute a regular (clothed) pic of someone under 18 ??

>>17188753
Is making a will difficult without a lawyer?? Could I do it on my own?

>>17189077
I don't understand the question. Do you mean how much time would the police put into it? If that's what you mean then I can't tell you that. Sure, sometimes there are political forces and public relations and media issues involved which will cause the police to devote more time to it.

The character of the victim shouldn't matter in an investigation, but often it does I suspect. Keep in mind that I'm from Canada so I don't know if I can even comment on your hypothetical.

If you think that not enough attention is being paid to an investigation you could get a criminal lawyer to start pushing the police, contact the media, like that.

>>17189116
My obligation to my client is to give them my assessment of their odds of getting what they say they want based on the evidence, giving them other options of settlement even if that's what they don't want to hear, and then taking their instructions unless doing so is contrary to my rules of professional conduct.

I will tell my client what I think is best for them, and which settlement options are viable, and try to steer them towards looking at their case objectively if they can.

But at the end of the day, the client is the client and is paying me to use my knowledge and skill to get them what they want. If what they want is obviously unreasonable or literally doomed to fail, then I'll tell the client that and if they insist on proceeding then I'll drop the client. As I wrote, I'm not as mercenary as many of my peers.

If the client has a reasonable chance of success then I'll try to get that. If there has to be a trial then it's up to the judge, not to me. But I make the client aware of the pitfalls of losing, and of rejecting a decent offer to settle.

I'm not allowed to start utterly useless proceedings that have no chance of success or that are merely meant to vex the other side. Yes, the client pays the bills, but I take the view that if my client is smart they will follow my advice. If they won't then they don't need me as a lawyer. They need someone else who will do whatever they say no questions asked.

Often, what they think they want isn't what they really want and it takes time to adjust their expectations.

>>17189125
You need to be a more specific, and tell me what jurisdiction or country we're talking about. But keep in mind that this is 4chan where there's not only a complete lack of confidentiality but an expectation that if you give personal information you're inviting unwanted attention.

>>17189138
You could do a will on your own, it's not hard. But remember that if the will is at all complicated, or there's a lot in the estate, that you really ought to have a lawyer do the will or at least look it over. This is important stuff and you don't want your family fighting over your estate after you die; that's the worst.

Lots of people buy a will kit and do just fine with that. However I recommend that you get a lawyer to at least look it over if you're doing that. Most lawyers charge very little to do a basic will anyway, most consider it a loss leader. The lawyer does the will for cheap so that you'll come back to them in the future for other legal needs, like if you get hit by a bus after leaving the office to sign the will.

>>17188753
Do you ask the client whether he actually committed the crime he is charged with? Or is it better for a lawyer to not know the truth?

>>17189264
I get that all the time. It depends what the client is charged with. The client is allowed to lie to me, I can't stop them. But if the client tells me the truth and says that they "did it" then I can't put the client on the stand and have them say under oath that they didn't do it. Then I'm suborning their perjury.

There are lots of charges where whether they "did it" isn't the issue. Like an impaired or DUI type charge where they were arrested on the scene. Sure, they were loaded and were clearly driving. But my job isn't to convince the judge that it was a case of mistaken identity, but to have the Crown (prosecutor's) evidence thrown out because of improper procedures, improper arrest, violating the client's rights, like that. So in case where it's beyond doubt that the client "did it", I'll ask. If the client tells me that it's mistaken identity, or that someone else at the party punched out the host, that's good enough for me if that's the client's story.

I've never done a murder trial, but even there the client can say that he "did it" but still be defenses, like provocation, or self defense, or sleepwalking, or insanity, in addition to the arguments about police violating the client's rights in arrest or handling or gathering evidence.

>>17188753
Has a suicide ever been seen in the court after alosing verdict? (crime, divorce, etc)

>>17189210
Usa...if someone ask u to tribute a pic (clothes person), of someone under 18 , and then send it back to them, via email, is that legal??

I heard if you've had a DUI as an American citizen, you can't enter Canada.

Is this true? If so, why?

>>17189210
Like. Would that be child pornography??? To tribute a pic, of minor. Whom is fully clothes ???

>>17189547
I've never seen a literal suicide in the courtroom after a verdict. I've seen metaphorical suicides many times. Like when a person has sworn up and down in an affidavit that they don't have a drug problem, then I get them on the stand and cross examine them until they cry and break down and admit to using drugs. I always find that strangely entertaining. That's what happens to liars.

If you're asking about whether people have committed suicide as a result of a verdict, I'm sure it has happened.

>>17189551
I can't give you a definitive answer for US law. I doubt that it's illegal to ask someone to do this. But doing it and sending it back, with your erection and discharge visible in the photo, could be illegal. In some states where "public standards" are high, I'm sure that it would be illegal.

>>17189552
Canada and the US each have rules about allowing the other's citizens to enter when they have a criminal record. Generally, you can't. If the border security doesn't run a check and they let you through, then fine. But if they find a criminal record that they don't like, then they don't have to let you through.

So yes, it's true. Many people get stopped and turned away for old convictions, even old arrests or being named a "person of interest" due to an investigation, without their knowlege. Happens all the time.

>>17188753
How hard is it to become a lawyer if you have never studied law before (e.g. at high school or pre-university level). I did physics and maths/chemistry between 16-19 but lawyers look like they make good money. How much studying and memorisation is involved?

>>17189759
I suppose I should greenthread to make the thread easier to read.

>How hard is it to become a lawyer if you've studied law before? And I'm a math guy?

The hardest part of becoming a lawyer is getting into law school. Once you're in the school doesn't want you to fail out because it's bad for their rep. So they have very high admission standards. Generally, you need a BA (honours preferably) or higher degree, and a good LSAT score.

By the time you've got good marks in a BA and a good LSAT score you have the academic skills to do law school. Those skills are primarily swift reading and comprehension, writing, and logic.

You're a math guy so you should have the logic part already. Do some practise LSATs online or from a book you can buy to see how you'd score.

You don't need to have studied law or pre-law at all. That won't help your application. It might make a few intro courses easier if you have polysci with a focus on constitutional issues, but honestly it shouldn't matter what you've studied.

The LSAT is crucial. It tests reading comprehension, dexterity with vocabulary and words, and logic. Take some practise tests under the time control. It's actually kind of fun.

>>17188753
OP here, these are great questions. Keep it up. What's on your mind? Normally I get questions about child support and men's rights and how much money I make, but that's on /b/ in between being called a faggot.