It is the duty of any criminal justice professional to uphold the law at all levels. This is highlighted in chapter six which emphasizes that the discussion of morality, justice and law is not just a mere academic exercise (page 172). In the case at hand, the dilemma that arises is that while the lawyer is mandated to protect the client and act in the client’s best interests, the lawyer also has a moral obligation to observe the law to ensure a free and fair trial. The moral obligation should override all other motives inherent in court procedures.
Being public servants, criminal justice professional should always aspire to portray the highest standard of moral behavior. The judge’s obvious bias against the defendant should not be comforting to the plaintiff’s lawyer more so because the motive is not known; the judge might turn against the plaintiff in future. Moreover, the case might end up being determined on grounds other than legal grounds which will then negate the primary purpose of the entire court process.
It is not wise to undermine the legal process because it is equipped to handle all matters through simple and when necessary, complex motions. From a moral point of view, it is a prerequisite of all criminal justice professionals to believe in the legal system before engaging themselves in the practice and enforcement of law. In determining that the judge is not acting in a professional manner, the plaintiff’s lawyer should use discretion to address the problem while at the same time bearing full knowledge that the effort may not be appreciated.
There is never an assurance that doing the right thing does not come at a high cost (page 174). In conclusion it is right to aver that criminal justice professionals will always find themselves in situations that require them to make huge sacrifices for the sake of ensuring ethical responsibility. This should not be viewed as an anomaly but should be seen as an effort in upholding the sanctity of justice.