LegalEagle's Devin Stone Answers Law Questions From Twitter | Tech Support | WIRED

Comments · 4.1K

• WI

  @WIRED · 1 year ago · pinned

  See LegalEagle&apos;s latest visit to WIRED Tech Support: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfePuqHaJlE">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfePuqHaJlE</a>

  124

• LE

  @LegalEagle · 3 years ago

  Thanks for having me, WIRED! &nbsp;(And yes, people, now I know that &quot;petit&quot; is French, not Latin. &nbsp;You are technically correct...the best kind of correct)

  37K

• RY

  @ryandowns6233 · 3 years ago

  I was on a petit jury once and had to remind my fellow jurors that the defendant choosing not to testify didn&apos;t make them &quot;seem guilty.&quot; Spending time on a jury and seeing just how dumb people deciding your fate can be was the single biggest deterrent to committing crime than anything else I&apos;ve ever encountered.

  19K

• JO

  @joepapa1189 · 2 years ago

  I was in Pre-law and you cannot imagine my shock when I see this dude walk in as a guest speaker. Great guy IRL and that was a lecture I was on every word.

  5.6K

• ET

  @ettinakitten5047 · 3 years ago (edited)

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbZlYl92OGU&amp;t=326">5:26</a> There&apos;s also a bunch of lawsuits people <b>think</b> were frivolous that really weren&apos;t, because of biased media coverage. For example, the &quot;woman sues McDonalds because her hot coffee was too hot and burnt her&quot; case was framed by media like she was suing them for a mild scalding, but in reality, she suffered third-degree burns on her groin and needed reconstructive surgery because their coffee was so ludicrously hot that it was a major safety hazard, and nothing on their packaging indicated just how dangerously hot the coffee was. There&apos;s a bunch of cases like that where big-name companies did a media hatchet job on plaintiffs who had very legitimate cases against them.

  383

• DC

  @dcstreet5037 · 3 years ago

  One of the best answers I’ve seen to “how/why would you defend a client who is clearly guilty” is to make sure the police and prosecutors follow the rules. Even if a given person is guilty, defense attorneys are there to make sure the process was followed, no corners were cut, no rules were broken, no funny business occurred. It may not make a difference for the clearly guilty client, but it’s not just about them. It’s also about the next defendant and the one after that and the one after that. The police and prosecutors must also obey the law, and someone has to put them to the test to make sure they stay honest and don’t get sloppy.

  8.4K

• ER

  @ErynNyx · 3 years ago

  So many people seem to always forget that defending somebody doesn&apos;t always mean proving their innocence but rather making sure that their human rights aren&apos;t violated. Regardless on if we think somebody &quot;deserves&quot; those rights, it&apos;s part of the law and needs to be upheld.

  4.7K

• ME

  @MechMK1 · 3 years ago

  Regarding a defense lawyer: The best explanation my law professor has given me is &quot;Everyone is entitled to a fair trial, even someone guilty. Especially someone guilty. The job of a defense lawyer is to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial.&quot;

  5.5K

• GM

  @gmbill6831 · 1 year ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbZlYl92OGU&amp;t=869">14:29</a> hoping I don’t have to see you in court lmao

  193

• GE

  @genesisreaper2113 · 3 years ago

  as someone with anxiety, I have no doubt I&apos;d look like the guiltiest person to ever walk into any courtroom.

  5K

• ED

  @EdamL22 · 3 years ago (edited)

  They literally tell you why you should plead the 5th when they arrest you: &quot;Anything you say can be used against you in court.&quot; This doesn&apos;t change if you&apos;re innocent.

  1.4K

• AN

  @antonymilne1346 · 3 years ago

  I like how he explains the technical stuff so clearly and simply without coming off as condescending it makes it way easier to listen to what he has to say

  1.4K