In your original post you seemed to want to paint the whole legal profession as unable to be ethical because of the requirement that a "guilty" person be entitled to a defense. Kind of a broad brush to stroke with.

In addition, we could have a days-long discussion of the difference between someone "having done something" and them being "guilty" in the eyes of the law.  I'm sure you realize the distinction.

Most laywers I have dealt with have been ethical to the point of IMO being a little anal about it, much to the opposite side of public perception. Yes, I know there are unethical, slimeball lawyers. But I think you might find similar individuals in all professions.

I know where you are coming from, so no need to respond and extend this thread.