> Whether a person is poor or not makes no difference to that point.
It absolutely does, though. A poor person can't get a crack team of lawyers to defend them, they get an overworked public lawyer that doesn't have the time to make a decent defense, so it's very risky for that person to go to trial, even if they're completely innocent.
For an entity like Goldman it's the other way around, you only settle if you know you're guilty beyond reasonable doubt, because you can otherwise afford great, dedicated lawyers working full time for years on your case.
No, this doesn't mean that you're automatically guilty if you're wealthy and settle, but the two situations are far _far_ from being equivalent.
It absolutely does, though. A poor person can't get a crack team of lawyers to defend them, they get an overworked public lawyer that doesn't have the time to make a decent defense, so it's very risky for that person to go to trial, even if they're completely innocent.
For an entity like Goldman it's the other way around, you only settle if you know you're guilty beyond reasonable doubt, because you can otherwise afford great, dedicated lawyers working full time for years on your case.
No, this doesn't mean that you're automatically guilty if you're wealthy and settle, but the two situations are far _far_ from being equivalent.