I honestly don't care in this specific case. It could be the head of the Union of Public Defenders everywhere. The fact is if you look at the funds allocated to support the police/prosecution, then look at the dollars spent maintaining the Public Defenders office (which should arguably be at parity), and given the unavailibility of "stealing from the populace" (civil asset forfeiture or fine assessment) to level the budgetary playing field, the resulting fiscal asymmetry would and should make any bookkeeper blush.

Our system is no justice system without parity between the prosecution and defense. That is nowhere near the case. It is an undeniable fact.