Why do lawyers put on no defense?

[AK84]

@Princhester

So you convicted based on whargarble without concluding that beyond a reasonable doubt the accused had the required intent.

So if you are on the jury and the accused is said to have committed a crime in the absence of witnesses, you consider he is probably guilty.

You guys are doing a good job of convincing me of something I already knew about juries.

It’s not called amature justice.