I don't see how an incompetent defence can possibly alter the facts of the matter - that she is a greedy cretin who couldn't keep her grubby mitts out the biscuit jar. What is she expecting? A different lawyer will push the "bUt ShE's A mOtHeR!!1!" angle harder?
I just fail to see how this can possibly be nuanced enough to justify an appeal. She stole money from charities. She got caught. She should face the punishment. |