On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Badri Natarajan <[email protected]> wrote: > > No, an earlier confession isn't automatically invalid. And certainly you > can assume that the defence lawyer knows what Kasab's confession said. The > issue will turn on the details (of which we are unaware). If, for example, > Kasab told his lawyer that he had been coerced to say he was an adult, > when in fact he was not (I don't know what Kasab told his lawyer - this is > an example), then it would be perfectly appropriate for the lawyer to say > that he was a juvenile. > > If Kasab told his lawyer that his confession was correct and he was an > adult, then of course the lawyer is not allowed to say to the court that > he's a juvenile (and if he did it would be a serious breach of > professional ethics). If his earlier confession[0] isn't invalid how is this not perjury? I'm curious.
[0] http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=15109 Swati Sathe, Jail superintendent said when he was admitted to the prison, Kasab gave his age as 21 and his date of birth as September 13, 1987. A second witness confirmed this: Venkat Ramamurthy, a resident doctor in a government hospital, testified that when the injured Kasab was brought there at 1 a.m. on November 27, 2008, he said his age was 21. -- .
