Basic Trope: A lawyer who is evil in the courtroom.
- Straight: Alice is a defence attorney who defends obviously evil and slimy clients without qualms and almost seems to enjoy it.
- Exaggerated:
- Alice is a defence attorney who defends only clients she knows are guilty and evil and will do anything to make sure they walk free, including personally assassinating key witnesses.
- Alice is the local kingpin and every single one of her soldiers is a criminal she represented (and still represents, as long as they are useful) in court and she demands their loyalty as payment.
- Downplayed: Alice is a defence attorney who will defend anyone who pays her enough, regardless of her personal thoughts on their innocence.
- Justified:
- It's Alice's job to be amoral. She is a lawyer after all.
- Alice is only in it for the money.
- Alice is the client's personal lawyer and is obligated to get them out of trouble.
- Alice is a sociopath who was told early in life that she should become a lawyer. Unfortunately that also translated to "laws are for suckers".
- Inverted: Crusading Lawyer
- Subverted: Alice looks like she is defending an obvious crook until she actually proves they couldn't have done it.
- Double Subverted: ...Until the evidence that shows her client is innocent was fabricated and Alice knew it.
- Parodied: Alice defends the most disgusting and vile human beings on the planet because she thinks it's fun. Bonus parody points if she says random stuff to defend them.
- Zig-Zagged: Sometimes Alice defends genuinely innocent and good people, sometimes she defends vile and disgusting criminals.
- Averted: Alice is just a normal lawyer who defends normal people.
- Enforced: "Well, somebody has to defend this guy to keep the story going, and no morally good lawyer would take his case."
- Lampshaded:
- Invoked: Alice gets bribed to defend evil clients.
- Deconstructed: Alice has a habit of defending guilty and evil clients, so people go out of their way not to hire her so they don't look bad.
- Reconstructed: Alice flat out calls out criticism of her defending "obviously guilty" people downright illiterate of the law. Including pointing out that if somebody didn't defend them to the best of their abilities they could never be convicted and have the charges stand. Besides if they are so unquestionably guilty why can't they prove it? And if they don't have to prove it what is to stop them from convicting literally anybody?
