They'd be a pretty shit lawyer if they couldn't. They're playing make-believe in a place that has hard rules. Unless their defence includes some kind of "insanity" plea, I don't know how any of them have any "victory against the courts" stories to tell.

That's like punting an infant across the street and saying that you "won the fight."

As I understand it the problem is upholding the conviction. I mean... it's hard to argue that a intellectually challenged individual who represented themselves based on legal advice from a conman had adequate legal representation.