If you are a lawyer and you're defending someone and they confide in you that they did in fact commit the crime but, on record, they have maintained their innocence. It's your job to represent them and prove their innocence regardless right?
Right?
Really?
I guess this is where my job would be in jeopardy. You're guilty and you confide in me that you did in fact commit this crime and another man is in prison for the past 26 years for something you did. I'm supposed to just sit on this information? Instead of ratting you out, I with another lawyer decide to write up the confession and seal it in a box. The contents of the box has been revealed. Now what?
WOW!
This is an excerpt from the following article. It pretty much sums up the question I would like an answer to:
3 I love Comments! Please click here to comment!:
I read that article yesterday on Yahoo. Unfortuanately, what happened is the only route the lawyers were allowed to take. I agree with the general concept of "doing the right thing", but what they would have been doing would have been professional suicide. Early in their career they would have basically broken the one rule of their profession, attorney/client priviledge. That would have been the kiss of death for them. That is why whistleblowers get such big payoffs based on the amount of money saved or fined to the offending company, because they will neve be able to work in that industry again. They will be labeled rats. Lawyers don't get that type of payoff to make an economical transition. It is a hard position to be in, but I am sure it came up in plenty of law classes in school, and they chose to continue in that line of study.
huh? how the frak did they sleep at night all these years? my career would have been over too!
I saw this story on television and the interviews of the accused and the lawyers.
In my opinion, the lawyers did not do the right thing! Still, that's the nature of the job.
Post a Comment