Attorney Client Privilege/ Alton Logan Ethical Dilemma

[songline]

I feel the need to respond to something stated in the above post: it was not their own careers that Wilson's lawyers were protecting. They were protecting the information that their client, Wilson, gave them, which they have legal, ethical and moral obligations to protect.

More importantly, and on a larger scale, please bear in mind that if these defense attorneys lose their licenses after breaching the attorney-client privilege, it will affect a great many people than just themselves: there are a great many potential accused persons, some of whom are likely innocent as well, who stand to lose the opportunity to have defense attorneys with the years of experience that Wilson's attorneys have/had defending them.

Chezhire with all due respect (and I did not read this thread - there are just to many and time is of the essence in my world).
I hope I am not veering off to another direction but staying on point; and you have been a well of great information here, which I highly respect.:blowkiss:
I DO know very well that an attorney has an obligation not to breech attorney client privileges: There are a few attorneys in my family. One ran for office in Florida so I will not mention names: BUT JMHO an attorney can say, If you did murder someone I do not want to know or I wont be able to work with you.
I almost went to law school they all thought I'd make a great lawyer; but this is just ONE of the reasons I wanted NO PART OF IT.
I could have never slept at night knowing that some innocent man is sitting in jail while some screwed up law is protecting the azzes with a degree.
She was not the attorney of record and only drew up and notarized papers on that poor mans case who slept in a cell for 26 years.
IMHO she could have found another law that would have saved his life. That is more respectable IMO.
Because for every law there seems to be another counter law and it is who knows how to play the game better that wins.
There are ways around everything if you stand for Doing the right thing. In my book she fits in with that low life level of folks the "A"s are. One difference she has a great resume, and lots of education.

 

[MAMABEAR]

OMG--you are so smart. I want to Thank you and all the other Lawyers/Judge who come here and hold our hands thru all this. Brings a tear to my ole eye balls.:blowkiss:

 

[Wudge]

Getting a PI involved to "tell prison guards what you're after" is not a solution.

Why? For starters, it requires that one of Wilson's lawyers hire a PI and explain that they want said PI to go to the prison guards and ask them to try to obtain information about Wilson telling another inmate about committing the McDonald's shootings. There has been a breach of the attorney-client privilege because the only way that some future prisoner/cellmate, security guard, and PI knew to ask Wilson about the McDonald's shootings was because Wilson's attorneys shared at least part, if not all, of the privileged information

Therefore, even if Wilson opens his mouth and tells another inamte, guard or someone else, that he committed the McDonald's shootings, it only happened because his own lawyers breached the attorney-client privilege.

If this came to light, and Wilson hired a new attorney to depose the particular inmate/prisoner, who would then have to admit under oath that he'd been approached by the prison guard, who would be deposed and have to admit under oath that he'd been aapaproached by the PI, who'd be deposed and have to admit under oath that he'd been approached by Wilson's lawyers "to obtain information about Wilson telling another inamte that he'd committed the McDonald's shootings, it would all come out. Same result.

It's not that hard to depose inmates, prison guards, PI, etc., and one can see where this goes-or doesn't go-really quickly, I might add.

No process exists. No path is foolproof, and all paths require an attorney to violate Wilson's privilege. The question has been: could an attorney finagle a way to free Logan and keep their career?

A member of Logan's family does their own investigation and learns that Wilson was always Edgar's right-hand made, not Logan -- Edgar told his attorney this was common knowledge in the "hood". The family member hires a PI to see if Wilson has ever said anything to anybody (plausible cover story).

 

[Marina2]

Getting a PI involved to "tell prison guards what you're after" is not a solution.

Why? For starters, it requires that one of Wilson's lawyers hire a PI and explain that they want said PI to go to the prison guards and ask them to try to obtain information about Wilson telling another inmate about committing the McDonald's shootings. There has been a breach of the attorney-client privilege because the only way that some future prisoner/cellmate, security guard, and PI knew to ask Wilson about the McDonald's shootings was because Wilson's attorneys shared at least part, if not all, of the privileged information

Therefore, even if Wilson opens his mouth and tells another inamte, guard or someone else, that he committed the McDonald's shootings, it only happened because his own lawyers breached the attorney-client privilege.

If this came to light, and Wilson hired a new attorney to depose the particular inmate/prisoner, who would then have to admit under oath that he'd been approached by the prison guard, who would be deposed and have to admit under oath that he'd been aapaproached by the PI, who'd be deposed and have to admit under oath that he'd been approached by Wilson's lawyers "to obtain information about Wilson telling another inamte that he'd committed the McDonald's shootings, it would all come out. Same result.

It's not that hard to depose inmates, prison guards, PI, etc., and one can see where this goes-or doesn't go-really quickly, I might add.

Thank you, Chezire. I did question whether this approach was really that simple.

I didn't see the solution as being one in which an inmate was solicited to bait Wilson into confessing. I was thinking more along the lines of finding out if a disclosure had already been made by Wilson, i.e. prior to Wilson's attorneys seeking the info or even one made prior to them asking Wilson if he committed the shootings. If this were the case, can it be said that there was no attorney/client privilege when the information was sought through a PI or prison guard or whoever? Does the privilege end as soon as the disclosure is made by Wilson to someone other than his attorneys or when his attorneys find out a disclosure has been made?

I hope my questions aren't confusing. I'm trying to understand if there was a possibility that no attorney/client privilege ever existed because of an admission Wilson may have made to someone prior to his attorneys asking him about his involvement. Or, if the privilege evaporated much sooner than with Wilson's death 26 years after telling his attorneys because he admitted it to another. If Wilson's attorneys sought out this information and found out that he did admit it to another prior to them seeking the information, does this protect them from a breech of a/c privilege charge?

If the attorneys found that Wilson did admit it to someone else it seems they could arrange to receive the information in a way that doesn't implicate them in seeking it out. I do acknowledge that if Wilson's attorneys truly had their client in mind and not their careers they would never attempt to find this out because they may find that Wilson never admitted to anyone that he committed the shootings.

ETA: There was an inmate that was said to offer testimony that Wilson signed an affidavit admitting his guilt so that someone in the prison system was aware of this prior to Wilson's death.

 

[Wudge]

Thank you, Chezire. I did question whether this approach was really that simple.

I didn't see the solution as being one in which an inmate was solicited to bait Wilson into confessing. I was thinking more along the lines of finding out if a disclosure had already been made by Wilson, i.e. prior to Wilson's attorneys seeking the info or even one made prior to them asking Wilson if he committed the shootings. If this were the case, can it be said that there was no attorney/client privilege when the information was sought through a PI or prison guard or whoever? Does the privilege end as soon as the disclosure is made by Wilson to someone other than his attorneys or when his attorneys find out a disclosure has been made?

I hope my questions aren't confusing. I'm trying to understand if there was a possibility that no attorney/client privilege ever existed because of an admission Wilson may have made to someone prior to his attorneys asking him about his involvement. Or, if the privilege evaporated much sooner than with Wilson's death 26 years after telling his attorneys because he admitted it to another. If Wilson's attorneys sought out this information and found out that he did admit it to another prior to them seeking the information, does this protect them from a breech of a/c privilege charge?

If the attorneys found that Wilson did admit it to someone else it seems they could arrange to receive the information in a way that doesn't implicate them in seeking it out. I do acknowledge that if Wilson's attorneys truly had their client in mind and not their careers they would never attempt to find this out because they may find that Wilson never admitted to anyone that he committed the shootings.

ETA: There was an inmate that was said to offer testimony that Wilson signed an affidavit admitting his guilt so that someone in the prison system was aware of this prior to Wilson's death.

Finding that the client had told another person or other people (the more, the merrier) before they confided in their attorney "could" work too; i.e., assuming the other person (such as a priest) does not also carry a "privilege".

The A/C privilege was established to prevent an attorney from being compelled to testify against his/her client. For purposes of our Hollywood script, a ruling that the privilege never existed would equal a ruling that the privlege later evaporated.

 

[Tricia]

Dear Guys,

AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHH.

Quit the back and forth tiptoeing to the line of being argumentative.

Stop before I lose what is left of my mind please.

Since there isn't a lot of new info in this case what starts to happen is we all start to nibble then eat our own young. Because we are bored.

Pleeeeeaaaasssseeee don't do this anymore OK?

Tricia