Attorney Client Privilege/ Alton Logan Ethical Dilemma

[Wudge]

She drafted it, so I guess some level of input or control would be needed.

However, Andrea says that had the penalty been more severe she'd have acted differently.

This means that she had considered how she would prevent the injustice of death for Logan (because he was innocent or because SHE is anti DP?), but failed to prevent the injustice of 26 years in jail.

She was prepared to violate privilege (her words, I don't believe it exists) to serve her cause (anti DP), but not to serve the cause of an innocent man.

Save the guilty but eff the innocent - a tragic reflection on our system and those who apply it.

Correct. It appears that one or more of the attorneys involved would have sacrificed their career had Alton Logan received the death sentence --principle prevails, short straw is the loser. As regards control of the signed affidavit (evidence), Andrea did not have control of it. She could not have produced it to anyone.

 

[Concerned Papa]

I have read all off the posts here on the "ethical dilemma" for Ms. Lyon as to attorney client privilege being the cornerstone of her justification for allowing an innocent man to rot in a prison cell for 26 years. I find it appalling.

As an attorney who has based her record of opposition for the death penalty on the sanctity of human life, her disregard of an innocent man's life renders her arguments as shallow and meaningless in my opinion. I find it no different from politicians who have campaigned on "family values" and moral issues, only to be caught in scandalous affairs after election. Her much publicized "never having lost a DP case" is clearly misleading as well when in fact she, apparently, has never won an acquittal at trial for a capital case.

I read an interesting in depth analysis of the attorneys involved in the decision not to disclose the knowledge of the man's innocence at:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/hottype/080131/

The prevailing response for their actions was "what do I do?". What should they have done? To me the choice should have been simple. Do the right thing. A career choice versus a man's life would have made the decision for me, not difficult at all. I would have preferred washing dishes for a living to being a party to taking a man's life from him by allowing him to remain locked up for 26 years.

With what appears to me to be a flawed moral conviction and a record of misstating her track record, Andrea Lyon may have indeed located a defendant she can relate to.

 

[SoSueMe]

I'm just going by what I've read the AL said, so, yes, she seems to have drafted the affidavit and notarized it. But she also says she considered herself one of the client's lawyers in the case, and my impression from something I read led me to believe that she also was one of the affiants, that multiple people signed it. Now that you ask me directly, I have to be honest and say I'm not sure. I'd have to go back and look at the media reports to se what made me come to that conclusion. If she was one of the affiants, I guess that is sort of a small thing in the sea of strangeness surrounding this, even if it isn't appropriate.

I suppose she could sign it and have someone else notarize HER signature, but why not have that person notarize all the signatures? I'm thinking they didn't even take the chance of a secretary typing or notarizing this thing due to the very nature of it.

I do think attorneys are presented with many dilemmas when confronted with legality vs. ethics vs. morality.

Better you highly educated guys than me. I'm just sayin'...

 

[amethyst221]

I suppose she could sign it and have someone else notarize HER signature, but why not have that person notarize all the signatures? I'm thinking they didn't even take the chance of a secretary typing or notarizing this thing due to the very nature of it.

I do think attorneys are presented with many dilemmas when confronted with legality vs. ethics vs. morality.

Better you highly educated guys than me. I'm just sayin'...

I just re-read the CR article. It specifically states that 3 lawyers signed. Miller, who got the first information from HIS client that the man arrested as his accomplice was a stranger, and that the real accomplice was the client of the other 2 guys, K and C (who reportedly also signed). They heard about it first from Miller, then asked their client about it, if the article is correct. He said it was true, and thus the dilemma. It is reported that AL drafted the affidavit, which was short though carefully and purposefully crafted, and notarized it, not that she signed as an affiant, to correct my earlier impression. Thereafter, she was not the one to retain the affidavit and denied it's existence, when asked. She had drafted motions or done other tasks in the case and did consider herself counsel, along with K and C, and thus bound by the privilege.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

The prevailing response for their actions was "what do I do?". What should they have done? To me the choice should have been simple. Do the right thing. A career choice versus a man's life would have made the decision for me, not difficult at all. I would have preferred washing dishes for a living to being a party to taking a man's life from him by allowing him to remain locked up for 26 years.

SNIP

If the wrongful incarceration had been one month, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been one year, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been three years, would you have sacrificed your career?

Does God grade on a curve? If he does not grade on a curve, should he?

 

[NSS]

Correct. It appears that one or more of the attorneys involved would have sacrificed their career had Alton Logan received the death sentence --principle prevails, short straw is the loser. As regards control of the signed affidavit (evidence), Andrea did not have control of it. She could not have produced it to anyone.

My apologies - I misunderstood the 'control over' portion of the question. I thought you meant 'control over the content' (hence my mention of her having drafted it), I now realise you meant 'control of the document itself, once signed'.
:blowkiss:
Maybe 'leaking' the content of that affidavit to TMZ would have led to some public investigation? (Tongue firmly in cheek).

I'm not sure why I am so affected by injustices (in all it's forms) in the justice system.

As far as this lady is concerned, she earns a living by defending the heinous acts commited by bad people, in order that they may live a long, natural, unfruitful life, she is unfamiliar with defending the innocent and was probably out of her depth in that case.

I'm not a DP supporter. I'd like to abolish it and the DP mitigation phase is just one reason why.
Listening to a lawyer attempt to turn a monster into a pathetic victim of circumstance or upbringing is offensive to me.
Being a victim is no excuse for turning into a perpetrator, EVER.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

I'm not sure why I am so affected by injustices (in all it's forms) in the justice system.

As far as this lady is concerned, she earns a living by defending the heinous acts commited by bad people, in order that they may live a long, natural, unfruitful life, she is unfamiliar with defending the innocent and was probably out of her depth in that case.

SNIP

Some witnesses are mistaken (25% to 30%). Some witnesses commit perjury. Some in LE frame people. Some in LE commit perjury. Some prosecutors hide exculpatory and/or exonerating evidence from the defense. Some prosecutors coach witnesses to effectively lie and/or hide deals they made with witnesses. Some juries assess evidence incorrectly. Some juries believe a reasonable story by the prosecution equals guilty. Some jurors are stealth jurors. Some jurors are too dumb to be jurors. Some judges are crooked. Some judges are very biased in favor of the prosecution. If you want a trial to avoid a wrongful conviction, there are a lot of evil hurdles a defense attorney must clear.

As regards Public Defenders, they seldom get to choose their cases much less their clients. That says nothing of the fact that few PDs are qualified to handle DP cases. Some are excellent. Some are poor. Andrea is superb.

All who are indicted are not guilty as charged. Those who are not guilty deserve quality representation but many don't receive it. Watch out for karma, what comes around...

 

[Concerned Papa]

If the wrongful incarceration had been one month, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been one year, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been three years, would you have sacrificed your career?

Does God grade on a curve? If he does not grade on a curve, should he?

Wudge, I have been a member here at WS only a short period of time, but it is obvious to me that you enjoy a good debate and typically I do as well. Normally my opinion on a subject could be swayed by sound opposing logic. However in this particular discussion, I have no give as to my beliefs.

You see, my friend, unlike most of you and possibly all of you, I was confined as a young man in a maximum security prison for a crime I was, in fact, guilty of. I spent 11 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, and 22 hours locked away. It was only the love of my family that allowed me to endure and get out with a determination to build a life that was meaningful. I cannot imagine the horror of being incarcerated for 26 years for a crime of which I was innocent.

There are no words, no matter how soundly based in the correctness of law, which allows me to consider their lack of action as anything less than reprehensible. This lack of action by the attorneys involved, including Andrea Lyon, constitutes a self serving callousness which is equalled only by their pretentious claim of willingness to take action if he received a death sentence. I submit to you the opinion that the robbing of an innocent man's soul and essence of inner being for 26 years is in many ways worse than a death sentence.

In a respectful direct answer to your question, it is my opinion that the prevention of one month, one year, three years, or certainly 26 years of wrongful incarceration justifies the sacrifice of any career.

As to whether or not God "grades on a curve", I frankly do not know. I can, however, offer the words from The Holy Bible of I Peter 3:14: "But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed."

 

[Verité]

. . . .As regards control of the signed affidavit (evidence), Andrea did not have control of it. She could not have produced it to anyone.

This was not a Manchurian Candidate case. She did have control of her "knowledge" of the affidavit. What does she do about living with that,
go to confession? Write-out another affidavit for another sealed box?

 

[Verité]

Wudge, I have been a member here at WS only a short period of time, but it is obvious to me that you enjoy a good debate and typically I do as well. Normally my opinion on a subject could be swayed by sound opposing logic. However in this particular discussion, I have no give as to my beliefs.

You see, my friend, unlike most of you and possibly all of you, I was confined as a young man in a maximum security prison for a crime I was, in fact, guilty of. I spent 11 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, and 22 hours locked away. It was only the love of my family that allowed me to endure and get out with a determination to build a life that was meaningful. I cannot imagine the horror of being incarcerated for 26 years for a crime of which I was innocent.

There are no words, no matter how soundly based in the correctness of law, which allows me to consider their lack of action as anything less than reprehensible. This lack of action by the attorneys involved, including Andrea Lyon, constitutes a self serving callousness which is equalled only by their pretentious claim of willingness to take action if he received a death sentence. I submit to you the opinion that the robbing of an innocent man's soul and essence of inner being for 26 years is in many ways worse than a death sentence.

In a respectful direct answer to your question, it is my opinion that the prevention of one month, one year, three years, or certainly 26 years of wrongful incarceration justifies the sacrifice of any career.

As to whether or not God "grades on a curve", I frankly do not know. I can, however, offer the words from The Holy Bible of I Peter 3:14: "But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed."

You've summed it up for me, CP!

Thanks to all those who have provided links for readings on this topic. I intend to go do that, now.

 

[Gaia713]

If the wrongful incarceration had been one month, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been one year, would you have sacrificed your career? If the wrongful incarceration had been three years, would you have sacrificed your career?

Does God grade on a curve? If he does not grade on a curve, should he?

She sacrificed her integrity and to me, that is sacrificing her reputation. How good could her career be with a reputation of failing to uphold the law? She could have testified to seeing said affadavit or submitted an affadavit of her own that she saw it.

Wrong is wrong is wrong. As for how God grades, I wasn't aware that he presented people with report cards during their lifetime.

 

[whiteangora]

Wudge, I have been a member here at WS only a short period of time, but it is obvious to me that you enjoy a good debate and typically I do as well. Normally my opinion on a subject could be swayed by sound opposing logic. However in this particular discussion, I have no give as to my beliefs.

You see, my friend, unlike most of you and possibly all of you, I was confined as a young man in a maximum security prison for a crime I was, in fact, guilty of. I spent 11 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, and 22 hours locked away. It was only the love of my family that allowed me to endure and get out with a determination to build a life that was meaningful. I cannot imagine the horror of being incarcerated for 26 years for a crime of which I was innocent.

There are no words, no matter how soundly based in the correctness of law, which allows me to consider their lack of action as anything less than reprehensible. This lack of action by the attorneys involved, including Andrea Lyon, constitutes a self serving callousness which is equalled only by their pretentious claim of willingness to take action if he received a death sentence. I submit to you the opinion that the robbing of an innocent man's soul and essence of inner being for 26 years is in many ways worse than a death sentence.

In a respectful direct answer to your question, it is my opinion that the prevention of one month, one year, three years, or certainly 26 years of wrongful incarceration justifies the sacrifice of any career.

As to whether or not God "grades on a curve", I frankly do not know. I can, however, offer the words from The Holy Bible of I Peter 3:14: "But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed."

Thank you very much for all that you said and
:Welcome-12-june:

 

[Tiki]

Wudge, I have been a member here at WS only a short period of time, but it is obvious to me that you enjoy a good debate and typically I do as well. Normally my opinion on a subject could be swayed by sound opposing logic. However in this particular discussion, I have no give as to my beliefs.

You see, my friend, unlike most of you and possibly all of you, I was confined as a young man in a maximum security prison for a crime I was, in fact, guilty of. I spent 11 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, and 22 hours locked away. It was only the love of my family that allowed me to endure and get out with a determination to build a life that was meaningful. I cannot imagine the horror of being incarcerated for 26 years for a crime of which I was innocent.

There are no words, no matter how soundly based in the correctness of law, which allows me to consider their lack of action as anything less than reprehensible. This lack of action by the attorneys involved, including Andrea Lyon, constitutes a self serving callousness which is equalled only by their pretentious claim of willingness to take action if he received a death sentence. I submit to you the opinion that the robbing of an innocent man's soul and essence of inner being for 26 years is in many ways worse than a death sentence.

In a respectful direct answer to your question, it is my opinion that the prevention of one month, one year, three years, or certainly 26 years of wrongful incarceration justifies the sacrifice of any career.

As to whether or not God "grades on a curve", I frankly do not know. I can, however, offer the words from The Holy Bible of I Peter 3:14: "But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed."

Thank you for sharing your beautifully told story. I agree with you 100%.

My son spent a few days in jail (he was arrested for DUI in FL while sitting in a car with the engine running to have the AC on while waiting for his designated driver. It took me a while to get thru' the red tape to get him bailed out from NY)
He was deeply affected by the experience - not in a good way.

Unfortunately, there are many people who put their careers and finances ahead of truth and human injustice, and rationalize it in many ways. It is my opinion that way of thinking has cost mankind dearly.

Fortunately, there are also many people who believe that just because something is legal, or a rule, doesn't mean it's right.

It's because of people who took a stand against the "rules" that we have many of the freedoms we enjoy. We need more people to stand up for what is right in order to progress as a nation and as individuals.

JMHO as an old hippie trying not to become any more cynical.

Welcome, Concerned Papa - I look foward to reading your future posts here.

.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, I have been a member here at WS only a short period of time, but it is obvious to me that you enjoy a good debate and typically I do as well. Normally my opinion on a subject could be swayed by sound opposing logic. However in this particular discussion, I have no give as to my beliefs.

You see, my friend, unlike most of you and possibly all of you, I was confined as a young man in a maximum security prison for a crime I was, in fact, guilty of. I spent 11 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, and 22 hours locked away. It was only the love of my family that allowed me to endure and get out with a determination to build a life that was meaningful. I cannot imagine the horror of being incarcerated for 26 years for a crime of which I was innocent.

There are no words, no matter how soundly based in the correctness of law, which allows me to consider their lack of action as anything less than reprehensible. This lack of action by the attorneys involved, including Andrea Lyon, constitutes a self serving callousness which is equalled only by their pretentious claim of willingness to take action if he received a death sentence. I submit to you the opinion that the robbing of an innocent man's soul and essence of inner being for 26 years is in many ways worse than a death sentence.

In a respectful direct answer to your question, it is my opinion that the prevention of one month, one year, three years, or certainly 26 years of wrongful incarceration justifies the sacrifice of any career.

As to whether or not God "grades on a curve", I frankly do not know. I can, however, offer the words from The Holy Bible of I Peter 3:14: "But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed."

It's good that you were not wrongfully convicted.

Principles are great. All people should reflect on theirs. In doing so, people often realize that the whole world is a compromise. While you might be willing to sacrifice your legal career to prevent a person from being wrongfully incarcerated for any period of time, would you sacrifice your life? Or the life of one of your children? Hopefully, you have a limit, a compromise.

We are all different. We all assess situations with a different set of principles and values, and our values will have different calibrations and limits.

Regarding Andrea, she had neither path nor process to effect the reversal of Alton Logan's conviction. You will not find a legal scholar who says otherwise. If you decide to sacrifice your career, achieving the goal should, at the very least, be highly or somewhat probable.

 

[jandkmom]

Have been trying to catch up....what if the man who was wrongly convicted was killed in prison? IMO just because he wasn't given the death penalty by a jury doesn't give the attorneys an excuse for letting an innocent man go to jail. If he had children, he can never gain that time back with them. He lost 26 years of time with his family. How did we get so far from doing what is right and justifying it to suit our needs?

 

[songline]

Did anyone follow this story last year? I think we might have a thread on it. Anyway,it was really interesting and eye opening:
Inmate’s freedom may hinge on secret kept for 26 years


For a quarter of a century, defense lawyers Dale Coventry and Jamie Kunzwere bound by the rules of law to hold onto a secret that now could mean freedom for a man serving a life sentence for murder.
The secret – memorialized in a notarized affidavit that they locked in ametal box – was that their client, Andrew Wilson, admitted that he shotgunned to death a security guard at a McDonald’s restaurant on the South Side in January 1982.
Bound to silence by attorney-client privilege, Kunz and Coventry could do nothing as another man, Alton Logan, 54, was tried and convicted instead.
The two lawyers testified in court last week that they were bound by theattorney-client privilege and Wilson’s admonition that they only reveal hisadmission after his death. Wilson, who was serving a life sentence for themurders of two Chicago police officers, died of natural causes Nov. 19.
snip
Coventry and Kunz both recounted separately how they had been haunted overthe years by knowing that they had evidence of Logan’s innocence, but couldnot legally disclose it until Wilson died.

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/jan/19/news/chi-secretjan19

IT is this article that has turned me off to KC's lawyer. I posted that with the link somewher.
Then went into lurking more then posting.
Ethical attorneys do not want to take the case.
Some would say I do not want to know if you killed someone or I'd have a hard time to defend you.
she has made me walk.....If KC needs someone of her caliber, IMHO we'll never know the truth.
YES attorney Client privileges allow clients to murder someone and if they have a great lawyer they get off.

I was willing to give KC the benefit of doubt that she was a negligent immoral person, but not a killer.
that perhaps something may have happened while she was doing something else and left Caylee with some scuzz bag.
But to the extent that this attorney is on, I do not care what happens at the end. I really do not.
My wish is that there will be some divine intervention.

Very very early on GA said they do not have anything to tie KC to any murder.
That put my eyes right on him. IMHO he made sure of that before that 911 call.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

How good could her career be with a reputation of failing to uphold the law? She could have testified to seeing said affadavit or submitted an affadavit of her own that she saw it.

Wrong is wrong is wrong. As for how God grades, I wasn't aware that he presented people with report cards during their lifetime.

What law did Andrea break?

Moreover, to whom would she have testified? Andrea was not there when Wilson allegedly confessed. She had but hearsay. Alton Logan would not have been set free on hearsay.

HTH

 

[jandkmom]

There was a time in some parts of the USA where some people were prohibited from sitting in certain seats because of the color of their skin. If these people sat there and the police were called, the police would remind them of the law and tell them to move. If they did not they would be arrested, and judges and juries would enforce the law by punishing the transgressors with prison time and fines.

Those were the rules. They were on the books, and people could point to them and say that's the law. Didn't make it right. Some brave people took stands against those rules, broke them, and suffered for it. Didn't make them wrong.

And I dare say these folks who stood up for what's right didn't weigh the consequences against any damage to their own careers, but rather their sense of right and wrong, and the effect on the world of failing to do what they felt they could to remedy an injustice they felt unconscionable. Some of them died for their principles, which did have a devastating effect on their careers, I will admit. But I dare say their effect on future generations was more profound than the ones who were only concerned with their own fortunes.

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[songline]

She drafted it, so I guess some level of input or control would be needed.

However, Andrea says that had the penalty been more severe she'd have acted differently.

This means that she had considered how she would prevent the injustice of death for Logan (because he was innocent or because SHE is anti DP?), but failed to prevent the injustice of 26 years in jail.

She was prepared to violate privilege (her words, I don't believe it exists) to serve her cause (anti DP), but not to serve the cause of an innocent man.

Save the guilty but eff the innocent - a tragic reflection on our system and those who apply it.

26 years for an innocent man is like a death of sorts.
She is justifying, and it stinks to high hell. :furious:
Her moral code is despicable IMO and that fits in with the rest of the clan.
she is not out to get the Anthony's or look for a loop hole to harm them, she is out to save Casey and free her.
She is not interested in an October Trail, but in a lot of delays. eventually people like me who are starting to get grossed out by this entire clan will fall off this wagon.
KC may walk; no perp is being sought out. IF she is guilty or innocent with this lawyer I will never trust the results.
CAYLEE WILL HAVE NO JUSTICE.

I think the A/C privileges should be altered to exclude murder.

JMO

 

[songline]

There was a time in some parts of the USA where some people were prohibited from sitting in certain seats because of the color of their skin. If these people sat there and the police were called, the police would remind them of the law and tell them to move. If they did not they would be arrested, and judges and juries would enforce the law by punishing the transgressors with prison time and fines.

Those were the rules. They were on the books, and people could point to them and say that's the law. Didn't make it right. Some brave people took stands against those rules, broke them, and suffered for it. Didn't make them wrong.

And I dare say these folks who stood up for what's right didn't weigh the consequences against any damage to their own careers, but rather their sense of right and wrong, and the effect on the world of failing to do what they felt they could to remedy an injustice they felt unconscionable. Some of them died for their principles, which did have a devastating effect on their careers, I will admit. But I dare say their effect on future generations was more profound than the ones who were only concerned with their own fortunes.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
I LOVE THE WAY YOU THINK. - A man after my own heart.