Cyber sleuth
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2015
- Messages
- 1,080
- Reaction score
- 9,080
Thank youYou mean when Baldwin said that? It could be anything. A client who was convicted lodging a complaint in support of an anticipated appeal on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, something more? We do not know and I would not want to guess because the outcome remains the same. He has no mark on his disciplinary record and she has just given him one without going through the proper process to do so. Where is her referral to the disciplinary committee? This is what she would have and should have done if there was meat on these bones. jmo
She told us. She would have read the statement, kicked them off the case, and then sent RA back to prison. The scene - with media being invited there for that one and only show would have greatly jeopardized RA and would have created a conflict on the record between them and their client and he wanted them to stay on and they were more than happy to stay on after the thousands of hours of time invested so this scenario had to be avoided at all costs.
She told them it wouldn't get to a point to ask for that and even assuming it did, she would have denied it. She was very clear. "I made my decision sua sponte, and I "really don't want to do this in public" but if you don't withdrawal, I am telling you this is what I will do. That is not a choice, and this is not the way this should have played out.
jmo
Could you please link me or briefly explain the proper due process for DQ of attorneys for gross negligence while they are still representing the subject client.