<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Don&#8217;t</title>
	<atom:link href="http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 06:39:32 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Phaedrus</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/comment-page-1/#comment-48772</link>
		<dc:creator>Phaedrus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 04:55:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=11297#comment-48772</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not a lawyer, but the attorney-client privilege generally has a number of exceptions. And one of those exceptions covers this situation. If you&#039;re talking to an attorney about how best to handle a crime you&#039;ve already committed, that&#039;s privileged; but if you&#039;re talking to an attorney about how to commit a &lt;i&gt;future&lt;/i&gt; crime, that&#039;s not. When last I checked, murder was a crime. So any discussions about how to murder witnesses (or anybody else) would not be privileged.

And at the risk of stating the obvious, no, this is not &quot;merely a good old-fashioned zealous defense&quot;. A lawyer is neither legally nor ethically allowed to commit crimes in order to represent a client.

Of course, the real fun here will be trying to empanel a jury (assuming there&#039;s no guilty plea). I would imagine that many potential jurors would react rather negatively to being told that they were assigned to the trial of someone accused of murdering a participant of a previous trial.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not a lawyer, but the attorney-client privilege generally has a number of exceptions. And one of those exceptions covers this situation. If you&#8217;re talking to an attorney about how best to handle a crime you&#8217;ve already committed, that&#8217;s privileged; but if you&#8217;re talking to an attorney about how to commit a <i>future</i> crime, that&#8217;s not. When last I checked, murder was a crime. So any discussions about how to murder witnesses (or anybody else) would not be privileged.</p>
<p>And at the risk of stating the obvious, no, this is not &#8220;merely a good old-fashioned zealous defense&#8221;. A lawyer is neither legally nor ethically allowed to commit crimes in order to represent a client.</p>
<p>Of course, the real fun here will be trying to empanel a jury (assuming there&#8217;s no guilty plea). I would imagine that many potential jurors would react rather negatively to being told that they were assigned to the trial of someone accused of murdering a participant of a previous trial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymer</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/comment-page-1/#comment-48753</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 21:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=11297#comment-48753</guid>
		<description>Would that be considered excessive or merely a good old fashioned zealous defense.  If they can successfully mount such a defense for themselves, they just might get off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would that be considered excessive or merely a good old fashioned zealous defense.  If they can successfully mount such a defense for themselves, they just might get off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Platt</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/comment-page-1/#comment-48750</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Platt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 19:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=11297#comment-48750</guid>
		<description>Wondering if the case against him runs into attorney-client privilege. How come the news item already refers to the content of a taped phone call between him and a client?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wondering if the case against him runs into attorney-client privilege. How come the news item already refers to the content of a taped phone call between him and a client?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Mary Johnson</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/05/dont-10/comment-page-1/#comment-48748</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Mary Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2009 18:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=11297#comment-48748</guid>
		<description>Saw it yesterday.  Amazing, just damned amazing.

What about prosecutors who do not have their law licenses? 

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:http://www.salisburypost.com/Area/051409-wagoner-us-attorney-had-suspended-license</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Saw it yesterday.  Amazing, just damned amazing.</p>
<p>What about prosecutors who do not have their law licenses? </p>
<p><a href="http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:http://www.salisburypost.com/Area/051409-wagoner-us-attorney-had-suspended-license" rel="nofollow">http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:http://www.salisburypost.com/Area/051409-wagoner-us-attorney-had-suspended-license</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

