Legal Ethics Dilemma
What is the Legal Ethics Dilemma?
There is a reason that the general public makes nasty remarks about conceivably crooked people “hiding behind their lawyers”. It is because so often that is exactly what they do. The attorney is in the position of being the mouthpiece. In representing his client, he is by the nature of the business going to conceal things that show his client in a bad light and spin as much as possible to make his client look good. The adversarial system pits the opposing sides against each other; to reveal things would frequently not lead to a victory. For justice to be served, the process depends upon each side ferrating out information on there own. Beyond the discovery process, opposing attorneys are left on their own and expected to find the truth through their own efforts.
In reality, this doesn’t always happen. Where one of the ethical dilemmas arises is in exactly what constitutes a lie. Many believe that not revealing information is a sin of omission and is in essence a lie. Yet in order to offer zealous representation, it is obvious that an attorney cannot reveal everything to the other side or he would not be acting in the best interest of his client. Thus, the process demands that even someone with an attorney who knows he is guilty of a grievous offense still is entitled to representation that does it’s best to protect him and place the burden of proof on the other side. How far an attorney is allowed to go to protect the client is pretty much up to him as long as he does not lie about material facts or aid and abet the commission of a crime.
Lawyers have to be careful in giving advice. This is another ethical dilemma. Generally, attorneys are intelligent enough to be able to plant ideas in the client’s head without outright telling them to lie. They are, after all, trained in the importance and implication of every word. In actuality, this is a slippery slope. Attorney’s are paid to give advice about what could happen if a client pursues a particular course of conduct. In the process, they are also basically telling the client how to avoid getting into trouble – which frequently involves the client lying if they choose to continue. While the attorney may not actually be telling the client to be dishonest, the basis of giving legal advice pretty much tells the client how to get away with breaking the law. Attorneys attempt to distance themselves and claim that they are not responsible when their client takes their advice and uses it to commit a crime. This is basically a lie where the attorney is sticking his head in the perverbial sand. Again, how far an attorney is willing to go is pretty much up to him and his conscience.
Most attorneys seem to get around the ethical issue by relying on the argument that they are required to do what is best for their client. They can go to sleep at night because they are placing their interests in being successful and in their duty to perform a role in a system that basically depends upon dishonesty. As they learn to work and manipulate the law, many also learn to spin what is basically their own dishonesty in a way that doesn’t quite seem like outright lying. Thus many, if not most attorneys almost have to be dishonest to some degree to protect their client.
