Monday, May 11, 2015

The Rules Vs. A Conundrum

"Lawyers are the only persons in whom ignorance of the law is not punished." 
-Jeremy Bentham

It takes a hefty chest of funds to retain attorneys, much less keep the legal folk as busy as WOFF seemingly has done over the years. And, the practice, so to speak, continues with upcoming court encounters these coming months.

This observer asks: If one or some or all of the attorneys involved attend WOFF AND represent WOFF , let's say in the case where some kind of abuse is alleged, how can they NOT KNOW the allegation occurred? How can they NOT know that it is alleged to happen frequently? Have THEY witnessed it? How can they continue to defend such cases time and time again?

IF any or all of the allegations are true.

One has to wonder if their “counselors” have compelled themselves to advise or have advised their client to refrain from engaging in such alleged actions? One has to wonder if those “counselors” have a limit to another form of legal matter involving a person making allegations against the “church”.

The WOFFWATCH links have mostly been helpful to those seeking a connection to authority to investigate matters where a person feels or alleges some kind of injustice may have been inflicted on them.It ALSO is a comprehensive list of all things WOFF documented and published.

Many view these options, but do not act. It is understandable given the stakes.

Going up against a perceived Goliath is formidable for a person who just wants to go about his or her business. Some cave to the pressure of the “church”, many have overwhelming complications affecting their decisions, others cut their losses and go free, despite the “consequences”.

Going free has been a tough road for all in some way shape or form that is certainly incalculable but commonly liberating despite the challenges.

Wake up, people.

"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein ...

So much money spent on counsel.
So much energy spent on trying to impress those in the Jewish faith.
So much energy devoted to scaring the hell out of your own members.
So much time in court.
So much news coverage.
So much trying to convince that everything said about you is a lie.

WOFF could use all of that time and money..........feeding the hungry, building the poor a place to live, ministering love to everyone, building a positive reputation in your community.

Now, that's an alternative that is more and more likely to ultimately land on succeeding leadership. This too, will take time.

In the meantime....

The point of these rules? I imagine counsel is in a bit of a conundrum.

Let's go over a few rules, shall we?

-WOFFWATCHER (aka: one of those “attackers”)

July 24, 1997


[4] A lawyer's conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer's business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law's procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials. While it is a lawyer's duty, when necessary, to challenge the rectitude of official action, it is also a lawyer's duty to uphold legal process.

[6] A lawyer is required to give an honest opinion about the actual consequences that appear likely to result from a client's conduct. The fact that a client uses advice in a course of action that is criminal or fraudulent does not, of itself, make a lawyer a party to the course of action. However, a lawyer may not knowingly assist a client in criminal or fraudulent conduct. There is a critical distinction between presenting an analysis of legal aspects of questionable conduct and recommending the means by which a crime or fraud might be committed with impunity. There is also a distinction between giving a client legitimate advice about asset protection and assisting in the illegal or fraudulent conveyance of assets.

[12] A lawyer's responsibilities as a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen are usually harmonious. Thus, when an opposing party is well represented, a lawyer can be a zealous advocate on behalf of a client and, at the same time, assume that justice is being done. So also, a lawyer can be sure that preserving client confidences ordinarily serves that public interest because people are more likely to seek legal advice, and thereby heed their legal obligations, when they know their communications will be private. In the nature of law practice, however, conflicting responsibilities are encountered. Virtually all difficult ethical problems arise from conflict between a lawyer's responsibilities to clients, to the legal system and to the lawyer's own interest in remaining an upright person while earning a satisfactory living. The Rules of Professional Conduct prescribe terms for resolving such conflicts. Within the framework of these Rules, many difficult issues of professional discretion can arise. Such issues must be resolved through the exercise of sensitive professional and moral judgment guided by the basic principles underlying the Rules.

No comments:

Post a Comment