Lawyers, Judge Thyself

I probably hurt my neighbor’s feelings the other day.

She’s a lawyer, and I was on a roll about how the legal profession has no moral backbone.  The concept of ethics is alien to them.

I was in a courtroom, trying to convince the judge that firing someone who was unethical was in violation of our contract and a greater moral code.

The judge laughed.  I lost.  It cost us almost a quarter million dollars, but I learned something.

Here’s a recent tragedy that illustrates how well the legal profession judges itself.

This tragedy involves a judge who may have killed his wife.  She’s a local teacher and well-liked.  Her murder is upsetting an entire community.

But that’s not the whole tragic story.That's why lawyers can't tell good from evil.

It seems that the tragedy started back in 2014 when the Judge was caught assaulting her.

He remained a WORKING Judge for about a year.  A few months later he was sentenced for the assault, and stayed in jail for about a year.

During all this time, he’s still a lawyer.

Here’s a glimmer of good news.  The Board of Professional Conduct recommended that he be disbarred.  For some reason this case went to the Supreme Court of Ohio.

Guess what?

They agreed his behavior was “abhorrent,” but since he was under “stress” they would let him remain a lawyer, but rule that he couldn’t actually work as a lawyer unless he petitioned to be reinstated.

Wow.  Talk about severe.

So, if the ex-Judge is indeed the killer of his ex-wife, then, maybe, the greatest court in the great state of Ohio might think that’s enough evidence to take away his law license.

Then again, a decision like that requires a moral backbone.

So I’m not holding my breath.

By the way, if you’re a lawyer reading this,

Don’t be angry with me.

Try fixing your profession.

Conspiracy of Silence

Image

The Rolling Stone magazine did a great article detailing known assault allegations against Don John, Predator-in-Chief.  I’m pretty ticked off about one aspect in particular, buying silence.

In particular, when a predator is done with his victim, he doesn’t want them to tell anyone else.  If the predator is rich enough, he hires a bunch of goons (lawyers) to give the victim money and a contract telling them to be silent.

The victim has sold their story, the truth, and their soul, along with their body.  They are no longer a victim, they are party to a contract.

The real victim becomes the truth.  And because the predator is still at large, more young women will come to harm.  The first victim has decided her pocketbook was more important than those other women’s dignity.

It makes sense that the predator himself wants his victims to remain silent, because it enables him to prey on others more easily.  If he’s rich enough, he can afford it.

But why doesn’t another rich person come along and buy out that contract?  For only a few extra dollars, the first victim can be just as rich, and the world would have her story.

Quid pro quo.  I’ll do you a favor if you do one for me.

If one rich person were to start doing this, than other rich people would do it to him.  As long as it’s only poor people who sell their voices, then the world of the rich is undisturbed.  But if one rich person were to come along and buy the truth, then someone richer would come along and buy stories embarrassing to him.

I’m confident that is how his lawyers would argue it with him.  I’m confident in this because to destroy the system of confidentiality agreements would also cut into the amount of money that lawyers make.  Anything that hurts their income is also one of the things they avoid.

Perhaps someone can crowd-fund social truth.  Perhaps.

Until we begin to truly value truth and values in society, we will continue to live in fear.  Women will be prey, alpha males will be predators.  We deify the rich and famous, ostracize the old and poor.

It’s better if we don’t talk about it.

After all, your silence is worth gold.

 

Buying Silence, Selling Truth

Image

The Rolling Stone magazine did a great article detailing known assault allegations against Don John, Predator-in-Chief.

The parts of it that make me angriest are those that purchase silence from the victims.

It makes sense that the predator himself wants his victims to remain silent, because it enables him to prey on others more easily.

But such agreements involve others, other men, other women.  These agreements involve parents of daughters, husbands, wives.  Why would these other people get involved in such a transgression of criminal activity?

For one thing, these other people we speak of are lawyers.  And lawyers are taught that ethics, morals, and the greater good are irrelevant.  The only things that matter are laws and verdicts.  The client’s interests are paramount, whether that client is a criminal, murderer, victim, or completely innocent.

Beyond agreements, there is also the ability to buy someone’s voice and become its owner.  The idea of “catch and kill” is something one of HIS friends has done to another woman who knew him.  She got money, he got silence.  She bought a house, he went on to harm another woman.

The women who remain silent, the women who sell their voices have their own conscience to contend with.  In some ways they can be considered almost as complicit as the predator himself.

They seem to be comfortable with selling their body, selling their tongue, even selling their soul.

Why not?  After all, it’s a free market.

Thanks for reading.