[Pete from Shawnee Mission]

Cheshire; If a lawyer colludes with a client to commit a crime, or is hired by a client to comit a crime, and it can be demonstrated to the court without reference to their communications I suspect that attorney client privilege may not or will not apply and those communications will no longer be privileged. So the question would be whether HRC initiated this or was made aware and approved of this, or was Perkins-Coie freelancing it.

But that is just me, a non lawyer saying that. Happy to hear from any Legal Freepers on this. (Since Madison Saving Bank and Casa Grande.... it would be about dxxx time!)

[Publius]

I suspect that you are right, which means that Durham’s target is the entire Perkins-Coie law firm, which would lead directly to the Democrats in general and Hillary in particular.

[greeneyes]

I suspect that attorney client privilege may not or will not apply
*********************************************************************************

It is the purpose of the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege to assure that the “seal of secrecy” between lawyer and client does not extend to communications made for the purpose of getting advice for the commission of a fraud or crime. U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 562-63 (1989).

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/business-torts-unfair-competition/practice/2018/tips-for-addressing-crime-fraud-exception-to-attorney-client-privilege-in-civil-cases/