Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: holdonnow
This is incredibly dumb on the part of the SA. As a elected official lawyer he knows he is held to a higher standard.

This is a violation of the following ethics rule:

4 RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
4-3 ADVOCATE

RULE 4-3.6 TRIAL PUBLICITY

(a) Prejudicial Extrajudicial Statements Prohibited. A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding due to its creation of an imminent and substantial detrimental effect on that proceeding.

(b) Statements of Third Parties. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to make such a statement. Counsel shall exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, employees, or other persons assisting in or associated with a case from making extrajudicial statements that are prohibited under this rule.

Comment

It is difficult to strike a balance between protecting the right to a fair trial and safeguarding the right of free expression. Preserving the right to a fair trial necessarily entails some curtailment of the information that may be disseminated about a party prior to trial, particularly where trial by jury is involved. If there were no such limits, the result would be the practical nullification of the protective effect of the rules of forensic decorum and the exclusionary rules of evidence. On the other hand, there are vital social interests served by the free dissemination of information about events having legal consequences and about legal proceedings themselves. The public has a right to know about threats to its safety and measures aimed at assuring its security. It also has a legitimate interest in the conduct of judicial proceedings, particularly in matters of general public concern. Furthermore, the subject matter of legal proceedings is often of direct significance in debate and deliberation over questions of public policy


There are additionals specific ethics violations in this case. The FL Bar needs a little prodding to investigate this matter. This act by the SA has caused ALL plea negotiations to be in jeopardy.
the other rules cited are here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1065387/posts?page=44#44
100 posted on 01/26/2004 8:22:01 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]


To: longtermmemmory
Why don't you people provide links !
Do I have to do EVERYTHING around here !

http://www.ablelegalforms.com/flalawyerethics.html


"A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication ...."

What statement are you refering to ? Please provide the quote by any lawyer that this could possibly refer to...

... and if I ask pretty please would you provide a link ?


108 posted on 01/26/2004 8:38:20 PM PST by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson