Posted on 12/14/2001 1:13:17 AM PST by Bad~Rodeo
NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge said lawyers for Marc Rich acted "principally as lobbyists" in helping the fugitive financier win a pardon from President Clinton and must hand over documents withheld from a grand jury investigating the controversial pardon.
U.S. District Judge Denny Chin said attorney-client privilege does not protect the materials from release.
"The Marc Rich lawyers were acting principally as lobbyists, working with public relations specialists and individuals - foreign government officials, prominent citizens and personal friends of the president - who had access to the White House," Chin wrote. "They were not acting as lawyers or providing legal advice in the traditional sense."
After the ruling, which did not give details of what is in the materials, Rich lawyer Laurence Urgenson said: "We're reviewing the opinion and considering our options."
Rich was indicted in 1983 on federal charges of evading more than $48 million in income taxes and illegally buying oil from Iran during the 1979 hostage crisis. Rich, ex-husband of Denise Rich, a major financial contributor to the Democratic Party, left the United States before he was indicted and has been living in Switzerland.
He received one of 176 pardons and clemencies Clinton issued on his last day in office, Jan. 20.
The pardons and commutations prompted congressional hearings and an investigation by federal prosecutors in New York.
Clinton said in February that he granted the Rich pardon based "on the merits as I saw them, and I take full responsibility for it."
He rejected any suggestion that he granted the pardon because of political contributions to the Democratic Party or donations Rich's ex-wife made to the Clinton library foundation.
Clinton spokeswoman Julia Payne referred queries to the former president's lawyer in Washington, David Kendall, who did not return a telephone call seeking comment.
Former White House counsel Jack Quinn, whose work on behalf of the Rich pardon received special note in the judge's ruling, also did not return a call.
The judge said Quinn was hired not because of his legal skills but because he was "Washington wise" and understood "the entire political process."
"He was hired because he could telephone the White House and engage in a 20-minute conversation with the president," the judge said. "He was hired because he could write the president a 'personal note' that said 'I believe in this cause with all my heart,' and he would know that the president would read the note and give it weight."
Quinn and Denise Rich have denied allegations that the pardon was tied to her political contributions.
Lawyers for Rich's pardoned business partner, Pincus Green, also must release documents, the judge said.
You make some good points. However, it seems to me there are some differences here. First of all, Marc Rich was not operating within our system of justice. He wasn't living here and facing the justice system and confiding in lawyers as part of his defense. He was a fugitive from justice, for goodness sake! There is something wrong, it seems to me, with the concept of using lawyers as a proxy to commit, or hide, criminal activity.
A lawyer (as an advocate) is almost by definition a lobbyist. Judges should not be given the lattitude to nullify attorney-client priviledge by simply declaring certain communications non-priviledged. That's too arbitrary and ripe for abuse.
Attorney Client Privilege does not exist in all matters of discussion between the two whether there's a court case or not. The communication must be made to a lawyer acting in a legal capacity. Thus, if a lawyer is giving business advice, as opposed to legal advice in connection with a business transaction, no privilege will attach to such communications. Also, the attorney-client privilege may not be used as a shield for a contemplated future crime or fraud. You should also understand that the Client, not the lawyer, is the owner of the privilege when and if it exists. Quinn is therefore in a rather precarious position if Denise Rich waives the privilege (assuming it exists) overtly or by remaining silent. One more important consideration which we can't determine based on this article is who was present when Quinn was discussing the matter with Denise Rich? If others who were not lawyers were present the privilege in all probability doesn't exist.
One more thing to consider is that Attorney Client Privilege appears on the surface to be a very simple concept yet it is one of the most litigated precepts of law in our courts.
Hes never taken responsibility for anything.
And this is bad? These people have been using the technicalities of the law to circumvent the law for too long. It's time we had some new guidelines.
More important is Clinton's oblique reference to Denise Rich's silicon enhanced breasts.
These lawyers were actively participating in bribing a sitting president. That's criminal and breaks the atty/client privilege immediately.
I wonder every day how some of these idiots passed the bar.
This question arises most frequently in corporate counsel situations. The attorney-client privilege is recognized to apply to communications between corporate officers and corporate counsel where the subject involves matters traditionally performed only by an attorney.
For instance, discussions with the corporate attorney involving pending or threatened litigation are protected by the privilege. On the other hand, if a board of directors has an attorney as a member, materials related to board discussions are not thereby priveleged. (sound practice dictates that attorneys on a board of directors not render legal advice to the corporation and attorneys who render legal advice not serve on the board of directors)
Although avarice drives well-connected lawyers to it, lobbying is recognized as not constituting the practice of law. It's not illegal for attorneys to do it, but they're not acting as lawyers when they do.
If you have a conversation with your neighbor about the weather is it privileged conversation? Is it privileged if your neighbor happens to be a lawyer?
What's all the contention about? x42 has spoken.
I, along with all Democrats, believe every word he says.
You folks must be part of that vast conspiracy thing I keep hearing about.
Pardon me, no pun intended, but I need to go hurl now.
LVM
...all the while X42's cloak of influence & *protection* continues to wane & dissipate.
;^)
Forcing ethics out of lawyers.
If this is part of the Bush plan, my hat is off to him and I will sit down and be happy. (But how could he ...?)
...now to see this kind of decisive & courageous executive level leadership with the run amok Civil Rights commission?
You are wise beyond yer years, my LargeTriceppedFRiend...Justice fer Der SchleekMeister is Inevitable, and we shan't wait fer it to be doled out in the Great Hereafter...
WE SHALL NAIL CLINTON IN THIS LIFE!!! Then we'll let God--or Satan--deal with what's left over when we're done!!
I GARE-RON-FReepin'-TEE IT!!!
MUD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.