[OldDeckHand]

"What kind of “lawyer” allows his client to testify to privileged information, olddeck?"

Probably the kind of lawyer who is either attempting to build a foundation of ineffective assistance of counsel for later appeal, or preparing the jury panel for some explanation at allocution that will perhaps mitigate exposure at sentencing. Without the benefit of reading the trial transcript (and without omnipotence with respect to precisely what his prior counsel said), it's tough to tell just from Judge Matthews' one or two sentence description.

[FS11]

“What kind of “lawyer” allows his client to testify to privileged information, olddeck?”

Probably the kind of lawyer who is either attempting to build a foundation of ineffective assistance of counsel for later appeal, or preparing the jury panel for some explanation at allocution that will perhaps mitigate exposure at sentencing.

389 posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2010 7:24:25 PM by OldDeckHand

---

More nonsense. Lakin waived his right to appeal when he plead guilty and the bad advice of his lawyers does not “mitigate exposure.” In fact, Puckett’s bad advice is increasing Lakin’s “exposure,” i.e., Lakin testified that Jensen advised him that “I can’t ethically advise you to disobey those orders.”