from Hacker News

When is it okay for a lawyer to lie? (2018)

by lazugod on 8/31/20, 10:42 AM with 142 comments

• by parsimo2010 on 9/1/20, 1:09 AM

  These are interesting scenarios, but let's not forget that the rules are only binding under the threat of being caught and punished. They aren't like the laws of physics. So if a lawyer isn't supposed to engage in trickery, they might do so anyway, especially if they think they can get away with it and their client happens to be a rich criminal who pays them extra to do shady stuff.

  Source: Lawyers wouldn't have the reputation they do if all the members of the club had integrity.

• by Iv on 9/1/20, 3:21 AM

  It has been several years ago that I discovered that despite a similar philosophy behind law-writing and programming, these worlds are very far apart and every year, even when I thought my cynicism was stable, the gap continues to widen.

  This is from the American Bar Association, it is the opposite of a blog post you would end with IANAL. Yet, we read (at the end) that even professional lawyers are "struggling" with understanding why a given accepted practice is ok given the laws and obligation. And this on no small matter: it is about hiding that the plaintiff died before the trial. And it is not clear whether it is ok or not.

  I had the "chance" to discuss with lawyers specialized in intellectual property. They did not even understand their subject or the imprecision of law. Every time I try to dig into legal issues surrounding IP I end up with the impression that the difference between a lawyer and a layperson is that the lawyer just is more up to date with what was made up in court recently.

  Lawyers are going to help you if you are in a case that has happened tens of times in the past but is going to be clueless in a genuinely new situation. Just as the judge will be.

  Recently I read about the licensing issues around deep learning models, the definitions of fair use and derivative works. We are used to IETF standards and IEEE specs. Even RFCs are usually pretty precise in how they define things. Laws are crappy when put to that standard. They are just there to provide arguments in a mud-slinging negotiation.

• by notafraudster on 8/31/20, 5:46 PM

  I was bummed to see the examples, which I reproduce here to highlight their obviousness (or their, uh, being noncontroversial):

  1. Can a lawyer who suspects the opposing party of breaking an agreement engage in plain-clothes trickery to figure out if that's true? Yes.

  2. Is a lawyer obligated to essentially testify [respond to a judge's inquiry] in a manner that incriminates their client based on private information? No, thought when they do respond to the inquiry they should be vague rather than affirmatively lying.

  3. Do prosecutors need to drop charges if, after a plea deal is signed, information comes up that would inhibit prosecuting the case in the absence of a plea deal? No, but this feels scummy.

• by SMAAART on 9/1/20, 1:00 AM

  I few months ago I was in court, I was suing 2 related parties and I was pro-se. One of the lawyers of one of the defendants lied 3 times in front of the judge, when I called him upon it, the judge didn't bling.

  This was civil court, not small claims.

  Oh well.

• by 50208 on 9/1/20, 3:09 AM

  My wife is an attorney, family law, and it's clear from the years of stories and discussions on what's she has dealt with that most attorneys lie with impunity ... and so do the litigants going to court! The judges generally don't hold the liars accountable, the attorneys don't hold the other attorneys accountable, and no one holds the judges accountable ... and with no real accountability, it's a free for all. If the State Bars would hold their own members to their own supposed standard we'd be in a much better place.

• by NotSammyHagar on 8/31/20, 5:01 PM

  It was interesting to read the scenarios but the result was only disappointing. I'm a non-lawyer expecting there to be complicated nuances that lawyers can use to explain their 'honesty'. Misdeeds by prosecutors (as in ignoring police lying on the stand because they need support from them for their next cases), not disclosing information like in this case cause me to take a very careful consideration of what a lawyer tells me.

• by mwexler on 9/1/20, 1:01 PM

  I find it interesting in the US that we hold lawyers to the high standard of no lying, while law enforcement officers are given more latitude, esp in interrogation situations.

  Seeing it in TV shows and movies, which often have officers and detectives lying about knowledge, evidence, other witness statements, all to get info, I assumed that it was fictional. In many cases, though not all, it appears to be allowed within limits in real life. See, for example, https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.adamsluka.com/amp/can-the-p....

  This doesn't mean all cops are liars, and they still shouldn't commit perjury, but it's an interesting comparison to me. I guess it's a reflection of the advocate/adversary approach that is often a part of the legal process.

• by supernova87a on 9/1/20, 6:04 AM

  I just have to say, that is one horrible font for a website.

• by flowerlad on 9/1/20, 1:11 AM

  How is a court-appointed defense attorney supposed to do his job if he knows his client is guilty?

• by WalterBright on 9/1/20, 1:09 AM

  Holly Golightly: How do I look?

  Paul Varjak: Very good. I must say, I’m amazed.

• by paxys on 9/1/20, 2:10 AM

  Scenarios 1 & 2 are pretty obvious, and 3 is not about the lawyer at all. Makes sense though since you're unlikely to hear any criticism of the profession in a publication by the ABA.

• by pseingatl on 8/31/20, 4:59 PM

  Always. See, The Grammar of Money, by Felous.

• by anamax on 9/1/20, 3:47 AM

  Should prosecutors be able to add incriminating statements to a confession transcript? (I'm talking about damning statements that the defendant didn't make.)

  The CA Attorney General at the time said yes. A CA Appeals Court said no.

  https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1695398.html

• by IncRnd on 9/1/20, 3:15 AM

  How does an attorney sleep? First he lies on one side, then he lies on the other.

  Source: An attorney told me.

• by altmind on 9/1/20, 7:43 AM

  > Everyone knows that lawyers are not allowed to lie — to clients, courts or third parties.

  What a great point for lose people reading the article; from the first sentence.

• by a3n on 9/1/20, 2:02 AM

  When do you want it to be ok?