Albert Snyder filed a defamation lawsuit over false statements about his son`s education. He also filed a lawsuit for “publicity for privacy” because his son`s funeral was a private event, not a public one. These charges were dismissed because the slander was a matter of religious opinion and because an obituary was printed with details about their religion. Other charges, including intrusion into solitary confinement, wilful infliction of emotional suffering and civil conspiracy, were allowed to continue. 2. Does the fact that the Westboro Baptist Church has done everything legally correct make its position acceptable? Do they have to meet ethical limits that go beyond regulatory compliance? Why or why not? Whether the lawyer represents a civil or criminal client, the lawyer`s ethical obligations remain the same. When a client informs the lawyer of his intention to commit perjury, the first duty of a lawyer is to try to dissuade the client from committing perjury. In doing so, the lawyer must point out to the client that if the client insists on committing the proposed perjury, the lawyer will be obliged to withdraw from the representation. The lawyer should also indicate that he or she may be required to disclose the specific reason for the resignation if required by the court. If the client continues to insist that he is making false statements, the lawyer must withdraw from the representation.
When Hannan investigated the story, he made what he thought was a dramatic discovery: the inventor, Dr. V., was a transgender woman. Hannan also discovered that Dr. V. had made false statements about his education and work experience. He reasonably included this information in the story. Readers judge a scientist`s credibility based on previous university degrees and achievements. They had the right to know if this scientist`s claims about the physics behind the putter were true or not. Two of the case studies on this page provide more detailed information about the cases discussed in the video, and a third case study examines legal rights versus ethical responsibilities versus the president`s duty.
Snyder v. Phelps investigates how free speech was brought to justice when Westboro Baptist Church protested at the funeral of U.S. Navy Matthew Snyder. Dr. Vs Magical Putter explores the debate over the ethics of journalist Caleb Hannans, who reported when he revealed the subject of his article, Dr. V, as a trans woman. Approach to the Presidency: Roosevelt & Taft addresses the legal and ethical dimensions of two extreme approaches to the exercise of presidential power. For a case study examining the legal rights and ethical responsibilities related to medical care and informed consent, read Patient Autonomy and Consent. In rejecting the defendant`s allegations, the court noted that “whatever the scope of a constitutional right to testify, it is elementary that such a right does not extend to false testimony.” Id. at p.
173. The court further noted that “the right to a lawyer does not include the right to a lawyer working with 3 Hazard & Hodes, The Law of Lawyering, § 29.19. 3rd edition (2005). ABA, Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 317, sixth edition (2007). planned perjury. A lawyer who cooperates in this way would run the risk of being prosecuted for perjury and disciplinary proceedings, including suspension or expulsion. As such, a defendant does not have the right to give false testimony on his or her own behalf or to seek the assistance of a defense lawyer. If a lawyer later learns of the client`s perjury, Rule 3.3 requires the lawyer to take immediate corrective action to correct the client`s misconduct. Normally, the lawyer should first protest to the client to convince them to voluntarily inform the court and/or the other party of their misconduct. In doing so, the lawyer should explain that if the client refuses to do so, he has no choice but to inform the court of the client`s actions. If the client refuses to disclose his misconduct, the lawyer is required to inform the court and/or the other party of the false evidence or witness statements.
Except in the defense of a defendant, the generally accepted rule is that a lawyer, if necessary to remedy the situation, must disclose the existence of the client`s deception to the court or other party. Such disclosure can result in serious consequences for the client, including not only a sense of betrayal, but also the loss of the case and possibly prosecution for perjury. But the alternative is for the lawyer to cooperate to deceive the court, thereby undermining the truth-seeking process that the opposite system is supposed to implement. See Article 1.2(d). In addition, unless it is clearly understood that the lawyer is fulfilling his duty to disclose the existence of false evidence, the client may simply refuse the lawyer`s advice to discover the false evidence and insist that the lawyer remain silent. Thus, the client could practically force the lawyer to be a party to the fraud in court. 1. What differences do you see between Roosevelt`s and Taft`s views on her ethical responsibility as president? Some states, such as Florida, require in formal declaration 04-1 that the attorney affirmatively disclose the client`s intention to make false statements when removing it from the court. The statement states: “If the lawyer knows that the client will testify incorrectly, the resignation does not comply with the lawyer`s ethical obligations, since the resignation alone does not prevent the client from committing perjury.” However, Florida requires a lawyer to disclose all information necessary to prevent a client from committing a crime, including the crime of perjury.
2 Hazard & Hodes, Law of Lawyers, § 29.13. 3rd edition (2005). Alabama has no such counterpart in the rules of professional conduct.  A lawyer is required to be honest in his or her dealings with others on behalf of a client, but generally has no affirmative obligation to inform a counterparty of the relevant facts. A false statement can occur when the lawyer includes or confirms a statement by another person that the lawyer knows is false. False statements can also occur through partially true but misleading statements or omissions that correspond to false affirmative statements. For unfair conduct that does not constitute misrepresentation or for misrepresentation by a lawyer that is not made in the context of representing a client, see Rule 8.4. If a lawyer does know that a client has committed perjury or presented false evidence, the lawyer`s first duty is to protest to the client to convince them to voluntarily correct the declaration of perjury or false evidence.
If the client refuses to do so, the lawyer is ethically required to disclose the declaration of perjury and/or the submission of false evidence to the court. For more information on the concepts discussed in this and other videos, as well as activities that help you think about these concepts, check out the Deni Elliott Ethical Challenges: Building an Ethics Toolkit workbook, which can be downloaded for free in PDF format. This textbook explores what ethics is and what it means to be ethical, providing readers with a variety of exercises to identify their own values and reason through ethical conflicts. Activities that promote discussion of ethics in relation to other institutions such as law and religion can be found on page 20. Recourse If statements of perjury or false evidence have been offered, this is usually the right way to protest in complete confidentiality with the client. If this fails, the lawyer should try to withdraw if it can remedy the situation. If the revocation does not remedy the situation or is impossible, the lawyer must provide the court with a disclosure. It is then up to the court to determine what to do – to make a statement on the matter in Trier of the facts, to order mischief or perhaps nothing. If the misrepresentation was that of the client, the client may challenge the lawyer`s version of his communication if the lawyer communicates the situation to the court.
If there is a problem with whether the client has committed perjury, the lawyer cannot represent the client in resolving the issue, and mischief may be inevitable. In this way, an unscrupulous client could try to produce a series of false processes and thus avoid prosecution. However, a second such meeting could be interpreted as a deliberate abuse of the right to a lawyer and, as such, as a waiver of the right to subsequent representation. Clearly, a lawyer`s ethical responsibility does not last indefinitely. 5. Which approach to the US presidency, Tafts or Roosevelts, seems preferable to you in terms of legal and ethical considerations? What for? Three solutions to this dilemma have been proposed. The first is to allow the accused to testify by means of a narrative without being guided by the lawyer`s questioning. This jeopardizes the two competing principles; It relieves the lawyer of the obligation to disclose false evidence, but subjects the client to the implicit disclosure of the information submitted to the lawyer. Another proposed solution, which is of relatively new origin, is that the lawyer is completely exempt from the obligation to disclose perjury if the perjury is that of the client. This is a coherent solution, but one that makes the lawyer a tool of conscious perjury. (c) A lawyer may refuse to provide evidence that he or she considers reasonably false. The other solution to the dilemma is that the lawyer must disclose the client`s perjury if necessary to remedy the situation.