There is also no privilege for protecting ongoing criminal
by 1NDGal (2018-12-11 16:57:19)
Edited on 2018-12-11 16:57:52

In reply to: There’s such a thing as at-issue waiver *  posted by captaineclectic


enterprises, certainly not when significant harm to a person will occur.

Jack probably thinks he did all he could when he unsuccessfully counseled USAG to remove accused trainers. USAG said no thank you, we shan’t report and we shan’t remove anyone unless and until they are convicted of a felony.

But at that point there was a good deal of evidence that an entrenched ring of bad actors was operating and would continue to operate. Lawyers not only are released from attorney-client privilege in that event, but are required to go to the authorities.

Give it up with the the Colonel Klink defense, Savvy.


I don't think your second paragraph is accurate or complete. *
by ACross  (2018-12-11 17:49:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


An attempt to paraphrase the 1999 compromise as reported
by 1NDGal  (2018-12-11 18:22:47)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

in harmonica’s excellent summary.

I might have given Jack too much credit there.