- Mar 2013
- Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
OK hypothetical here. Suppose you have someone convicted of a crime. Can his lawyer then go on tv and say "He totally did it."
You should also remember that, in Clinton's case, not only is the case almost certainly outside the statute of limitations, such that it couldn't be used against the former client on grounds of subject-matter jurisdiction, but because of the evidentiary rule for attorney-client privilege the statement wouldn't be usable anyway even if inside the statute of limitations.
But she was a lawyer when she gave the interview. I think it's fair to expect someone to abide the ethical rules of a profession while they are practicing it and fair for people to judge their character afterwards by how well they maintained those ethics.
I understand the difference between legal and factual guilt. But if you ask a client something, don't you need them to answer openly and honestly?
But remember ... she did not divulge any confidential communications; she only offered an opinion. It may not seem different to you, but as a legal and ethical matter it makes a huge difference.