1. Defense attorneys encounter ethical issues that arise in the areas of responsibility to the client (they must defend clients even if they believe they are guilty and whether or not the client can pay once appointed), conflicts of interest (balancing an individual client against overall effectiveness as an attorney with a caseload of many), zealous defense (determining the limits of what should be done to defend clients), and confidentiality (keeping clients' confidences even if it harms third parties).
Discuss the proper role of defense attorneys regarding their clients. Should defense attorneys pursue the wishes of their clients even if they think it is not in the client's best interests? What if it would hurt a third party (but not be illegal)? Do you think defense attorneys should maintain confidentiality if their clients are involved in ongoing criminal activity that is not inherently dangerous?
2. Some research suggests that the very nature of a prison may encourage abuses of power. Some critics argue that responses to ethical misconduct on the part of corrections officers lags behind efforts previously discussed involving police departments and other law enforcement institutions.
Describe at least two types of common misconduct involving corrections officers (i.e., prison officials). What are some of the possible explanations for these types of misconduct? Present some suggestions that could be utilized to decrease misconduct by corrections professionals.
Respond to 2 students/.
1. As a defense attorney, I will explain all the possible consequences of the options my client has before he makes up his mind. If my client, after careful consideration, still wishes to pursue the option that is not in his best interests, I will respect his decision. What seems to be the best choice in my eyes may not be so in his eyes. Then again, I have more knowledge as an attorney than my client, so I will explain that it is not a wise choice and why. I will suggest other options that may be beneficial for him. However, it is his choice at the end of the day. I cannot force him to do what he does not want to do; he needs to choose what he wants for himself even if it results in less favorable.
If his choice hurts a third party, I feel bad for that person but I cannot do anything about it. The key point is that it is NOT illegal. I will most likely not agree with what he is trying to do; my personal ethics will kick in. I will, however, ask his motives of doing that and discuss the other options in case he wants to change his mind. If he still insists on sticking to his choice, I will process it as is. That does not mean I do not feel bad for the third party, but I cannot step in as long as it is lawful. I can only talk to his good consciences.
Now, if he is involved in an ongoing criminal activity that is NOT inherently dangerous, I will maintain confidentiality. Once again, that does not mean I agree with what he is doing. As an attorney, I need to follow the grounds that American Bar Association sets for attorneys. According to American Bar Association, there are some occasions that client’s information can be shared with others. When a client gives informed consent, it can be shared. However, in this case (my client is involved in an ongoing criminal activity that is NOT inherently dangerous), I believe Rule 1.6 (b-1, 2 and 3) does not apply.
The followings are the exact quotes stating when the attorneys can reveal information relating to the client; “(1) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm; (2) to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another and in furtherance of which the client has used or is using the lawyer's services; (3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another that is reasonably certain to result or has resulted from the client's commission of a crime or fraud in furtherance of which the client has used the lawyer's services;”
If I suspect my client’s engagement in this criminal activity will cause substantial harm to others despite its non-dangerous nature, I will step in. If it does not cause serious harm as stated in Rule 1.6, I believe I need to maintain my client’s confidentiality.
2. #1 - Sexual misconduct is known and frequently don't involving inmates and correctional officers. The reason this cold is occur is either the officer may empower the inmate and make them feel as they have to, either for their own enjoyment or "bribes" or loneliness can often cause sexual misconduct between officers and inmates. This does not only happen with officers, but also administration, cleaning staff or other inmates. "Sexual misconduct is the most serious form of boundary violation in a correctional setting. Sexual misconduct is not about sex, but about safety and security. Both are compromised whenever boundaries break down and a staff member becomes personal or intimate with an offender" (Smith., Yarussi, 2007). Some ways to prevent sexual misconduct would be to enforce rules,hold training sessions which teach officers the danger and punishment that could be faced, background check all officers and apply drastic consequences if these rules are broken.
#2 - Physical abuse is the number one misconduct that correctional officers face. There are many, but not all correctional officers who take their power to another level when it comes to harming inmates. "Violent assault on inmates is the most common type of abuse committed by correctional officers. This is the needless beating, hitting, kicking or striking of a prisoner. The officer's unnecessary or excessive use of a weapon upon a defenseless inmate is a typical example" (Fogel Law, 2015). Violent assault on inmates can happen because an officer may not know when to stop "punishment" and when may be enough. This is lack of training and ways force should and should not be used. Another reason this misconduct can occur is simply because the officer may like to feel in charge of the inmate and to show them who is boss. Instead of letting officers getting away with this type of crime, they should be subject to severe punishment. As any part of the law enforcement field, the goal is to protect and serve. Any abuse of that title and responsibility, should be stripped from the individual if not held up to that standard.
|Due By (Pacific Time)
||10/02/2015 12:00 am