Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Idaho Murders: Bryan Kohberger's Lawyer Represented Victim's Mom Before Stabbings" video.

@TheShadowMan. OP: "How can this attorney even take this case??" Shadow: "She's a lawyer." Okay, so deadpan humor. I see that.
2
@allanthomas6097 Conflicts are analyzed from the viewpoint of the first case you took. Any case that represents a conflict with that case must be refused, with certain exceptions. Just dropping one of them is not enough; the conflict persists if the first client is in any way jeopardized -- and in this case, something the mother told the attorney in confidence potentially could help Kohberger's defense. I consider that a conflict of interest, but I don't know if it is technically permissible and just disfavored in some people's eyes. It's a tough call, but I expect criminal defense lawyers to volunteer themselves to act as counsel pro bono, so in the end Kohberger will probably opt not to use the public defender's office. If this case goes to trial, the lawyer will have a book deal in the millions.
1
@deecastle5053 If he goes to trial, he'll end up with a private lawyer. Just watch.
1
I think it is a conflict of interest, but I tend to view those laws more strictly than most. A typical lawyer will not ask whether representation is forbidden or ethically disfavored -- when a case that could get them a major book deal and make them rich comes along, they ask "how do I get on?" Conflicts are analyzed from the viewpoint of the first case you took. Any case that represents a conflict with that case must be refused, with certain exceptions. Just dropping one of them is not enough; the conflict persists if the first client is in any way jeopardized -- and in this case, something the mother told the attorney in confidence potentially could help Kohberger's defense. It's a tough call, but I expect criminal defense lawyers to volunteer themselves to act as counsel pro bono, so in the end Kohberger will probably opt not to use the public defender's office.
1
@TheShadowMan. WRONG
1
@stellahead thank you . . . that is right!
1
@TheShadowMan. The implication was that a lawyer would take any case. They are like hired assassins, or what?
1
@deecastle5053 This is incorrect. EVERY lawyer is a professional, and is bound by the same ethics rules, and is responsible for obeying those rules, even if it means disagreeing with a superior in their office, or with a court. It's their duty, and they can't pass it off. I have a California license, and we are trained and tested heavily on PR rules -- or at least we used to be. 2023, don't hold me on it. Refusing a case for personal reasons and refusing a case that represents a bona fide conflict of interest are two different things.
1
@daniellecruz2917 Agreed. The other person was spouting sophistry.
1