Lawyers are Crooks, say Anti-War Activists

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Anti-war activists in LA have demanded that a law professor be "dismissed, disbarred and prosecuted for war crimes". What was his crime? He gave a legal opinion. (See The West, Law professor in hot water over torture, 19 Aug 09.)

Professor John Yoo, it seems, "went to Washington and created the ideological, political and legal basis for the torture of innocent people." That's the words of civil rights lawyer Dan Siegel. In less strident terms, Yoo defined a legal position within which "harsh interrogation techniques" were legally acceptable.

So, what does a lawyer usually do for a client?

A lawyer is employed -- in many cases -- to use existing law to defend the past actions of the client. To search existing law for justifications, possibly for loopholes, which -- in hindsight -- show that past actions were perfectly legal. You punched someone and they died? Not murder but an unforeseeable accident. You physically attacked a policeman? Perfectly legal, it was "self" defence of your poor, aged and infirm father.

That's what lawyers do. They interpret the law. Lawyers interpret the law on behalf of the person who is paying the lawyer.

If John Yoo found legal justification for torture then that is because the law appears to allow torture. The final decision requires a court judgement. (Followed by as many appeals as the protagonists can afford.) If John Yoo found legal justification for torture then he did exactly what he was paid for (I guess).

Dan Siegel has his own legal opinion. As a lawyer -- a "civil rights" lawyer -- that is Dan Siegel's job. It is what he is paid for. Has Siegel had his legal opinion tested in court?

All lawyers are crooks

Okay, a lot of people believe that heading... Nevertheless...

According to Siegel, "There is little doubt that John Yoo is a war criminal." Yoo is a war criminal for presenting a legal opinion. For acting on behalf of his clients.

By Siegel's illogic, every lawyer is a criminal.

Lawyer A presents the opinion that action A is legal. Lawyer B presents the opinion that action A in not legal. One is right, one is wrong (possibly). By Siegel's illogic, the "wrong" lawyer is, in fact, a criminal.

No wonder we respect lawyers just a little bit less than we respect politicians.

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems by Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought: email nick leth at gmail dot com