Semantics.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    18 months ago

    But if the attorney is party to the crimes then the discussion is not privileged (to my understanding).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      18 months ago

      Read my second paragraph, because I covered that already. The attorney can’t help you plan or execute future crimes, because that makes them a co-conspirator.

      And from what I’ve read, that’s pretty much exactly what Trump tried to do. He apparently tried to use the “hypothetically if I were to commit this crime, what would be the best way to do it” method. The issue is that this is just a blatant attempt at getting around things, and courts don’t tend to like it when you try to skirt their rules.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        18 months ago

        To be pedantic, you specifically said future crimes. A discussion between a lawyer and a client, about past crimes where the lawyer was a participant in the crime are not covered.