A chart from that study shows that the public considers lawyers as a variety of competent prostitutes:
Yet, lawyers continue to claim themselves to be "the honorable profession", and judges (who are also lawyers) continue to put the "Honorable" as a required job title, claiming a "presumption of integrity", at the same time as they claim absolute immunity for their malicious and corrupt acts on the bench.
Lawyers were some of the least-trusted professionals, according to the public opinion.
In June of this year I wrote about the joint letter written by the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, this letter.
In that letter the FTC and the US DOJ said this:
referencing their former comments to the American Bar Association back in 2002-2003:
And, in the ABA Comments in 2002-2003, FTC & US DOJ said, among other things (you can read the full comments of FTC & US DOJ to ABA here), the following:
So, the American Bar Association, a non-profit that participates in regulation of the legal profession by imposing educational standards of lawyers upon the states through certification of law schools, acknowledges, as FTC and US DOJ does, that "defining the practice of law has been a difficult question for the legal profession for many years".
Now, even if lawyers find it difficult - for many years - to define what the hell it is that they are doing for money -
- how can an average citizen, untrained in the law (but presumed to know the laws - remember, lack of knowledge of the law is no defense in a criminal prosecution for unauthorized practice of law), know what the practice of law is, so that not to engage in "prohibited conduct" and so that not to commit a crime of unauthorized practice of law (UPL);
Both the oath and the creed also say a lot of lofty words about supporting "fair administration of justice" and providing services to those who cannot afford legal representation.
After saying all of that, the Arizona State Bar established a Public Service Center - while allowing, reportedly, only 2 minutes of comments from lawyers BEFORE the program was announced, and without any public bidding for the service that the third-party provider, Legal Services Link, LLC, was allegedly providing through that Public Service Center.
The Public Service Center was established - as declared by the Arizona State Bar - for the noble cause of connecting the lawyers with the clients, and promoting pro bono service.
Yet, the "Public Service Center"
1) replaced a similar service of Arizona State Bar already in place, for which previously lawyers' money was expended (and, surely, all lawyers' costs were passed to clients in fees); and
2) competed with county lawyer referral services.
Moreover, while Arizona State Bar claimed that it will cost $300,000 for the Arizona State Bar to run the Public Service Center through the 3rd party provider, Legal Services Link LLC, Legal Services Link LLC reportedly announced on the website of the Public Service Center that, on the contrary, the "service" is free to Arizona State Bar and that Arizona State Bar will actually be paid revenues from operation of the Public Service Center, here is a comment about it by a reader of the Irreverent Lawyer blog:
So, with all the pandering to its members for candor and enhancing their trustworthiness, reinforced by "oaths" and "creeds", the management of Arizona State Bar demonstrated that it is a group of crooks, out to scam the ordinary members of the association.
The "public trust" chart was correct, it appears.
Post a Comment