A lawyer shouldn't throw his client under the bus like that publicly, even if his client is a gigantic gaping asshole, like here. It's always a risk letting a defendant testify. In this case it probably didn't matter. There was a ton of evidence against him.
Seems like he’s just reaching for publicity points here. But I agree with you. This would scare me off from hiring this attorney if I needed their services, especially if I was a gigantic gaping asshole.
A lawyer shouldn't throw his client under the bus like that publicly, even if his client is a gigantic gaping asshole, like here. It's always a risk letting a defendant testify. In this case it probably didn't matter. There was a ton of evidence against him.
Seems like he’s just reaching for publicity points here. But I agree with you. This would scare me off from hiring this attorney if I needed their services, especially if I was a gigantic gaping asshole.
Perhaps he intends to justify this betrayal with the newly minted GGA exception.
The trouble with GGAs is they usually don’t know their own GGA status
This is an issue. Perhaps a database needs to be created and updated lists need to be published.
Careful, this sound a lot like a social scoring system
True. Also, the sheer enormity of the quantity of data may overwhelm the most robust systems. Maybe we'll stick to peer to peer identification.
Yeah what a disaster!