Confidentiality: Unprosecuted Homicide

When looking at the list provided in “The Behavior of Lawyers”, I chose number 18: “Confidentiality: Unprosecuted Homicide” to write about for this essay. This short paragraph disturbed me due to the fact that the lawyer’s conduct was considered correct because of the confidentiality agreement between lawyer and client. The lawyer’s decision was deemed professional. Even though this client admitted that an innocent person went to jail for a murder they themselves committed, the lawyer decided not to alert authorities on the issue. Instead, they chose to let an innocent person rot in prison for the rest of their lives. Knowing that this lawyer chose not to say anything is utterly disgusting. I understand that they wanted to be professional

Neutrality is requiring a lawyer to do their practice without regarding their own personal views. Partisanship, on the other hand, commits a lawyer to aggressive, single-minded pursuit of client objectives. Schneyer, in sum, says that when lawyers are behaving badly, that it is mostly because they are not being neutral and partisan enough. People want a lawyer because they need their professional consultation and advocacy. They want someone who has a lot of knowledge of the law and who can help them during their situation. Knowing this, I can see why in most cases this is important. This article displays too much neutrality and does not seem to display partisanship in my opinion. This is why the behavior in this section is problematic. The circumstances in this section are different. As stated before, the client admitted that they killed someone in the past that someone else took the fall for. The attorney knew of this and did not tell the authorities. Although the attorney wanted to remain professional and maintain the client’s confidentiality, it is still morally wrong to keep this information from law enforcement. In this case, the lawyer had way too much neutrality. It makes me wonder what goes through their minds once they learn of this information. This should be considered a breach of legal