9 of 79

Write now Article Tools

Page 3 of 4

they replied basically that they do not address "strategy" issues. This means that performance is irrelevant to this institution, invalidating one of their "canons" (zealous representation of the client"). Since the client is not allowed to have recording devices in the courthouse there is no documentation of this failure, the one institution that could identify a performance issue is the "Bar" - if the client, us, asks whether certain aspects of the case would alter the outcome, theoretically this institution could identify a performance failure, if it could then their member is at fault. Since this institution does not enforce their documented ethical standards, their members have found a niche where they can "get away with" scamming citizens with impunity, facilitating a fraud against society by their members.

In one of our correspondences to the "Bar" they claimed that we could act as a referee and censor their member by suing the offending member. By this comment this organization expects that a damaged victim will expend resources, risk hiring another member, if they can find one that will actually diligently sue another one of their own to resolve this item. Is this the response from an institution that claims responsibility for the ethical standing of their members to provide competent service to the community ?

When one enters America's judicial system it is just like going into a casino, it is a crap shoot. If one is actually honest the best hope is that both sides obtain incompetent attorneys. If both "officers of the court" are on the crusade, the issues will be drawn out forever as each attorney fabricates a web of lies. If one "officer of the court" or the other is "processing" their client then the liar will probably win, which side depends on who is on the crusade and who is processing. If both "officers of the court" are incompetent and not diligent then one has a chance, a flip of the coin, that the outcome would be reasonable. This goes back to the "service", what is the goal here ? The options appear to be "profit" or "service". When a plumber fails one can point to the leaking pipe and state that the plumber did not do their job. When an attorney fails they fall back on the claim of "strategy", their "strategy" is to drop the ball, last the game and collect the paycheck - the service is not performed competently, no one but the victim knows how they failed and the "Bar" dismisses "strategy".

On two different occasions the press made mention

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Critique of America's justice system?
We want to hear your view. Write now!