Lawyers don’t usually get their offices raided—unless they’re (allegedly) in on the crime, too.
……
Lawyers told The Daily Beast that raiding lawyers’ offices isn’t unheard of—but is generally used for lawyers who work with alleged members of organized crime, or for lawyers who are involved themselves in elaborate criminal schemes.
“It’s a tactic generally used against organized crime, against very serious, very serious criminals and lawyers who are operating outside of the protections of the law,” said Alan Dershowitz, a liberal attorney and frequent critic of Mueller’s tactics.
Because of attorney-client privilege, communications between lawyers and their clients are almost always protected from investigators’ prying eyes. Almost. The exception is when investigators convince a federal judge they have probable cause that the lawyer is involved in a crime. When that happens and a search warrant is executed—as happened today—then a team of attorneys who aren’t working on the prosecution go through the communications first with an eye to protecting privileged communications that aren’t evidence of crime.
“The only excuse for raiding a lawyer’s office is if the lawyer is potentially involved in crime—if there’s probable cause to believe that the attorney is either involved in crime or his services are being used for that,” said Sol Wisenberg, a white collar defense attorney at Nelson Mullins and former federal prosecutor.
……
- Discussion
-
Feds Are Treating Michael Cohen Like a Mob Lawyer, Trump Allies Say https://t.co/cTqCUBV7SW via @thedailybeast
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) April 10, 2018
If the shoe fits…
Exactly. I’m enjoying watching Trump, his supporters and allies wailing and gnashing their teeth over the “death” of attorney-client privilege. That privilege is not “dead.” It has always had exceptions — the big one being that this privilege cannot be used to hide communications and activities in commission of or covering up of a crime.
I keep hearing from Trump supporters that Mueller doesn’t have anything on Trump. Well, he must have something. Otherwise, neither he nor the US Attorney would have been able to execute a warrant for normally privileged files. That warrant I believe was signed by a magistrate judge. That will judge will want to know what evidence there is that supports a reasonable belief that a crime or a coverup of a crime has occurred and that evidence sought in connection with such a crime can be found in privileged documents and communications. No judge is going to just let the FBI search and seize privileged attorney files without probable cause.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.