Sunday, January 27, 2008

A few months ago, there was a huge fuss about an arrest of a doctor in Australia on terrorist charges. It looked bad. The guy's movements were very suspicious, and police said he had been able to provide no coherent explanation at all. Except that he had, as quickly became apparent when his lawyer released the full transcript of his interrogation.

Charges against the doctor have been abandoned as baseless... but the lawyer may lose his license, due to a complaint filed by (among others) the police. As they explain:

Releasing the transcript was “unprofessional and inappropriate,” the federal police said in a statement, and resulted in “a great deal of misinformed and speculative reporting.”
The repeated false statements released by the police themselves, and the unjustified character assassination that followed are, evidently, less of a concern.

It's rare to see such a clear demonstration of the difference between legal "ethics" and real ones.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

the article though not lengthy provided a good distinction of the terms.

12:15 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home