"Judging lawyers by the choice of their clients" is a perennial topic here at Legal Ethics Forum. Some law students at Harvard have a "Firmly Refuse" group that singles out big law firms for the clients they represent and urges HLS students not to work at big firms.
[This was posted by John Steele. When I post from the editing mode, the blogging software assumes the poster is John Dzienkowski.]
John (and everyone else): any thoughts on the series in the Washington Post in the last couple days on issues at DOJ and FBI in terms of forensics, the subsequent investigation, and how to handle the result of the investigation if "problems" were discovered?
Doesn't appear html works so:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/doj-review-of-flawed-fbi-forensics-processes-lacked-transparency/2012/04/17/gIQAFegIPT_story.html?hpid=z1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/convicted-defendants-left-uninformed-of-forensic-flaws-found-by-justice-dept/2012/04/16/gIQAWTcgMT_story.html?hpid=z1
Posted by: Ugh | April 18, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Ugh, thanks for those links. I will take a look at those and try to follow up.
Posted by: John Steele | April 19, 2012 at 10:11 AM