A New Year 2009 - will there be Change ?

Context and relevance of one Experience
The Short List of personal experiences
One thing that I do know from past experience and recent national events is that there was no intention of bringing accountability to any governing processes, American government was a sham implemented to fleece the sheep. Our experiences identify that there are two sets of "laws", that they are manipulated to suit through selective processing, many years of programming and implementation have reinforced these tactics. Greed is also a factor, as we have been told many times, "attorneys have to eat too". Usually we get the "whine" when we ask them to look into evidence, like police reports, contacting doctors or video. I got the impression that from the context of the video excuse was as if to produce it would make waves in their professional environment, that it would be bucking the system to cause problems - I had the feeling that I was "presumed guilty" and any deal was better than fighting it. Once convicted and sentanced "double jeapordy" would apply and if the video supported my claims damages would apply - why didnt my attorney respond to my calls ? What would a subpoena for the video have hurt - except duties to ensure the integrity of the law ?

So what incentive protects a client from "poor strategy" ? What we discovered was that others in the population sympathize with their brother member, covering up "poor strategy" with excuse of the choice of "strategy". Why should they diligently represent one client diligently when they can represent many ? The attorney knows the resources that a client can bear to apply to a malpractice action. The attorney knows also the reluctance of their population to address "strategy failures". Then there is the last caveat, at least in Virginia, the Virginia State Bar an Agency of the Supreme Court, looks the other way at "poor strategy", here is a certifying institution that in 2000 changed from Code of Professional Responsibility to Professional Guidelines and Rules of Professional Conduct the change allowed the institution to ignore such things as "diligence", "integrity" and "competence".

The Virginia State Bar an Agency of the Supreme Court is interesting, not only in changing their ethical mandates but also in that they still accept complaints. The complaints the Virginia State Bar accepts only address bad filing or failure to appear. When one does complain about "strategy" they receive a canned response. They excuse it by stating that they will not take disciplinary action on a "strategy" grievance, sure the failure could have been one day of poor performance or trend with the attorney, the metric is not collected, the only one who knows about the failure is the client and their issues are swept under the carpet. So no one knows the metrics on an attorney, how many "poor performance" days has an attorney had, one cannot ask the Virginia State Bar because they do not know.
The Virginia State Bar is a toothless fraud, it has broken all the old Code's of Professional Responsibility.
Over the last two decades when confronted about a failure to engage we have heard a variety of excuses, starting with professional courtesy to "we have to eat too". It was not about the "law" it was as if to raise the subject they would get in trouble. On the "courtesy" issue my girlfriend was pulling out documents that would have directly refuted the claims of the husbands presentation, the attorney patted her hand and made the "professional courtesy" comment. At the time I believed in "professional integrity", that this attorney was executing a "strategy" as this was just a hearing. The years pass and the questions keep coming up about our representation or failed representation.

Another notable time was with the attorney representing me with the CVS incident. When I hired him he seemed engaged, the "id", the assault and I thought that he would look into the video. On that court date he had not reviewed the video, claiming that if I was upset it would go against me, regardless of events, regardless of the evidence the courts would go against me - my hired representation. Was this a classic scam, support the mark and then sacrifice them ? Is this how courts are run now, evidence no longer matters, without evidence the interpretation of the law is tainted and therefore the concept of "Rule of Law" is irrelevant.

Maybe it is just us, we must be "bad guys" and must be punished. Either that or we have experienced the regular conviction process and many have had similar experiences.
The "Bush doctrine", economic crisis, foreign entanglements, patterns of meddling and avoidance seem to identify an endemic problem with American government and society. What we have experienced over the last twenty years, from spousal abuse, crusading attorneys, failing attorneys, deserting attorneys, biased judges and corrupt law enforcement gives further clarity to the American environment.

The only rule is do not get caught, the successful change the rules to protect themselves from their morally bankrupt activities.
LeftContents   Talk   References   Articles   Blog's   Experience's
your3dsource		 Right