I posted this here in
Courthouse Confessions
Here is an observation that may be relevant to this topic. In our
CVS incident my girlfriend was medically and mentally incapacitated, she had doctors and therapists who were treating her and the hospital took her in for a week after the incident.
We hired two attorneys to represent us, one to represent her alleged "prescription" fraud and my allegedly scaring the police. Her attorney made no effort to ascertain their clients condition that morning. His strategy was to have her plead guilty of prescription fraud.
When our attorneys failed to respond to communications requesting the video, we contacted other members of this profession. We were told that it was the attorneys "strategy" and it is hard to prosecute legal malpractice, that we should go on with our lives. We were also told that there are some "bad apples" but most attorneys are diligent. We were told that we should research our attorneys better, that we were "stupid".
When asked about "researching" an attorney to avoid the "bad apples" we were told to ask neighbors, friends and members of the Bar for referrals. My girlfriend was charged with "prescription fraud", I was charged with "assaulting a police officer", something that none of our friends have experience with. There was also the "employment/employer" issue - I now have a record in a profession that frowns on such incidents. The attorneys that we selected had no blemishes on their "record" or bad reviews on any of the legal forums, part of the sale was that they would act as a team to represent us.
When the Virginia State Bar avoided the "strategy" oversight issue I tried to post negative reviews on the sites that took reviews so that others knew what to expect. That maybe the "claim" of "word of mouth" would apply. I noticed that the reviews did not take, I figured that maybe I had done something wrong - I shook my head. Recently I went back to posting some negative reviews, so often I have been told that "word of mouth" would regulate this profession. Make these individuals accountable for their mistakes, proactive in representing their customers.
Here are some questions about the event and the consequences of it:
- Would incapacity, such as our CVS case effect the outcome of a judgment ?
- Would evidence, such as store video effect the outcome of a judgment ?
- Why is there a reluctance of this profession to be "professionals" and research their cases ?
- Why is there a reluctance to remove those that are considered "bad apples" ?
- How can "rule of law" be effective if those executing it are negligent ?
Then we have the charade that the biased reviews provide the citizens of this country:
- How can "word of mouth" regulate the "legal profession" if no negative reviews can be posted ?
- What does this say about the sites that claim to allow "reviews" to be posted, but only allow good reviews ?
- How can anyone effectively "research" a prospective representative if they only see "good reviews" ?
I have to add that no negative reviews posted on sites that would show up high on Internet search engines, such as Google or Yahoo.
