• Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s actually the defense they’re trying to use in Trump’s NY civil fraud case, and you can use “advice of council” as a viable defense if you can prove:

    • The lawyer(s) in question did indeed provide you bad advice (putting the lawyers in jeopardy of committing a crime)
    • The other evidence doesn’t point to you as having criminal intent.
    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Right. And it works if you can prove you had good faith reasons to believe the advice you were given was sound and otherwise had no criminal intent. But Trump isn’t arguing that. Neither is Bannon. Both are using “advice of counsel” as if it were a do-whatever-you-want certificate.

      If Trump or Bannon’s arguments were allowed to stand, it would usher in a whole new breed of unscrupulous lawyers willing to help their clients get away with crimes by just saying “My client was acting under the advice of counsel”. Imagine what someone like Trump and his team of crony lawyers would be getting away with if they were allowed to make that argument.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s laughable on its face, but it’s scary that it’s not out of the realm of possibility if people like them ever come close to the levers of power again.

        The fact that I can’t dismiss that possibility out of hand is terrifying.