Washington Bar Association

Please support the RSE whistleblowers and citizen journalism and voice your concerns here. Act collectively and hold JZ Knight and the Thurston County public officials accountable for fraud and human rights abuse at RSE. This is about accountability and pursuing justice.
Qui tacet consentire
voidgate
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:31 am

Washington Bar Association

Unread post by voidgate » Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:57 am

I have been looking up some of the laws of Washington State and found lawyers are under the ethics rules of the Washington Bar Association.

A lawyer is prohibited from counseling or assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent. A third party also has the right to object to the Washington Bar Association for violating the code of ethics if they can furnish evidence.

JZ Knight has perjured herself in court regarding the Jesus tapes and she is marketing without disclosing that her offer to the public is a religion. Furthermore if you live in a foreign country where religion is not dominating the mindset of the public people tend to disregard a study by a religious scholar. In this country it would be regarded as a professional interest within the confines of a religious community. It would not be regarded as relevant to law. Under these conditions it is not disclosed that RSE is a religion.

Under section 6 a lawyer has to give a certain amount of pro bono legal work every year for poor clients. It was unknown to me and is probably unknown to many others.

A lot of people have had breakages in the arena. RSE has never had a conscience about what it does. If some people get together perhaps they could contact the Washington Bar Association and find out in this situation what can be done to help the people. It requires investigation by a few people so a pool of resources is available and people can know their legal rights and what avenues are available. It should be investigated what rights an out of state person has and what rights a foreigner has when they attend a Washington corporation that is fraudulently presenting itself in the market.

People should be aware that one person's opinion in an organization may not necessarily be correct and on another day there may be someone far better to help with the problem. Never take no for an answer. Furthermore if the problem is explained then often resources appear that are unexpected.


This is the link to the entire Washington Rules of Professional Conduct printed by the Washington Bar Association :

http://www.wsba.org/lawyers/ethics/rpc2 ... d71009.pdf

This is taken from title 4:

Crime or Fraud by Client
[3] Under Rule 1.2(d), a lawyer is prohibited
from counseling or assisting a client in conduct that
the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent. Paragraph
(b) states a specific application of the principle set
forth in Rule 1.2(d) and addresses the situation where
a client's crime or fraud takes the form of a lie or
misrepresentation. Ordinarily, a lawyer can avoid
assisting a client's crime or fraud by withdrawing
from the representation. Sometimes it may be
necessary for the lawyer to give notice of the fact of
withdrawal and to disaffirm an opinion, document,
affirmation or the like. In extreme cases, substantive
law may require a lawyer to disclose information
relating to the representation to avoid being deemed
to have assisted the client's crime or fraud. If the
lawyer can avoid assisting a client's crime or fraud
only by disclosing this information, then under
paragraph (b) the lawyer is required to do so, unless
the disclosure is prohibited by Rule 1.6.

voidgate
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:31 am

Pro Bono work

Unread post by voidgate » Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:02 am

Taken from the Washington Bar Association's Rules for professional conduct

RPC 6.1
PRO BONO PUBLICO SERVICE
Every lawyer has a professional responsibility to
assist in the provision of legal services to those
unable to pay. A lawyer should aspire to render at
least thirty (30) hours of pro bono publico service per
year. In fulfilling this responsibility, the lawyers
should:
(a) provide legal services without fee or
expectation of fee to:
(1) persons of limited means or
(2) charitable, religious, civil, community,
governmental and educational organizations in
matters which are designed primarily to address the
needs of persons of limited means; and
(b) provide pro bono publico service through:
(1) delivery of legal services at no fee or
substantially reduced fee to individuals, groups or
organizations seeking to secure or protect civil rights,
civil liberties or public rights, or charitable, religious,
civil, community, governmental and educational
organizations in matters in furtherance of their
organizational purposes, where the payment of
standard legal fees would significantly deplete the
organization's economic resources or would be
otherwise inappropriate:
(2) delivery of legal services at a substantially
reduced fee to persons of limited means; or
(3) participation in activities for improving the
law, the legal system or the legal profession.

Kensho
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 11:52 pm

Unread post by Kensho » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:04 am

Hello voidgate,
Interesting and informative search, however I noticed a discrepancy between what is actually written in the Washington Rules and your interpretation.

QUOTE: Every lawyer has a professional responsibility to
assist in the provision of legal services to those
unable to pay. A lawyer should aspire to render...

QUOTE: Under section 6 a lawyer has to give a certain amount of pro bono legal work every year for poor clients.

I don't believe that professional "responsibility" and/or a charge to "aspire" to something means that it is mandatory.
Good info on the other points though ;-)

Much love, unbound

voidgate
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:31 am

Unread post by voidgate » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:54 am

Unbound, You are correct. There is more in the PRC document making a strong recommendation. Volunteer work seems to be fashionable in the USA. I did a huge amount of it on hiking trails and fortunately I was financially supported to do what I enjoy. It was amazing to me so many people wanted to do it. It seemed to be part of the US culture.

I consider it would be worth following up. I am too busy at the moment with legal issues in my neighbourhood. Likewise there might be lawyers that really enjoy doing pro bono work.

Most people I met on the trails loved doing the work and some did it several times per week. Some were doctors. I met an antarctic scientist. I met a policeman. Someone could enquire with the association and might find someone who really enjoys it.

If some lawyer really got into cult activity and had a legal precedent they might really end up very well off in the USA whose major export seems to be cults.

Post Reply

Return to “Lawsuits & Court cases - JZK,Inc - latest lawsuit - RSE Music Copyright Infringments”