A Terroristic Divorce

The Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and Justice.
– Things you believed in because you trusted the teller.
– The truth moved you to the other side where you continued the stories.
– Among ‘friends’, you could talk about the truth.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 – if you thought finding the truth about the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus was difficult… wait until you find out what the American Bar Association has done.

Undermining justice in the United States by enacting a law which violates your constitutional rights, the Supreme Court in each state acted on the recommendation of the American Bar Association.

They created a situation which they could not lawfully undo. They conspired to conceal it. They mandated it be concealed without regard for life, liberty or justice.

They manipulated the population to believe that the problem was in bias, god, sexism, racism, prejudice, hate, ignorance, … All of the ridiculous things which the media blows out of proportion in the United States. Yes, those issues do exist BUT NOT AT THE LEVELS THE MEDIA IS PORTRAYING IT.

It is necessary for you to believe in those reasons for the problem. Once you do, you stop looking for a resolution. You just point at the problem. The unresolvable problems which except for a few hateful groups are not as pervasive as the media would have you believe.

All of those things help to conceal and misdirect from a bigger issue. INJUSTICE – deliberately caused by lawyers and judges who mandate that they not take any action to reveal it lest they face disciplinary action.

The members of the American Bar Association need you to believe in all of the things which distract you from their epic failure. So that is where they point when injustice occurs. They POINT at other problems to distract you.

You must believe in justice – even though there are SO many problems with it.
The People believe in justice.
Lawyers and Judges are like the parents that told you about the Tooth Fairy and Santa Clause, lawyers and judges also know the truth
People go to court and expect justice. Lawyers and judges know better, but can’t lawfully tell you.

Lawyers and Judges know that they are MANDATED to ignore injustice and judicial corruption where it will adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary, negatively affect the reputation of lawyers, self-incriminate, or affect their client.

Lawyers and Judges know to refer to Rule 1.6 as Attorney-Client Privilege (ACP). But that’s a lie.

Rule 1.6 is called CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.

Same number. RULE 1.6
Same title. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION
Every state. Rolled out gradually from a ‘trade code’ to a LAW.
(The only way that could happen is if they had the same author… the American Bar Association.)
When Rule 1.6 was a trade code, it was a suggestion. As LAW, it is a MANDATE which must be followed by lawyers, District Attorneys, Attorneys General,…

Any effort to expose the conspiracy became ILLEGAL.
Any effort to expose the conspiracy was considered sedition because it would expose their sedition.

When Rule 1.6 became ‘law’, the ethical and moral problems with the code had been documented. THEY KNEW.
When rule 1.6 became ‘law’, no lawyer or judge could lawfully address the unconstitutionality of the ‘law’.
When Rule 1.6 became ‘law’, a lawyer and judge could trigger injustice which would be unescapable for the litigant… the only possible outcome is loss of everything, prison, or suicide.
When Rule 1.6 became ‘law”, the victim litigant lost their rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution… and because those who were sworn to protect those rights were the ones responsible for the ‘law, there was nothing anyone could do to end the injustice.

Rule 1.6 is NOT law. Repugnant to the US Constitution, Rule 1.6 is a nullity. The conspiracy to deny and obstruct justice in the United States Courts is a conspiracy of epic national proportions. Documented in the law books and court records. The evidence of the conspiracy is there.

The evidence of the conspiracy to conceal the sedition is documented in the ‘bread crumbs’ left by efforts to maintain the conspiracy. Each time Rule 1.6 was edited in each state, it was done to conceal and prevent exposure of the injustice and corruption of the Judicial Branch.

Those who may tell you otherwise,… we all believed in the Tooth Fairy and Santa… until the truth was told.

JUSTICE IS COMING.

Rule 1.6 undermined the United States Constitution. They broke the Judicial Branch and destroyed their integrity. The time has come for the American People to restore the US Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the integrity of the Judiciary.

This would be funny… except IT IS TRUE.

The separate set of laws are THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT which must be followed by lawyers and legal professionals. Enacted by each state Supreme Court without any legislature, governor or constitutional review, .

IT IS NOT LEGAL. Rule 1.6 denies constitutionally protected rights, therefore it is repugnant to the US Constitution. So, it also violates each state constitution. It is definitely not legal

IT IS ILLEGAL TO ASK ABOUT IT. An attorney or judge must maintain CONFIDENTIALITY. Not only can they not discuss it, they cannot lawfully address it’s unconstitutionality.

This document dates back to 1984. Rule 1.6 had only just begun undermining the American Judiciary. The Supreme Courts in each state were without proper authority enacting an unconstitutional ‘law’ with the full knowledge that Rule 1.6 additionally had serious ethical and moral problems.

ENACTING RULE 1.6 INTO LAW WAS A DELIBERATE ACT OF SEDITION DONE WITH INTENT TO COMMIT INJUSTICE.

The Ethics and Morality issues are well documented. Lawyers, who are the people usually authoring these Legal Reviews, always stopped short of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL label. If they were to write it, they would be violating the’law’ and face discipline.

In this article, Rule 1.6 represents two incompatible views. The permissive language of the text of the Rule accomodates the view which favors disclosure. The policy statements accomodates the view which would prohibit disclosure. In the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6, I refered to this incompatibility as a self-nullifying feature of the statements which comprise Rule 1.6.

FORDHAM URBAN LAW JOURNAL
Legal Ethics: Discretion and Utility in Rule 1.6
Charles A. Kelbley
Fordham UniversityNo other professions require practitioners to identify so closely and completely with the interests and confidences of their clients, as in the legal profession. Unlike doctors, preists, rabbis and other professionals, the lawyer is an advisor but also an advocate.

Rule 1.6 is a major flaw in the legal professions history of self-discipline.

The rule fails the test of logic because the concept of discretion which it reflects is self-contradictory.

The rule is a crude form of utilitarianism and should be reformulated to require disclosure whenever clients have no right to confidentiality and their conduct would constitute unjustified aggression or seriously invade the interests of others.

[It is not the intention of this web site to infringe on copyrighted material. The Document presented above is widely available and can be found by anyone who searches on the internet.]

The following document includes ‘Practice Points to help you avoid not only professional embarrassment, but also loss of clients, a disciplinary complaint or even a malpractice claim.”

While the Model Rule 1.6(a) duty of confidentiality is closely related to the attorney-client privilege, it is broader in scope than the attorney-client privilege, “which is a rule of evidence,” or “the work product immunity which is a rule of procedure.”

Prosecutors, District Attorneys, and Attorneys General must know who their client is in order to protect their interest. As they represent the public, the government, the counties, the states, state agencies, their department, and THEMSELVES … it’s a wonder they can ever prosecute a corruption matter.

OH, THAT’S RIGHT… Prosecutors, District Attorneys, and Attorneys General DON’T prosecute judicial corruption. Rule 1.6 makes it unlawful for them to prosecute and adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary… EVEN where it denies the constitutional rights of the people…

Like the Cash for Kids children and their families…

Like the families affected by the foreclosure crisis nationwide…

Like the victims of family court where injustice overwhelms the target to commit suicide to escape.