Disposable People - What is in your wallet ?

When a client walks into an attorneys office the first thing they ask is "what is in your wallet" ? what are the clients assets ? From the assets they determine their "strategy", it is not their professional skill or diligence to the law that determines the "strategy". Once a clients "threat" level is ascertained, the level of representation is determined, whether the client will have enough assets to be able to retain another attorney to sue them may provide the incentive for competent representation.

The predatory practice is supported when institutions such as the Virginia State Bar an agency of the Virgina State Supreme Court, choose to dismiss "strategy" complaints. As a result "due process" and "rule of law" are NOT observed in the courts, rule of whimsy is observed. Crusaders, malingerers and those that "don't feel like performing today" have infected the system. When "strategy" complaints were addressed, a channel of enforcement, consequences and oversight of performance was made available, there was incentive for their members to be diligent in their representation of all their clients not just the rich ones - the client had leverage.

The integrity of the courts was lost when the Bar chose to dismiss "strategy" complaints. Will an officer of the court just not bother to "prosecute" a criminal today, a defender forget documents or evidence refuting oppositions claims resulting in an unfavorable judgment or overlook a Judge that is biased because it is "expedient". The theater is infected, "rule of law" is "rule of whimsy" a niche without oversight or an expectation that a damaged client provide the oversight in an arena that is biased against them. There is no way that one individual or twelve can make a decision without the facts being presented, presentation is performance and strategy. When dismissed the process becomes a facade.

The questions become:

• How many are in jail because they were "processed" ?
• How many are free because they were "processed" ?
• How many are like us who handed their attorney in court documents refuting the statements of opposing counsel and their attorney told them "professional courtesy" and dismissed this and other material ?
• How many watched these failures train wreck their lives and then were told by the Bar we do not address performance of our members ?
• The old Canon's addressed Integrity, Zealous Representation, Competence and Diligence - now we have "the VSB does not address 'strategy' complaints" - why ?
• Why not address performance of ones members if one is in a performance profession ?
• How can anyone have anything but contempt for the courts when an institution claiming to be an agency of the Supreme Court of Virginia dismisses strategy and performance of its members ?
• Why the avoidance ? I suspect laziness, profiteering and elitism. Populations of certain groups have problems self-regulating their theater.

If there was a concern about "rule of law", "process" or the "integrity" of their members then they would address and diligently review the complaints. Yet one gets silence, dismissal and cover up from the institution. The precedence set is that an individual is available for harvest and disposable, the individual without assets poses no threat and cannot prove their allegations so the issue can be avoided and the person disposed, the individual has "sour grapes".

Where are the witnesses of malpractice ? First thing an attorney says is, don't talk about the case with anyone - isolate the mark. I find it interesting that when I intercede in my girlfriends case I am told that it is her case and a defensive front is put up. I point out that I am paying the bills and footing the costs of their failure to engage in a competent manner. I point out prior counsel and identify that failure to perform appears to be a trend that may be discrimination. The Virginia State Bar dismisses my discourse as irrelevant by attempting to focus on the immediate, implying that the individual attorney may have made a mistake and dropped the ball. The fact that my girlfriend has had ten attorneys and they all have been impotent in their representation, is either discrimination against an individual or harvesting of clients is endemic problem facilitated by the institution. We are told that we have the option to take it to court. Now the option is to go up against an attorney in a biased court and defend ones position or risk being harvested by another attorney. I stood up to a judge once when they denied us our presentation of position, I mistakenly thought that the courts were supposed to hear a presentation of both sides of a case before a ruling - I said "your honor" - too much.

What about material/evidence/documents ? The response is not using the material was your attorneys "strategy", VSB does not address "strategy". The glove, DNA, pictures, documents or witnesses were not used to refute the allegations of the opposition one loses, assets, liberty and maybe life. If one is upset they call it "sour grapes" or tell the individual that they are "stupid".

There is no incentive to provide competent representation, the client has no leverage to address and "rule of law" becomes "rule of whimsy".

So what is in your wallet, can one buy the law ?