I don't even know him. I merely stated my opinion on the subject at large, which has nothing to do with him personally. And, my questioning if he is an attorney at all also does not discredit him--that is an opportunity for him to prove he is.
There is nothing sleazy about encouraging masses of people who are in precarious positions that it would be in their best interest to make contact with a reputable attorney of their choosing before trouble arises.
Shyster. Shark. Etc. They're jokes, people. Poking fun at oneself.
I know thousands of attorneys and I can definitely say that I have no doubt that SJ is indeed not only an attorney, but also a knowledgeable and reputable one.
He's a great resource here and spends a great deal of time helping the community. He gets little to nothing in return. Why on earth people would attempt to discredit him, I'm not sure. But I'm dumbfounded.
Enough said. Now, would anyone like to plan an event in Dallas? Let me know. (<---- THAT is self promotion).
Originally Posted by Your Naughty Muse
I didn't say suggesting an attorney is sleazy. I said a sleazy attorney would get involved in a true retainer involving illegal activity, or potential illegal activity to be exact. I failed to define my reasoning:
Clearly, if charged, an attorney can represent anyone. And, I'm honestly not sure how this is handled financially, since money obtained illegally cannot be used to pay for representation--this could lead to disbarment:
No, I'm not an attorney. But, I read a lot on pertinent topics. I was merely saying that someone who knowingly risks disbarment by accepting illegal funds is sleazy--a sentiment echoed in the show Breaking Bad. Most likely, this would fall on the providers side.
http://www.lexisone.com/balancing/ar...lw020004a.html
Damn, y'all are sensitive