78
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
78 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10188 readers
663 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The Model Rules explicitly disallow the type of defense she’s posing, I.e. “my boss told me it was OK!” She knows this, so she’s attempting to shift to a defense of innocent negligence (lack of diligence), rather than willful violations of law and ethics rules. Which, given she’s just agreed to be convicted of a crime or crimes, is going to be a tough defense to put up.
I believe Colorado will start separate bar/ethics proceedings now that’s she’s been newly convicted of a crime. She was not convicted when the CO Bar originally censured her, though the subject of the censure is largely the same.
TL;DR: She’s chock full of shit and hopes the CO Bar is going to punish her for a lack of diligence (which might be a lesser punishment) than for intentionally attempting to subvert an election.
Source: I’m a lawyer barred in two states. Kill me.
Disclaimer: take whatever I say with a massive grain of salt, I’m not your lawyer, I’m not barred in Colorado, etc.