Confidentiality Is Main Topic Of Law Debate

Two criminal lawyers said last night that it is impossible to observe professional strictures concerning the confidential relationship between lawyer and client without sacrificing the lawyer's responsibility to either his client or the court.

Dean Monroe H. Freedman '52, of Hofstra Law School told a Burr Hall audience of 70 that defense lawyers are compelled to "eliminate candor" in their presentation to the court if they wish to preserve both confidentiality and complete knowledge of their client's case.

Andrew L. Kaufman '51, professor of Law, said that he warns clients that "what you say to me may hurt you" should the client tell him of the intent to perjure himself or commit some future crime. He termed the resultant loss of information concerning the client a "cost that must be paid."

The lawyers spoke at a debate on legal ethics.

According to the American Bar Association (ABA) Code of Responsibility, Kaufamn said, a lawyer may reveal his client's intention to commit a future crime, but is not required to do so.

Freedman said the current ABA policy toward breach of confidentiality could be summed-up as "permissable in any case, mandatory in none," and therefore liable to abuse. He proposed a specific, restrictive code instead.

For cases in which the death or serious injury of another person might be avoided by a lawyer's breach of confidentiality, Freedman said that lawyers should follow their conscience while risking disciplinary action from the local ABA review board.

Both Kaufman and Freedman said that their law school training had ignored questions of ethics, but that this policy seemed to be changing in recent years.