For those who don't know the story, these lawyers already represented Andrew Wilson on charges of murdering two police officers, a crime for which he was eventually sentenced to life without parole. During this representation, the lawers developed information that their client had also murdered a McDonald's security guard, a crime for which another man, Alton Logan, was accused. When they confronted Wilson, he confirmed that he -- not Logan -- had committed this crime, as well.

Bound by their ethical obligations, these attorneys kept this information under wraps. Meanwhile, Logan was tried and convicted of the charge, and was himself sentenced to life without parole. 

Twenty-six years later, following Wilson's death, the lawyers came forward to exonerate Logan. Apparently, their client told them that once he was dead, they could reveal his confidence, and so they did, setting in motion the events that should result in the exoneration and release of the innocent Logan.

My take on all of this is that these lawyers -- unless they did everything humanly possible to right this wrong when they first dicovered it -- should be ashamed of themselves. I have been a criminal defense attorney for 20 years, and a public defender for 15 of those, and I know all about the attorney-client privilege.  But there are things these attorneys could have done to rectify this situation, such as trying like crazy to convince their client to come clean, regardless of the consequences (after all, he was already facing double murder charges). If their client was willing to admit what he had done on condition that he not receive the death penalty, his lawyers could have gone to the prosecutor and advised they had "compelling" evidence that the wrong person was being prosecuted for this murder. Perhaps the State would have been willing to agree not to seek death in the case in exhange for information that would have prevented prosecution of an innocent man. 

In short, had it been me, I would have stopped at nothing in an effort to exonerate Logan. I would have found a way, or at least exhausted every possibility. And if nothing else worked, I would have comitted a direct breach of my ethical obligations as an attorney -- i.e., I would have revealed the confidence and taken my lumps. Those lumps would have included disbarment, but so what? Isn't there a duty to prevent an injustice from destroying the life of a completely innocent person,  if it is within your power to do so? I believe there is. 

My sense from reading articles about this case is that these attorneys feel they should be applauded for doing the right thing after all these years and for maintaining the confidence of their client for so long lin the face of intense internal pressure to reveal all. I don't see it that way. I see them as cowards, unwilling to put their careers on the line to do the right thing.

I suspect Alton Logan would agree with me.