The Brett Favre Scandal

               Journalist A.J. Daulerio and the website Deadspin.com recently broke the salacious story about Brett Favre and New York Jets employee, Jenn Sterger. The story about the long time football star was headline news. Part of what made the story a scandal was the lack of confirmation from deadspin.com that pictures and texts used in print  were actually from Brett Favre. 

In this scandal it was hard to tell who the bad guy really was. Even if all the allegations were true, A.J. Daulerio and his lack of journalistic integrity could outshine Favre for being most unprofessional. A.J. Daulerio even told CNN that there were “two scum-bags in this story,” referring to himself and Farve, and that he was okay with that characterization.

What makes Daulerio a bad guy is that Sterger had made it clear that she had no intention of going public with the story. Daulerio tried applying heavy pressure on her to expose Farve and she refused. Despite his source not wanting to be exposed, Daulerio went public anyway, ignoring all professional standards on how to treat sources.

There are some important parallels between journalistic integrity and the practice of law. Integrity is defined as adherence to moral and ethical principles, soundness of moral character and  honesty.   Daulerio threw away all his creditability just to get national media attention about a particular story.

 It may be tempting for lawyers, at times,  to make controversial statements about a case or the law just to get attention, but the attention may not be helpful to the client’s cause or to the lawyer’s reputation. That’s not to say that lawyers cannot or should not speak to the press. At times, they may not have a choice; for instance if inaccurate information about a case is printed. Nevertheless, careers should be built on credibility and integrity; and as somebody once said, you only get one reputation.

 

   

Philadelphia Lawyers Tracking Car Accident Victims From Public Police Reports

I recently read a few articles about lawyers in Wisconsin and Texas targeting car accident victims by scouring local police reports. They then contact the accident victims by mail. In the articles, the lawyers give their reason for doing this as trying to put accident victims on equal footing with insurance companies, who also approach accident victims immediately after an accident. Fair enough. Sort of like public service. But I guarantee the lawyers using this method to attract clients are not offering free legal services. Are the Wisconsin and Texas lawyers justified in their attempts to seek new clients in this way? Is it just another method of marketing their practice, or does it go too far?

The same thing happens in Philadelphia, although it has not been written about. Local lawyers hire “investigators” to sit in a room in City Hall where all the police reports are kept. The “investigators” scour the police reports for serious accidents where the accident victims are not at fault, for instance rear- end collisions, and once that information is obtained by the lawyers, they write to the car accident victims offering representation. A few clients of mine have told me, after they have hired me, that they have received a “strange’ letter from another lawyer, like what I’ve just described. I then explain this method that some lawyers use to try to find clients.

Is this illegal? No. Is it unethical in terms of the standards lawyers must adhere to? Not technically. Lawyers have the right under the 1st Amendment to contact prospective clients in writing, not in person or by telephone, and offer their services. Does it undermine the legal profession and personal injury lawyers in particular? It certainly does.