“I will not be surprised if the state bar association does dis bar him. Destroying files on another attorneys computers is more then adequate grounds for removal. Then he blamed the other attorneys because they left their computers on in a secure room. Joe the victim, yeah, right.”
Nice try.
Your support for your claim??
Again, if the borough felt that it was a serious violation, it should have handled it at the time. Since they didn’t, not only does this absolve Miller from wrongdoing, but it also would also call into question the validity of the borough staff’s own ethics if they later claimed that this episode was a serious violation. How many other ‘ethics lapses’ have they allowed to pass by involving other attorneys? The supervisors would come under a lot of heat for that.
And as I said, if the borough tried to make him violate the ethics rules by putting his own client at risk, the borough supervising attorneys were clearly wrong, and Mr. Miller was correct in objecting to this- and this (unlike taking an online poll) is a very serious ethics problem.
And it disappoints me that you don’t seem to want the newspapers and all the little hack blogs to examine Murkowski’s past and her record. It almost feels like you want show trials for those who you don’t like, and want to cover up everything negative about those you support. Surely, you’re better than that...