[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Double Ds,

If an undercover cop pretends to be a lawyer and someone unknowingly hire him and tell him their secrets, is the "client-lawyer privilege" still exists? I got the example from a movie but am curious for an answer. My thinking is that the undercover cop can go to jail for pretending to be a lawyer [is this true?] but he get to testify against the person as a witness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, I don't know about this. My gut instinct is that there is no privilege if there is no lawyer, but that there's a pretty good claim of entrapment that the defense could argue.



[/ QUOTE ]

The privilege belongs to the "client." If that person actually believes that he is talking to his lawyer, there would be a privilege. Of course, the fake lawyer can attempt to use the information, but it would not be admissible for any purpose (unless, of course, the client gives consent to waive the privilege).