Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (15784)	6/9/1998 12:59:00 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

I don't think they asserted 5th Amendment rights. I think it is limited solely to attorney-client privilege. The privilege is based upon the notion that it is important for a client to be able to speak freely with his lawyer. The tobacco case someone raised is probably not apposite to this case. In the tobacco case I understand that the lawyers were actually (allegedly) involved in the illegal conspiracy. In that case, the Court would not protect those conversations for obvious reasons. JLA