26-year Life in Prison v.s. Lawyer Professional Ethics

In yesterday the “60 Minutes” program, there was a story about an innocent guy who has been in prison for 26 years, while two attorneys who knew he was innocent kept silent. The real killer in the case was the lawyers’ client, who confessed to them when they were dealing with another case. However, that was the exact reason for the two lawyers to maintain the client confidentiality, based on the rules of conduct for attorneys. Late last year, before the real killer died, the two lawyers convinced him to let them reveal the truth after his death. That was the point when we know the secret after 26 years. Now the innocent man, who is 54 now, is waiting for trials to set him free.

I was shocked by the reality, but meanwhile it reminded me of the similar cases I read in novels about priests and doctors. I think everyone respects the ethic concern and rules in those sensitive professions, whenever it doesn’t conflicts with your own interest or hurt someone in this way. The two attorneys actually tried their best to research the ethics of attorney-client privilege, but still failed to find a way to help the innocent guy but not to put their client in another capital case. I think “this story cuts to the core of America’s justice system” as it suggests. How to balance those specific professional ethics and general moral standards? Is there some way or standards to solve the kind of situations? What’s the justice in this case? Maybe, to different people, there is a different answer!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/06/60minutes/main3914719.shtml