Psychiatrists have an obligation to break their patient/doctor confidentiality if they believe their patient is a danger to themselves or to someone else. For some reason, I thought that lawyers would have the same obligation. It only makes sense that lawyers are ethically responsible, if they can, to stop their clients from hurting anyone. After reading about Harvey Weinstein, I realize I am woefully ignorant of legal ethics.

There are 8 known agreements between Weinstein and the women he has harassed and/or raped.  He paid his victims cash for their silence. All tied in a nice legal bow. Lawyers needed to tie this bow. Maybe, just maybe, you could justify a lawyer working with Weinstein once or twice. You could argue that there was some misunderstanding and that this is best settled out of court. Let’s give a two-time litigant the benefit of the doubt.

The problem, at least it is a problem for me, is there was a forth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth case. If it were me, I would begin to think Harvey has a problem here and that the women involved aren’t misunderstanding crazy Harvey’s intentions but, rather crazy Harvey might just be a sexual predator. What then is the lawyer’s responsibility in situation like these? Sexual Harassment is against the law. Rape is against the law. At the bare minimum, Weinstein is breaking the laws regarding sexual harassment but also might be breaking much more serious laws regarding rape. At some point, isn’t a lawyer required to say I can’t continue as your lawyer any more, I believe you are guilty and I can’t in good conscious represent you. To continue representing Weinstein would seem like an egregious breech of ethics on a lawyer’s part.

Don’t lawyers have an obligation to protect society at large? You have represented Weinstein several times regarding women bringing sexual harassment accusations against him. You see Weinstein continues to come to you with the same problem. You might argue that you don’t know that someone is going to continue harassing and raping women. You don’t know all the facts as no court has made a decision regarding the guilt of Weinstein. Besides it isn’t imminent harm and you don’t know who his next victim will be. Which I get and I realize it is a difficult issue. You should only break lawyer/client confidentiality if it is genuinely imminent and there is a known victim in danger.

And yet. And yet, from my understanding, Weinstein’s contract with his production company had a clause that states the company couldn’t fire him from sexual harassment suits as long as Weinstein took care of the payment himself and did not involve the company. Who puts that in an employment contract? Why would you put this in your contract if you were intending to change your ways? He obviously had no intention of stopping. What ethical lawyer would write a contract with such a clause in it? Is that even legal? Can you actually write a contract protecting someone from termination even when the person is committing a crime? So sadly, we know. The lawyers knew what Harvey was and, more importantly, they knew that Harvey planned on continuing harassing women. Isn’t this the point you get off the merry-go-round? I hope someone goes after Weinstein’s lawyers. Make them spend some of the dirty money they earned protecting Weinstein. Now that would be justice.

Finally, for anyone who doubts it exists, this is what privilege is. Justice, or rather injustice, can be bought. Rich people can buy themselves out of a whole lot of jams and, if their victims are poor, the victims will keep their mouths shut because they need the money more than the justice. How much better would life be if Weinstein faced justice when the first woman complained? Seven other women would have been saved their dreadful experience. Who knows, maybe even Harvey Weinstein could have been salvaged, learned his lesson, and moved on to still make great movies. We will never know now.