Why is it a response of lawyers, when they hear about abusive, corrupt acts of government officials, to advise those harmed by the corrupt government officials to hire a lawyer?
Some things should be dealt with as a crime, not as a lawsuit. Or don’t lawyers care, especially if it generates fees they can collect from those harmed by the corruption.?
And do they really think that such lawsuits would accomplish much in a locality where corruption is widespread, even accepted as part of the culture? How many of the local judges could be trusted in such a situation?
#1 by Cantankerous on 11/26/2011 - 9:01 PM
Because the government far too often does not fund the law enforcement agencies enough that they can adequately police markets or the public sector. Look how poor a job they do with securities fraud, drug safety, advertising fraud, and medical malpractice. Right now private lawsuits are the only things that are keeping those industries even close to honest.
#2 by grrandram on 11/26/2011 - 9:33 PM
If a crime has been committed, the case goes to trial to prove it and to get justice. It’s not just a lawsuit to generate fees. Usually a District Attorney will be the prosecuting attorney in government corruption. It’s not a private attorney out to make a buck.
#3 by KarenL on 11/26/2011 - 10:12 PM
Public Corruption is a crime, so that it must be prosecuted by the State.
Private lawsuits are filed on the behalf of named victims of the crime. These are filed to establish a pecking order to the assumed assets of the criminals on behalf of their victims
Much like a auto accident. The State prosecuted the drunk drive. The victim of the accidents must file suit to claim damages from the criminal’s (i.e. driver) estate or insurer.