So recent news has me pondering quite a bit and I have a question. Do you think giving a reference can incriminate someone? What are your thoughts? Has anyone ever seen this first hand? Could a compromised provider calling another provider in hopes for a reference actually incriminate the provider who gave the reference (see scenario below)? Perhaps, dare I say it…this could be a reason for a provider NOT giving references. Hmmm…not a bad idea! Then, I wonder am I thinking too much or am I right on? If so, I may just shy away from giving references for at least a month.

Please, no crucifying! Wink=being playful (ie. I am in a playful mode right now, though asking a serious question).

Thank you for your input!

Xoxo,
Gia

Hypothetical Scenario
Compromised Provider #1:  Hello. I am calling for a reference for Jimmy John.
Provider #2: He is ok. Have fun!
Compromised Provider #1: Thanks!

Not for the girl giving the reference, this is one of those things that they have to catch you in the act of doing. Any information of what may or may not have happened in the past can come back to incriminate you for something they did not catch you in at the time.

Reviews and linking to them are more incriminating then giving a girl the Ok about a gentleman.

given, there was no discussion of p4p or any other illegal activity.  In any event, it's hearsay and generally inadmissible into evidence.

See the legal board for what to say to the cops.  NEVER SAY ANYTHING!!!!!!

That the person who is being referenced is a good safe person.   If the giver of the reference says nothing about what they did, then there is nothing that can be construed from that reference.

For example, if I as a generic person were to ask you about one of your clients, and you said something like: "From what I know, he is a great guy.", then there is nothing that I can do with that info other than knowing that he is a great guy.   Even if you mentioned that you knew him, and that he was a great guy, there is nothing that can be determined from that on how you know him.

If the reference were to include information such as could be learned from a sexual encounter, then there might be a potential to use that reference in a nefarious way.   But the potential for such an outcome is not very likely.

It could also be a wife who had figured out her husband's extracurricular activities!

BB

your correct that they are just saying "the person is a "good guy"  which legally implies "nothing" other than he might be a decent person.

however, If LE have that info they will still use it as a piece of the strawhouse, so they can create a circumstancial case.  Then blow it down.

whether it is fair or  legal  does not matter in reality.

It appears that object of the game is to  push cases through the system for a quick plea.  rather than actually "defending the case"  That is way too much work & too expensive for the average Attn.

which is why LE are getting away with more & more, they know that the average person has no clue how things work Or can even afford a real defence..and many times you don't even know what happened until it is too late.

nutshell: the attorney "victimizes" their clients
& LE know this.