this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
20 points (95.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

47044 readers
683 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm not asking about the ethics of lying, or whether lawyers may be justified in lying. That is beside the point. I am just asking: hypothetically, would it be possible for a lawyer to have a successful career while never uttering so much as a white lie?

Like, let's say the lawyer had some sort of spell cast on them, so they could never lie. If someone were to ask them a question, they'd either need to find a way to avoid answering or answer honestly. Would it be possible for a lawyer in such circumstances to still go on and have a successful career?

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 4 points 1 hour ago

Of course.

First, lawyers don't say "my client is innocent". They say "my client claims he is innocent". Lawyers are not witnesses, they don't claim anything in the court. They present evidence and ask questions. You don't have to lie to do it.

Second, people imagine the job of a lawyer is to get their client acquitted. It's not, it's to represent their client in court.

Let's say you are a lawyer and you have to represent a serial killer. The evidence is overwhelming and it's obvious he is guilty but still he pleads "not guilty". Your job is not to try avoid conviction. Your job is to make sure he is treated fairly and that his rights are respected. You basically have to oversee the trial from his side. Make sure that evidence was obtained legally, that witnesses tell the truth, that experts have proper credentials. You don't have to lie to do any of that.

Yes, some lawyers will be experts in taking out criminals out of jails by manipulating juries, forging evidence or intimidating witnesses. Most lawyers are not.

[–] krellor@fedia.io 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Most lawyers never litigate or actively engage in matters before a court. There are whole armies of lawyers who do contract law, agreement reviews, general counsel in organizations, tech transfer specialists, etc. These folks advise clients and help manage risk and would never be in a position to need to lie in most cases. Their job is to advise business decision makers, and you don't need to agree with the decisions made to advise on the risk landscape.

Even outside of that, there is a lot of ambiguity and conflict in large amounts of our statutes and promulgated policy, such that two lawyers can disagree about the application of law and neither one is lying.

The kind of lying that is objectively lying, like suppressing or mischaracterizing facts, are also breaches of their ethical code of conduct and would put them at risk of professional repercussions from the courts or the BAR.

So while there are bad apples like in any profession, most lawyers don't lie more than anyone else, and probably less given they have incentives to be transparent in their role.

[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

A really good niche is international contracts. You have to have a good handle on the laws of multiple countries, and deal with the constantly changing Venn diagram between them.

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

No because even avoiding answering can be a lie. A lie of omission.

The key being that you are hiding some detail or information in an attempt to deceive, that is what makes it a lie.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 points 59 minutes ago (1 children)

In that case, no one can ever tell the truth. Because you can never know what thing you've accidentally left out might be considered relevant to the person you're talking to.

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes ago)

Not true. The key is the intent and attempt to deceive. Forgetting to include info or being *unaware of it means you did not intend to deceive.

[–] Steve@communick.news 24 points 11 hours ago

Not all lawyers are trial lawyers. There are lots of things you can do helping people with paperwork of various kinds. EoL planing and incorporating businesses, for 2 examples off the top of my head.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 19 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I love the trope of lawyers being evil. They are typically held to some pretty tight requirements for ethics. Engineers on the other hand are given a free pass but are responsible for a significant number of humanities worst crimes against both itself and the environment.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

I mean, there's various kinds of lawyers, and some kinds are definitely evil.

Doesn't help that those are the ones who become rich, popular and famous.

[–] RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Chozo@fedia.io 7 points 8 hours ago

Found the successful lawyer.

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Deceit through misinformation or hiding information.

[–] mech@feddit.org 6 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

If omitting information is a lie, then no, you can't be a successful lawyer without that.
Your job is to help your client. Informing the opposition of something they missed and that would help their case hurts your client who pays and relies on you.
But then you can't be a successful business owner, politician, Union rep or even parent without lying either. Unlimited honesty and transparency isn't really something society values.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

But if there is no intention to deceive (and I would add no obligation to reveal that information,) then there’s no lie.

You just don’t provide information.

If my mom asks “where were you?” And I refuse to answer, I’m not lying, I’m just not answering, right?

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago
[–] bizarroland@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I would argue that hiding information is not always lying.

There are lies of omission, but it depends on if you are asked about the things you are omitting or not.

And even if you are, it is possible to steer the conversation away from the thing without actually telling a lie.

Politicians do it all of the time.

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Thats why the requirement for omission to be a lie is that there is an intent to deceive.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 13 points 10 hours ago

Lawyers don’t lie. They massage the truth.

[–] verdi@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 1 points 6 hours ago

I feel like there's a sequel to liar liar incoming and Jim is doing prep work on the fediverse...

[–] cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 hours ago

I would respond that it's almost impossible to thrive in any sort of human society that has ever existed in history without telling even the faintest hint of a white lie sometimes. I don't think it's realistically possible to be a successful human, nevermind a lawyer. Everyone thinks they're being completely honest all the time, until you spend some years having a bunch of philosophers pick apart the entire basis of the reality you think you're not lying to yourself or anyone else about, then once you're done figuring out what reality actually is, you might have a totally different idea of what lying even means. But you'll never get there, because you'll never actually figure out what reality even is, nobody comes out the other side of existential philosophy. This isn't new stuff, the ancient Greeks were struggling with it thousands of years ago, and we only know that because they were among the first who bothered to write it all down.

[–] disregardable@lemmy.zip 11 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

"Due to my ethical obligations to my client, I am unable to answer that question. If your honor insists on an answer, I will need to withdraw."

You will lose out on a lot of money though. Remember that there are two sides to every story, and it's not the lawyer's job to judge what the truth is. The lawyer advocates. The judge and jury decide.

[–] bizarroland@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I work with lawyers and I have to say lawyers are by and far either the most or least ethical people you have ever met.

And success is not determined by your ethics as a lawyer.

The best lawyers find the points of the truth that are the most salient to their case and push those.

[–] kubok@fedia.io 1 points 7 hours ago

by and far either the most or least ethical people

Anedcote: I once had a lead developer who was a successful lawyer earlier in his career. He quit his law office because he could not stomach defending people who were not only obviously guilty, bet were scumbags as well.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 3 points 8 hours ago

Obviously it depends on what is meant by a lie.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Someone just watched Liar Liar.

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 2 points 4 hours ago

But not all the way through?

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago