MK forum

Just a couple of ideas here...to add another layer of confidentiality to the whole mix and to protect oneself from possible defamation suits: (1) MK's should ensure that PH signs some sort of a confidentiality agreement prior to being interviewed stating, amongst other things, that PH will not disclose or otherwise make available the identity of the MK to any party, either by intent, gross negligence, or negligence unless ordered by a court of law; (2) Because documents may inadvertently be made available to the wrong persons (i.e., accidental forwarding to the wrong person, etc.), any documents (such as documentation of an interview) should not contain the victim's name. PH could assign each interviewee an ID number of sorts and use that number in the document rather than the actual name. There would then only be ONE document with any victims' names on it - the document with the list of names and ID numbers. And, no, this document should not be stored on NTM servers. It should be encrypted and formatted in such a way as to be meaningless to the casual observer.

I don't think an attorney would be disbarred for allowing NTO to store these docs on NTO's servers, but assuming an attorney had knowledge of this procedure and did not advise against it, the attorney should surely be reprimanded by his employer. Attorneys generally have the affirmative duty to report certain activity of their clients if such activities would cause imminent serious bodily injury...attorneys generally are "permitted" to report activities such as those that may cause serious financial injury...and attorneys are generally not permitted to report anything else due to attorney/client privilege. In other words, attorneys may be aware of some very bad things their clients are doing, and just have to live with that knowledge. Of course, this all does vary from state to state. On the other hand, affirmatively actions on the part of an attorney that are contrary to law or in violation of the professional code of conduct are another matter.

Having said that, running some potential decisions by some members of this fanda site may serve to mitigate some bad decision making. There are some intimidatingly smart people on here.

Disclosure - nothing I have said here should be construed as legal advice! Just rambling thoughts of a crazy man.

Regards.

I disagree. I do not think Pat Hendrix should be used. Nothing personal against her.

This is not about NTM & what will best protect their image. She was selected BY them. Was any MK (abused or not) involved in selecting her?

Call GRACE. CALL GRACE. just do it.

I'm not speaking on her behalf, but I'd be surprised if PH/NTM sees any more cooperation from AA. And the re-opening and adding to the depths of her heart wounds is on NTM's heads this time - not Frank Parker's.

Call GRACE.

to be clear, i am not advocating the use of PH. i am advocating confidentiality at all costs regardless of who is used - which, in this case, appears to be PH.

OT is quite correct. INTENTIONAL use of this methodology as a pretext to obtain certain information would, indeed, be a serious matter.

It was an honest mistake.

First honest thing they do, and it's a mistake.....