The offer of cooperation came in the form of an 1,800 word manifesto blasting lawyers, tax evasion, weak lawmakers and income inequality. In it, the leaker, “John Doe” whose identity is said to remain unknown even to the journalists he communicates with, said he is worried about weak protections for whistleblowers, and called on Congress and other global lawmakers to make it easier for people like him to get immunity.
On April 26, 2016 we posted Mossack Fonseca Law Firm Leak & Attorney-Client Privilege where we discussed that current and former clients of the law firm subject to the leak now face the potential exposure of their confidential documents and conversations spanning nearly 40 years.
Whenever confidential attorney files are leaked, innocent clients, as well as those who may have been seeking to cover up wrongdoing, face the potential of their personal information and confidential files being reviewed by reporters, members of the public and government investigators.
Even when only a subset of the stolen documents are publicized, the DOJ can often obtain additional, nonpublic material through grand jury subpoenas served on the entities or individuals that now possess the stolen files or through mutual legal assistance treaties to foreign authorities.
This raises the question of whether U.S. government investigators are able to make use of these "Privileged Materials" that appear to have been hacked from Mossack Fonseca, an overseas law firm?
Law 360 and Baker & McKenzie both discuss Attorney-Client Privilege And A Law Firm Leak including whether the 4th amendment and/or privilege applies to these hacked materials
is Right for You?
Read more at: Tax Times blog