Blake Knight at Legal Brand Marketing is still at it: sending strangers emails revealing the secrets of people who think they’re contacting a lawyer:
State = TX
County = TARRANT
Date Arrested =
First Name = Brendan
Comments = I was in a drunk driving incident in which I was travelling the wrong way on a one way street and had a collision with another vehicle. I was rushed to the emergency room and had a one week stay in the hospital. I do not have any copies of my tickets or court summons so I have not yet been to court. The ticket states that the offense was a DUI 49.04. It also states that the victims were injured as well. The state of their injuries is unknown to me at this time. Can these charges be bumped up to Intoxication Assault? Unknowingly to me, I refused the breathalyzer on the scene, will this bump my charges up? What am I facing right now since I have missed my court date? ?»?
Sure, Blake stopped sending the pigeons’ last names after I published this post, putting a Hello Kitty bandaid on the gangrenous ethical wound that is Legal Brand Marketing. You don’t think Richard Alpert can figure out who Brendan is? You don’t think he’ll find some way to use this message (“in fact, you were so intoxicated that you don’t even remember refusing the breathalyzer?”) against Brendan? You’re mistaken.
Legal Brand Marketing’s ethical problem—and the ethical problem of the lawyers hiring it, not to mention the lawyers shilling for it—is not simply that it revealed the last names of people who revealed potentially incriminating facts to LBM while they thought they were communicating with counsel.
No, Legal Brand Marketing’s ethical problem goes much deeper. Legal Brand Marketing’s ethical problem is that they are marketers. Marketers’ ethics are not the same as lawyers’ ethics; they might care a little bit about legal ethics because their failure to comply makes them look bad, but the marketers at Legal Brand Marketing have demonstrated that they haven’t a clue.