This issue of the ethical failures of legal profession is baked in to a legal profession that is not properly structured to manage the conflicts of interest that sit at the very heart of legal representation itself. 1/ https://twitter.com/NGruen1/status/1336497912730140673

The 19th c application of the English common law governing conflicts of interest saw both specialized legal expertise and financial market pricing as areas where knowledge experts were at risk of improperly profiting from their knowledge. 2/

This led to the clear distinction between two roles in the relevant professions. In law solicitors were advocates for their clients, who hired barristers as specialist topic experts -- who had an ethical obligation to offer services on all sides of the topic. 3/

In finance brokers were the client representatives who transacted with dealers who where specialists in pricing the securities they traded and stood ready to both buy and sell. 4/

This structure was dictated by the common law of agency (or conflicts of interest). Unconflicted representation of a clients interests required that the client representative not hold or take a position adverse to the client. 5/

So, barristers and dealers existed to protect the system of law and the system of market pricing from conflicts of interest. Unfortunately this structure has been completely eliminated -- and never really existed in the US where common law was always interpreted less strictly. 6/