Lawyer Alexei Aksenov Biography

Try the literature selection service. You can always turn off the advertisement. Overcoming Prejudice, Or a Shot from the Shadow Purpose: To Study the Objectification of Opinions Placed ON Lawyers on the Internet. Methodology: Formal Legal, Comparative Legal and Analytical Methods Were used. Results: On the Basis of His Own Negative Experience of Influence The Reputation of a Lawyer of Anonymous Posteed On the Internet, The Author Comes to the Conclusion that Has Been a Long-Term Update of the Legislation Regulation Information Issues.

According to the Author, The Regulatory and Legal Promulgation of Such Mechanisms Willow Objectify Information Posteed ABOUT Lawyers on the Internet, At the Same Time Increasing The Level of Digitalization of the Lawyer Community, Which Corresponds to Modern Global Trends. Methodology: formal-legal, comparative legal and analytical methods were used. Results: on the basis of his own negative experience in influencing the reputation of an anonymous reviews posted on the Internet, the author comes to the conclusion about the navigated novelization of the legislation governing the information issues under consideration.

According to the author, the regulatory violation of such mechanisms will objectify the information posted about lawyers on the Internet, simultaneously increasing the level of digitalization of the lawyer community, which corresponds to modern global trends. Key words: reputation as a lawyer, slander, reviews on the Internet. Aksenov A. Keywords: Reputation as a lawyer, Slander, Reviews on the Internet.

Many years ago, at the dawn of a legal career, I sincerely believed that the key to the success of my activity was honest and professional implementation of the assigned work. While at night I was ahead of claims, and for days he stupid shoes in running around the courts, senior colleagues inspired me, young, that the most important talent that helped our brother to gain the daily bread lies in the ability to like the client.

Today, when there are twenty years of practice, thousands of affairs, millions of mistakes, I understand how they were right! Did you think how the client chooses us, lawyers? What is happening in the soul of a person when he gives his future, his hopes in the hands of a professional lawyer? After all, A. Koni aptly noticed that the attorney and the principal have a special relationship when the latter is forced to discover the defender of the cache of his soul [5, p.

It turns out that the choice of a lawyer, like the work of the latter with a client, excludes mutual indifference: the principal must have an interesting person! Everything is fine with you. Surprisingly, with such happiness - and at large, I. Ilf, E. The Golden Calf of the founding rely on his defender of the representative. But what gives him such confidence? If I need to decide on the builder, designer, tailor, then I will prefer to see their completed work portfolio.

This is not difficult, because such a product is material. About the same I choose the manufacturer of furniture and the brand of the car. If the final result is perfect, then, perhaps, only frank alcoholism or rudeness of the performer can embarrass me. But when it comes to a doctor, an audience or consultant, the only criterion is taken into account - reputation.

All because the line separating the high -quality intangible service and “air” is extremely thin. It is important for me that I am not deceived, especially in those things about which I have a very superficial idea. I do not think that in this I am very different from others. Now, in the era of general digitalization, it is difficult for a public person to hide his true face. His professional achievements and failures, family dramas and household braids -everything becomes transparent.

Agree, a successful lawyer is an undeniably public figure: trials, television broadcasters, teaching department at a university, scientific tribune [1, p. This permanent X -ray of knowledge, skills and qualities is a lactus paper for a specialist. It would seem that day after day, month after month, year after year, a reputation is earned, so necessary for a lawyer and such an important potential principal for the client once shared doubts that he had found very ambiguous information about me on the Internet resource “worse.

Indeed, after reading the page, I was convinced that one character with the nickname Tatyana Kovaleva convicted me as a fraudster and a passerle of the fact that I cynically abducted three million rubles from her relatives, after which I did not slow to escape from the interrogation of the investigator; The other - “Andrei” - was angry that I planted his son; The third - “Sergey V” - was shameless of facts from my personal life and participation in the television show; The fourth - “Elena” - formulated the conspicuous -rological theories, for some reason mentioning my deceased father.

Drinking with such reviews were also radically opposite opinions. However, I could not correlate a single statement with real people and situations, since there were no dates, events, surnames, names of courts, state bodies, etc.It turns out that the discussion of my modest person took place in isolation from any specific criminal cases, economic disputes, and negotiation processes.

Some links, allegedly confirming my atrocities, for some reason concerned completely inappropriate events, for example, the next birthday of V. no matter how much I was strong, I could not remember the principals by the name of Tatyana Kovalev, as well as those whose sons I probably put into prison, from whom I could hear such claims. All these nicknames were without a signature, without feedback, and their profiles in this social network testified that in addition to the recall of Aksyonov’s lawyer, no other comments were listed behind them.

A real yard injection. Blow on reputation without the right to answer. Perhaps I would try to find out this issue with the site administration, however. Yes, the information for feedback is that the organization, the leader, the address, the phone was not there either. The only thing that came to my mind in this situation is to leave my review: “Dear visitors!

I carefully read the reviews. Thank you for good opinions, I was glad to help. Surprised by negative responses and, frankly, I do not really understand what events we are talking about. If my activity brought to someone problems, complicated my life, I propose to contact me directly on the coordinates below. Ready for conversation, I can even help you make a complaint about yourself.

About my “dirty linen”: yes, I am not an angel, and in my life there are courts, quarrels and squabbles. Do you have them? Sincerely, lawyer Alexei Aksyonov. " I note the main thing, the described facts were fully pulled on the compositions of serious crimes, for which I would have long had to be stolen at places not so remote, deprived of status and fill up with claims. However, neither criminal cases, nor materials of inspections, nor disciplinary proceedings were aroused for my soul.

Some kind of nonsense, but it is always better to make excuses for what you did not do. My colleagues, learning about this situation, only waved their hand, complaining about their bitter experience. Some showed similar reviews to themselves, others referred to sources, where, for example, the most famous lawyer was accused of dishonor and pediculosis [6], and others began to tell what gossip surrounds them for many years.

I was tormented by the question, who needed to crack my name? The ancients prompted the answer: is Fecit Cui Prodest! As the classic said: Muscovites ruined the apartment question. However, why in anonymous reviews everything is so terrible? So much so that any professional will doubt their truthfulness. You are familiar with the common expression attributed to the famous “philanthropist” Adolf Hitler: “The worse the lie, the more willing to believe in it”?

And how does the reader feel about the Russian proverb “there is no smoke without fire”? People like bright, juicy images. If a villain, then terrible, if a hero, then without fear and reproach. And if people say, then this is clearly not without reason. Ethnoculture, however. Like any person, the lawyer is not cherub. For example, my biography is marked by different actions, including those for which I experience remorse.

Returning in memory to some events, I want to change the course of time and fix everything. This is a person’s life, consisting of errors, moments of insight and repentance. Anyone who does not try to study on other people's mistakes studies his own. This also applies to professional formation. Over the years, the stuffed “cones” develop into experience, honing skills, and exacerbate intuition.

Who is not mistaken? But this does not mean that a lawyer who changed his wife or quarreled with a neighbor is an unclean scoundrel on his hand. How important is the Client "Dirty Lingerie" of a lawyer? A large project involves a thorough selection of its participants. And the lawyer, as the main figure,, according to his professional and personal qualities, must fully correspond to the ideas of the principal.

I’m not sure that instead of studying the statistics and specialization of a lawyer, a serious customer will plunge into reading anonymous opuses, but he has the right to know who will work with. If you do not trust such reviews, what to rely on in your choice? Obviously, to date, in Russia there is no single authoritative source capable of highlighting the person of a lawyer with the light of truth.

Most of my colleagues do not even think about a personal website as a tool that helps to reveal their personality for the client. Own Internet resource is not only and not so much advertising. The movement of society towards civilization determines the “exit from the shadow” of both lawyers and those who express their opinion about their work, human qualities and other details that can affect the client choice.

In our opinion, such a task may well solve the opening of a special section of reviews on the official Internet portal of the Federal Chamber of Lawyers of the Russian Federation.This option will solve a number of problems: 1 deanonymization of “reviewers”; 2 providing feedback with a lawyer and a lawyer community; 3 objectification of the content of reviews; 4 Organization of rating indicators of the work of lawyers, based on a comprehensive assessment of the results of their activities [7, p.

It seems that the website of the Federal Chamber of Lawyers will be the only respected source of information about lawyers. On the one hand, this will increase the authority of the advocacy in general, on the other hand, it will promptly respond to violations committed by individual representatives of the community, as well as protect the lawyers themselves from unreasonable attacks of slander [2, p.

The basis of normative novelization should be additions to Art.