I think they are correct that it's better for the client to open the crowdfunding, or a family member or trusted person to avoid all the ethics issues.
If RA raises funds is he still "indigent"?
Are "family members" or "trusted persons" using regulated trust/escrow accounts to hold and account for use of funds?
It seems to me to be prudent that those raised monies go nowhere near RA, his family, his "friends".
It's both ethical and normal here for counsel to collect a client retainer, place the retainer in trust accounts, use trust/escrow accounts for related cost disbursements, report monthly on retainer balance. Attny escrow accounts are highly regulated. There are no ethics issues.
The D can advance their own funds (i.e. advanced retainers) to experts. The D is free to choose to cover those costs, to trust that the Court will approve expert expenses funded by the State and then D reimburses themselves upon receiving State funds. Or if State falls through, the D can cover the experts pro-bono. Or the D can find alternate funding sources, such as fundraising.
Hennessy here has set up a crowdfunding vehicle for expert costs for RA's defense with a precise description of how funds will be spent. Per Hennessy, those funds will be held in escrow until disbursed as either reimbursement for Defense-paid RA expert costs, or for direct payment for RA expert billings. Hennessy is (obviously) set up to manage trusts/escrows.
Here, Hennessy is essentially holding funds in escrow for the D to use only for RA's expert costs.
If the D has advanced RA's expert retainers or costs (paid them) and does not receive Public Defender's reimbursement, it's not RA but rather, it's the D's that will be reimbursed.
Finally, I'll add that defense expense crowdfunding in the US is neither new nor uncommon.
In fact, I can think of at least one high profile American defendant (out on bail) whose handlers for years have publicly crowdfunded to cover 100% of the defendant's criminal expenses, using fundraising websites, social media and email messaging - that do not disclose that those crowdfunding contributions will be used for criminal defense expenses, let alone explain how those funds are held and accounted for.
JMHO
