What's the issue? You're visiting your CLIENT. Whether you meet face-to-face or talk on the phone, what's the difference? If you read 18 USCA § 1071 annoted, you'll see that in the cases where someone was convicted, the prosecution had proven an element of the crime through some very compelling circumstantial evidence.

Assuming an attorney is going to advise and counsel his client ... and the attorney stays within those parameters, then where's the "aiding and abetting" issue? Whether location of a fugitive client is privileged or not depends on the jurisdiction.

I think the only issue when visiting a fugitive is whether you conceal his location or help him evade arrest. The best expample is were the attorney cashes checks for the fugitive.

In your example of cashing checks, I believe that the attorney is committing the additional crime of money laundering under the RICO statute. Helping a fugitive evade is one thing, but cashing checks would be something completely different.