calgary123
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2008
- Messages
- 228
- Reaction score
- 0
To oenophile, Its a little surprising given the tone of most of your posts that you are infuriated with the Butterfly Fund. Based on reading what you've written above, it seems your bigger issue is, you think that Brad did not do it, and therefore, having a group of people band together in sympathy for the victim with the implication that Brad killed Nancy is maddening. I don't take your comments to mean that the raising of money for a good cause was bad in and of itself, its just you disagree with the impetus. You also comment that it affected the jury.
Can't we state with certainty this "Fund" didn't impact the jury based on the process of jury selection? Had there been enough tainting of the jury pool via the charity, or more likely, the local news reports, I would expect the defence would have moved for a change of venue. I'm no Kurtz fan-- I don't like some of the many decisions he seems to have made defending, but he does seem to be diligent, and he had a second attorney with him who, in my view, had more know-how. If Kurtz participated in the decision and agreed to have Brad testify in the child custody matter, that was a massive mistake.
When your client faces the potential of life in prison with a jury, I would have to think that attorneys of this caliber deal with the issue of whether to ask for a change of venue. We can assume Kurtz did and decided to not proceed with such a request. We can also presume the defence team and Brad all participated in that decision.
As to the fund itself, there is plenty of information that has been put out into the public, let alone evidence put forward in court, that Brad and Nancy were in a long term, non-violent struggle where, depending on the position you take in that, Brad qualifies as an abuser. I'm not one to take sides in those kinds of issues and I do think Nancy shared a lot of blame in their domestic struggles, but there is a peaceful way to end a bad marriage, and murder should never be an option.
Can't we state with certainty this "Fund" didn't impact the jury based on the process of jury selection? Had there been enough tainting of the jury pool via the charity, or more likely, the local news reports, I would expect the defence would have moved for a change of venue. I'm no Kurtz fan-- I don't like some of the many decisions he seems to have made defending, but he does seem to be diligent, and he had a second attorney with him who, in my view, had more know-how. If Kurtz participated in the decision and agreed to have Brad testify in the child custody matter, that was a massive mistake.
When your client faces the potential of life in prison with a jury, I would have to think that attorneys of this caliber deal with the issue of whether to ask for a change of venue. We can assume Kurtz did and decided to not proceed with such a request. We can also presume the defence team and Brad all participated in that decision.
As to the fund itself, there is plenty of information that has been put out into the public, let alone evidence put forward in court, that Brad and Nancy were in a long term, non-violent struggle where, depending on the position you take in that, Brad qualifies as an abuser. I'm not one to take sides in those kinds of issues and I do think Nancy shared a lot of blame in their domestic struggles, but there is a peaceful way to end a bad marriage, and murder should never be an option.