2008.11.06 Nancy Grace

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe Mr. Nejame, find upstanding citizen that he is, would like to take a polygraph. He would claim the results are not scientific so he could do it just for fun. CA should not take one. The machine would overheat and emit too much smoke and sparks. It can only handle so many lies.
 
I saw the photo. However, it would make perfect sense for them to have purchased that same dress in a larger size for her to continue to play in. We all know they make that same exact dress in the larger sizes and can be ordered online or purchased at many outlets.

Not saying it is what they did since the dress probably has nothing to do with this case in any way, but simply that MN was so far off base it was a ridiculous statement for him to make in the first place. He was only going after NG and it backfired on him miserably. LOL
 
Theonly1 said:
How did this thread get to be 43 pages long? :)

Last night was crazy. I loved the tri-screen with LP chuckling to himself while NG and Nejame duked it out. I like that LP laughed off the "P.T. Barnum" insult. LP really is a clever one (alluding that Nejame is "Tom Thumb") and thinks fast on his feet.

Last night notwithstanding, I also think that Nejame (generally) is doing a fair job with what and who he has as clients. [Just my opinion] I don't get the same gagging reflex with him as I do with Baez is on screen. :)
Click to expand...


LJ reminded me of a kid who was enjoying seeing someone else get into trouble for a change. lol

ITA about Baez.... can't stand his smirk OR the stupid things that come out of his mouth every time he speaks.

IMO, NG is becoming more & more unwatchable every week. I don't know when being rude became so acceptable to the American public but I don't condone it from political pundits & I don't condone it from legal pundits either. I still haven't forgotten how nasty Nancy was with TIM MILLER. The woman has no self-control when ANYONE deviates from the pre-conceived script she has in mind.
 
I though Nejame was correct in what he said about Nancy's ratings and stuff. I laughed out loud when he said "Don't tell me no!" LOL. I enjoyed that.
 
BeanE said:
Not my concern at the moment. I just want to know why, per Nejame, the reason George is not a candidate for a polygraph is because Cindy takes medication. Doesn't make any sense to me.
Click to expand...

So NO ONE who takes meds has taken a polygraph?

And who is spinning what, MN???
 
TxLady2 said:
I agree.. she hasn't done such a good job. She is too biased towards the guilty side... we should be able to hear the other side once in a while, but unfortunately, she doesn't want to listen to good old common sense.
I will be glad when Greta gets back to covering this case, but I'm not sure she will now. I'm glad that Nancy kept up the coverage, and I appreciate her dedication to it... but I do wish she would take a crash course in professional journalism.
Click to expand...

I think NG is just really tired of hearing the bull$h...
 
Im On It said:
rut roh, I'm guessing her new big-house beau is spanish and likes tarts de la pop!
Click to expand...
I was thinking about the book myself. My first thought was I bet Jose speaks fluent Spanish and she is the little chameleon. ;) (Or she wants to know what others are screaming at her on the inside in spanish perhaps.)
 
SeriouslySearching said:
I saw the photo. However, it would make perfect sense for them to have purchased that same dress in a larger size for her to continue to play in. We all know they make that same exact dress in the larger sizes and can be ordered online or purchased at many outlets.

Not saying it is what they did since the dress probably has nothing to do with this case in any way, but simply that MN was so far off base it was a ridiculous statement for him to make in the first place. He was only going after NG and it backfired on him miserably. LOL
Click to expand...
I'm guessing, based on MN's fiery response regarding the dress, that the results have come back and that it has proven to be unrelated???
 
Im On It said:
I think NG is just really tired of hearing the bull$h...
Click to expand...
LOL Yes! Also..she crams a LOT into that little time frame when you think about it. With all the commercial time, she is limited. She usually has no less than 10 people inserted into each show counting the panel, reporters, and callers.
 
eg@gm said:
I though Nejame was correct in what he said about Nancy's ratings and stuff. I laughed out loud when he said "Don't tell me no!" LOL. I enjoyed that.
Click to expand...

I'm with ya on that! lol

Let's also not forget her interview of Elizabeth Smart & how she tried & tried to force Elizabeth to talk about what she went through when she was held captive.

Sure, viewers might be interested in hearing sordid details BUT the last person a "victim's advocate" should make uncomfortable is the innocent victim of a horrendous crime.
 
100%Agave said:
Why couldn't Caylee have had more than 1 MM dress? One when she was 18 months old and one when she was almost 3. Not saying it happened that way but if it was cute and she out grew it and she wanted another one, why not? It could have happened and it could have been hers so I don't think it was over the top to present that it could be hers.

I don't see why NeJame feels that it was sensationalism. It was reported and it could have been a possibility.

If NeJame was asked for his comment, he could have said "Look Cindy has the original dress and the one found is definitely not it." He could have put it all to rest but he chose not to so that Cindy could make her cameo on national tv and hold up the smaller dress for all to see.

I think he doth protest too much.
Click to expand...

But, he did what he's paid to do - he very successfully diverted attention from the defence's DP plea leak and the document dump.
 
Pink Panther said:
I'm guessing, based on MN's fiery response regarding the dress, that the results have come back and that it has proven to be unrelated???
Click to expand...
Yes...so why did it even matter?! LOL Like NG said, he only had to tell her producer when she/he called. Duh! NG doesn't mind the truth, but when they don't come out with it...not her fault for going after it.
 
Nosey Parker said:
But, he did what he's paid to do - he very successfully diverted attention from the defence's DP plea leak and the document dump.
Click to expand...
Exactly. He did that well didn't he? He started fighting and the questions stopped. Mission accomplished. Still, I don't think he intended for it to turn out quite the way it did because he didn't seem all that pleased at the end of it.
 
Chilly Willy said:
The discussion was about NG calling Nejame rather than Baez.
There was no duty on anyone to turn over a dress of Caylee's in order to prove that non-evidence was indeed, non-evidence. If someone in Florida finds a child's black sock is Cindy supposed to gather up all Caylee's black socks and rush them in to the sheriff's department?
Click to expand...
(Bolded is mine.)

Re: the bolded portions, either you missed some of the thread discussion (which happens to me sometimes ;) ) OR you followed it all quite closely (as I suspect) and you're posturing the thread discussion from that angle, since it's the only way to justify the posts being made by some posters here who think Nejame did "what he was supposed to do" in terms of whether or not to call NG back to discuss the dress that his client thereafter went on national TV and displayed.

I. THE POSTS ABOUT NEJAME'S DUTY

Since this thread is now 44+ pages long, for anyone who need a recap of the above thread discussion of Nejame and his duty to his client re: the dress, here it is:

Post #135, from poster Boston, the FIRST post even remotely mentioning Nejame and the "dress": "[t]his guy is calling Nancy out on the Mickey Mouse dress,"
Click here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=6

Post # 146, next post mentioning Nejame and dress, from Leila, who said that "...NG says that when Cindy went on air with the dress. NG says she called him for comment and he didn't comment..."
Click here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=6

Post # 321, by poster 100%Agave, which first placed the issue of Nejame's duties to his client squarely on this thread:
"...If NeJame was asked for his comment, he could have said 'Look Cindy has the original dress and the one found is definitely not it.' He could have put it all to rest but he chose not to so that Cindy could make her cameo on national tv and hold up the smaller dress for all to see...."
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=13

Post # 498, by poster BlueEyedSpy: :laugh: "I had to laugh tonight when she asked Nejame why he didn't return a phone call discrediting the dress as being Caylee's, and Nejame answered her with the truth - 'it's the State's place to make that call, not me!' To be an ex-Prosecutor, (although reprimanded as one several times by the Supreme Court), Nancy can't seem to grasp the very simple fact that Nejame has nothing to do with anything pertaining to Caylee, or Casey..."
Click here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=20

Post #553, by Truthwillsetufree, in direct response to BlueEyedSpy's post # 498, above, which Truth quoted, that "...Oh really? Then why did MN's client show up the next morning on the Today show with a dress?"
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=23

Post #554, by IrishBosoxfan, also in direct response to BlueEyedSpy's post # 498, above, which Irish also quoted, that "See this I don't understand because the very next day CA was whipping that dress in everyones face so if NG called and asked for a comment MN was well within his rights to say something along the lines of "Well CA produced the baby dress so it can't possibly be Caylees"
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=23

Post #574, by BlueEyedSpy, in direst response to Irishbosoxfan, who was quoted, that : "You don't understand the difference between Cindy proving that she had Caylee's dress, vs. Nejame?!? Nejame doesn't speak for Caylee nor Casey - they are not his legal clients. Cindy is not legally bound from proving that she was still in possession of Caylee's dress."
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=23

Post # 579, by Irishbosoxfan, in direct response to BlueEyedSpy post # 574, above, that : "Ok so what don't you understand because you yourself just spelled it out. If Cindy had the dress and was willing to go on national television with it then why couldn't MN answer a question in regards to it???? I mean he does represent CA and CA did produce the dress so why no statement on his clients behalf??"
Click here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=24

Post #598, by me, Chezhire, in direct response to BlueEyedSpy post #574, asking: "Can you explain the difference a bit further, b/c I don't see the difference between either (1) Cindy (Nejame's client) or (2) Nejame (Cindy's attorney) explaining away the infamous dress (which I don't personally this all that important anyway, but nonetheless...)... Can you explain who, then, is "legally bound from proving" anything, cause I sure don't recall any gag orders or anything similar that would preclude anyone from proving anything in this case... "
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=24

Post #606, by Truthwillsetufree, that: "But Ca IS MN client therefore a comment from MN would not have been out of the ordinary since his client did in fact show up on a major television network with possible evidence."
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=25

Post #634, by BlueEyedSpy, in direct response to Irishbosoxfan, that: "Because the dress in question pertains to a criminal case that he is not involved in. He is involved in the representation of George & Cindy - not the criminal case itself which includes any "questionable evidence". It's quite simple."
Click Here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74580&page=26

ETC.ETC.ETC.

II. NEJAME'S DUTY TO HIS CLIENT, CINDY
(WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT THIS "DRESS" WINDS UP BEING RELEVANT TO THIS CASE)

The issue is not whether or not Cindy is a party in the criminal matter, which she obviously is not, such that she has a duty to involve herself in evidentiary issues pertaining thereto and/or to, as you state it above, "turn over" a dress.

In fact, many posts on this thread, starting with 100%AGAVE, post #321, supports/stands for the exact OPPOSITE PROPOSITION: that Nejame should have prevented Cindy from intentionally inserting herself into a criminal case.

Nejame should have PREVENTED Cindy's course of action (e.g. going on national TV and inserting herself into the evidentiary issues for the directly stated purpose of trying to undermine some evidence that may or may not even be relevant to the case -which she most certainly should not have been doing.

His inaction left the door WIDE open for his client to insert herself into evidentiary issues. Amazingly, certain posters posting on ths thread last night tried to spin the issue as "Nejame isn't the one with a duty to comment upon evidence, etc." The duty went to keeping his client OUT of evidentiary issues, so whether that meant MJ should have gone to LE, returned NG's call, etc., that would have been his call to make in terms of the best way to handle it, but he most certainly should have handled it.

Seriously, Nejame should know his clients better than we do so he should have known after informing her (which he obviously did, else she wouldn't have wound up on TV thereafter) she would take matters into her own hands if he didn't do something. Tsk, Tsk, Nejame.
 
Tricia said:
Ok Thank you for the explanation. I get it now. Sorry I jumped to the conclusion but I haven't read this whole thread. It's so short after all I should have read it by now.... :crazy:

Please be nice, Please don't nip at each other's posts.

Love,
Tricia
Click to expand...

No problem Tricia-
It is my pleasure to be here in your forum, and I am happy to see you are right on top of it all...When the worm is on the hook and thrown into the water, it IS so hard not to nip at it, isn't it? :waitasec: I am learning that as a fish, I am going to have to learn to change my diet and eliminate worms altogether...:) But for you dear lady, I will try my best.:blowkiss:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 1,893 (members: 154, guests: 1,739)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
1,739
Total visitors
1,893
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,228
Messages
18,200,807
Members
233,785
Latest member
kaylacalifa
Back
Top