Andrea Lyon New DP Atty

[MissJames]

Bold mine.

MissJames, I don't know if this is on this thread or not, but there was that case that AL wrote the papers on, for another attorney, about the man who spent years in prison for a crime that that attorney and another attorney knew was committed by another perp. These papers were put away, only to be brought out if the real perp died, IIRC. This doesn't make me think too highly of Ms. AL! She wouldn't say a word, (protecting herself and the other attorneys), and just let that man stay in prison, wrongly accused, and yet she will battle and cry big crocodile tears in the courtroom, for those clients (who are more than likely guilty) that she is trying to save from the death penalty. Kinda like a double standard to me!

I remember that case and you are so right. She pretty much stomped all over the rights of the innocent man.
I can't say I understand those who so passionately want to defend those they know are guilty. On a personal level I find them repulsive,but it is their job and as long as they are within legal bounderies I can't fault them [ but I want to ]. It's the "crossing the line" I'm curious about.Is this status quo for AL or is she stuck in quagmire with JB?

 

[lin]

The prosecution's actions need to be beyond reproach. Either this is game playing or SA Ashton is inexperienced/disorganized. Neither possiblity is good. What an embarassment.

Or there is a 3rd possibility and one I find more credible: Things are exactly as stated by the prosecution. Period.

I have no reason to doubt the state's veracity but plenty of reason to doubt the honesty, integrity and organizational skills of the defense.

ETA: And to be blunt, plenty of reason to question the intelligence of the defense as well, imo.

 

[lin]

I want to preface my comments to show I am not looking to bash AL. I am very curious about her reputation and if she has ever been linked to any legal improprieties.All I have seen about her has been positive .
She has now linked herself with JB,who has several complaints with the FL Bar currently in play.
If Tony Padilla can prove JB gave false information to the court, that is a huge deal.I believe AL also signed the motion to the court. Why would she risk her reputation [or her liscense to practice] by working with JB?

IMO, AL has at least plausible deniability, if she was aware at all of possible fraud. I think it's more likely that she is as surprised as everyone else about the allegation. She signed the motion, but she didn't sign the document that is in question. Like everyone else, including the state until being alerted otherwise, she relied on a document she didn't prepare and had no way to know was possibly fraudulent.

 

[JBean]

Bold mine.

MissJames, I don't know if this is on this thread or not, but there was that case that AL wrote the papers on, for another attorney, about the man who spent years in prison for a crime that that attorney and another attorney knew was committed by another perp. These papers were put away, only to be brought out if the real perp died, IIRC. This doesn't make me think too highly of Ms. AL! She wouldn't say a word, (protecting herself and the other attorneys), and just let that man stay in prison, wrongly accused, and yet she will battle and cry big crocodile tears in the courtroom, for those clients (who are more than likely guilty) that she is trying to save from the death penalty. Kinda like a double standard to me!

I remember that case and you are so right. She pretty much stomped all over the rights of the innocent man.
I can't say I understand those who so passionately want to defend those they know are guilty. On a personal level I find them repulsive,but it is their job and as long as they are within legal bounderies I can't fault them [ but I want to ]. It's the "crossing the line" I'm curious about.Is this status quo for AL or is she stuck in quagmire with JB?

Just a word of caution. the Alton Logan case has been hashed and rehashed. PLEASE do not re visit it at this thread. It was a nightmare to moderate and you can always search the old threads on it to read.
These posts are totally fine, just don't want to drift into in depth discussion about this topic. thanks.

 

[Balthazar]

So you believe the prosecutions' contention (made in a courtroom) that the defense can request and receive documents directly from the FBI EVEN THOUGH the FBI's representative actually wrote a letter stating that was not so? Or are you implying that the letter the defense received from the FBI is a forgery?

Or there is a 3rd possibility and one I find more credible: Things are exactly as stated by the prosecution. Period.

I have no reason to doubt the state's veracity but plenty of reason to doubt the honesty, integrity and organizational skills of the defense.

ETA: And to be blunt, plenty of reason to question the intelligence of the defense as well, imo.

 

[Spangle]

So you believe the prosecutions' contention (made in a courtroom) that the defense can request and receive documents directly from the FBI EVEN THOUGH the FBI's representative actually wrote a letter stating that was not so? Or are you implying that the letter the defense received from the FBI is a forgery?

You didn't ask me, but it's an open forum/discussion.

At that point, JB all ready showed his MO wasn't to do any work on the case and get everyone else to do it for him. That only works for so long. Then the well runs dry. Whose fault is that?

So YES, it is my contention that JB would have to show he requested (correctly) the info from the FBI and received such a letter in reply, before moving to the next step.

Inhale, then repeat. Until he finally gets the idea of how to properly obtain official reports, etc.

Also part of his MO is to whine about something, that is/was his own fault. At some point, no one is going to take your whines serious.. not without proof. So SAYING he had a letter from the FBI means nothing. Whining that even whit the letter from the FBI he is getting no help, means nothing. If he didn't follow through and submit the proper paper work.. but tried to just rush into court without submiting paperwork and whining to the Judge for the JUDGE to do something about it, when it was his fault for not following procedures, etc...

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

The prosecution's actions need to be beyond reproach. Either this is game playing or SA Ashton is inexperienced/disorganized. Neither possiblity is good. What an embarassment.

Hmmmm....how true....he can only aspire to be as stellar an attorney as JB.

 

[spqr]

I personally don't understand AL's "winning record". After watching her at the motion hearing the other day, her court room presentation left much to be desired. I don't think she spoke well nor carried herself well.

Also, she signed the motion as well. As such, she should have read it in its entirety BEFORE signing it. So there for she knew what it contained. If it contained a forged document then she is just as culpable as JB. Rule #1, never sign anything without reading it first.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

You didn't ask me, but it's an open forum/discussion.

At that point, JB all ready showed his MO wasn't to do any work on the case and get everyone else to do it for him. That only works for so long. Then the well runs dry. Whose fault is that?

So YES, it is my contention that JB would have to show he requested (correctly) the info from the FBI and received such a letter in reply, before moving to the next step.

Inhale, then repeat. Until he finally gets the idea of how to properly obtain official reports, etc.

Also part of his MO is to whine about something, that is/was his own fault. At some point, no one is going to take your whines serious.. not without proof. So SAYING he had a letter from the FBI means nothing. Whining that even whit the letter from the FBI he is getting no help, means nothing. If he didn't follow through and submit the proper paper work.. but tried to just rush into court without submiting paperwork and whining to the Judge for the JUDGE to do something about it, when it was his fault for not following procedures, etc...

From my experience, when going through the discovery phase, an attorney will subpoena records from a 3rd party and then file a "notice of filing" with the court (such as the SA getting records from AT&T). It is then up to the other side (JB) to request a copy of the documents produced from that subpoena (either from the party requesting the docs, or from the 3rd party itself). There is sometimes a "copying" charge, which is duplicated to the other side when they get their copy. BUT it is the other side's (JB) duty to follow up on the 3rd party subpoenas, not the requesting party (SA) to deliver gift wrapped to the other side (JB).

Now as far as requesting materials from the otherside thru the normal process of discovery, (request for production) the attorney (JB) outlines in very minute detail, exactly the scope of what the docs they are requesting should cover. That's where you have to use your brain....hence JB wanting to the SA to just ..."gimme what 'cha got!" the FBI records would be "expert" documents, and fully discoverable...if JB knew how to ask.

 

[whiteangora]

The prosecution's actions need to be beyond reproach. Either this is game playing or SA Ashton is inexperienced/disorganized. Neither possiblity is good. What an embarassment.

Embarrassment? That seems like the perfect one word description of Baez to me. Have you ever read the 2 part article on him - "Who is Jose Baez" from the Orlando Sentinel? It highlights his failed attempt at passing the bar exam, his failure to pay his child support payments, his very long list of judgements against him from the Osceola County Court website, his false advertising on his website and on and on.
The Orlando Sentinel has removed the May3,'09 article from it's archives but it can still be found in several places online simply by looking for it.

 

[believe09]

Back onto the topic of AL, lol...

I think her sole duty in this case is to try and save Casey's life-what I see her doing is formulaic...delay, delay, delay, bluster, threaten with charges of misconduct, delay, delay, delay, hammer home reasonable doubt (RM did it) and then the hail mary pass...

will she regret her association with JB? Well, if it turns out that any part of the Tony Padilla documents are forged, she will. I have seen this happen on a smaller scale myself and it aint pretty.

 

[affinity]

I personally don't understand AL's "winning record". After watching her at the motion hearing the other day, her court room presentation left much to be desired. I don't think she spoke well nor carried herself well.

Also, she signed the motion as well. As such, she should have read it in its entirety BEFORE signing it. So there for she knew what it contained. If it contained a forged document then she is just as culpable as JB. Rule #1, never sign anything without reading it first.

I think it is interesting how many people think she did poorly. I am no fan of KC or her defense team...but honestly I thought AL spoke very well and made good points (I didn't WANT to hear reason from KC's team--but AL was articulate and reasonable). She is a far far superior speaker than Baez and I would even go so far and say she seemed gracious to me when she asked the court clerk if she was speaking too fast (some of you thought she was condescending..I thought the opposite). This is what is so fascinating to me, how people view the same person, hear the same words, take in the entire same scene, but come away with such different views. This is why courtrooms are endlessly fascinating..because a jury will be like us! Some would like AL (despite or maybe because of her disheveled look) and some would not like her because she is aligned with who they think is a child killer. I will be interested to see how much more AL takes over--because clearly, she is smart. I think it may actually be smart to stay "disheveled" ..she is a professor..IMHO the jury would pay more attention to her reasoning and advocacy than her shoes. The "professor look" will probably actually earn her points with people who see her as caring more about law than vanity.

 

[affinity]

I'd like to add that KC definitely looked like CHITE at the motion hearings and I don't think that this was something that happened by chance. Better for her to look bad - at the very least she garners some sympathy rather than reproach for arrogance, self-confidence or beauty. Not a co-incidence at all in MO. Frumpy is most certaintly more beneficial than "sexy" or "seductive" in an appeal for mercy.

MOO

absolutely. Orchestrated.

 

[MissJames]

I think it is interesting how many people think she did poorly. I am no fan of KC or her defense team...but honestly I thought AL spoke very well and made good points (I didn't WANT to hear reason from KC's team--but AL was articulate and reasonable). She is a far far superior speaker than Baez and I would even go so far and say she seemed gracious to me when she asked the court clerk if she was speaking too fast (some of you thought she was condescending..I thought the opposite). This is what is so fascinating to me, how people view the same person, hear the same words, take in the entire same scene, but come away with such different views. This is why courtrooms are endlessly fascinating..because a jury will be like us! Some would like AL (despite or maybe because of her disheveled look) and some would not like her because she is aligned with who they think is a child killer. I will be interested to see how much more AL takes over--because clearly, she is smart. I think it may actually be smart to stay "disheveled" ..she is a professor..IMHO the jury would pay more attention to her reasoning and advocacy than her shoes. The "professor look" will probably actually earn her points with people who see her as caring more about law than vanity.

She told the judge that it was the SA's doing that the defense did not have time to deal with the check fraud case because they [SA] put the DP back on the table. Puhleeze.She was well spoken,but to me much of it was still BS and whining.
She basically threatened the SA when she said there would be much more litigation over the DP .It was the way she said it .
My issue isn't that she's a defense attorney or DP attorney, I am suspect as to why she took the case in the first place.The announcement was made that she had joined the team and in the same breath ,that she has a book coming out in January.She knew when she took the case that she had little time available because she also teaches. And the next delay will be because she is promoting that book.
If JB really did pull a fast one on the court over the privacy agreement I can't imagine AL would stay connected to the case.

 

[okiedokietoo]

This is a Body Language observation
re: the Motion Hearing, AL
you know how it is when you get embarrassed and you sort of put your hand up to the side of your face obstructing the view to your eyes - somewhere in the motion hearing I saw AL do this, somewhere towards the end of the hearing, I think the SA was addressing the court -

found it-
http://www.wftv.com/video/20493801/index.html
at 16:56 - the 4th video
LDB is talking about no proof of an "oral agreement" - all parties not questioned etc
AL has her hand up covering her eyes from view and a pen in other hand as if writing but isn't writing, she's listening - only time in whole hearing that she isn't taking notes or trading notes with KC or JB or whispering to someone - she is very very focused on what LDB is saying.

 

[Balthazar]

Hmmmm....how true....he can only aspire to be as stellar an attorney as JB.

As info, the lead prosecutor in the Caylee Anthony case is Linda Drane Burdick - a woman.

 

[JBean]

you guys are carrying broken quotes and causing misquotes. If I can't fix the broken quotes I am going to delete tha bad posts. Just telling you so if a post of yours is deleted that is most likely why.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

What a horrible waste of resources by a group like this. There are so many others who would be lucky to get barely enough time from an overworked public defender, who would love to have an expert or some paralegal help or the research needed to file needed motions and briefs, etc. Why devote this to a person with multiple private lawyers and a team of experts who are being paid for their services?

I agree. There have GOT to be some changes made regarding these lawyers getting rich through disgusting/free self promotion by attaching themselves to high profile cases. It's simply wrong that these things go on. As seriously as the legal profession seems to take itself, you'd think they might have addressed this by now.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

As info, the lead prosecutor in the Caylee Anthony case is Linda Drane Burdick - a woman.

OK...here we go....LOL

If YOU go back to YOUR original post :

Originally Posted by Princess Rose

The prosecution's actions need to be beyond reproach. Either this is game playing or SA Ashton is inexperienced/disorganized. Neither possiblity is good. What an embarassment


IF, I'm not mistaken...YOU mentioned "SA Ashton"....FYI, he's a "him".....therefore, my "HE"
in my statement was only referencing YOUR reference to "him"......LOL LOL......Can you remind me "Who's on first" again?????

I'm also aware that LDB is a "she", Princess Rose :blowkiss:

 

[lin]

So you believe the prosecutions' contention (made in a courtroom) that the defense can request and receive documents directly from the FBI EVEN THOUGH the FBI's representative actually wrote a letter stating that was not so? Or are you implying that the letter the defense received from the FBI is a forgery?

It really doesn't matter a whole lot what I believe; what's important are the facts.

FACT 1 - The prosecution represents they have turned over or are in the process of turning over everything they have to the defense. I have nothing to dispute that other than the whining of credibility challenged defense.

FACT 2 - I have no reason to disbelieve Mr. Ashton represented what he believed to be fact and the court agreed with Mr. Ashton, let us not forget.

FACT 3 - The court ruled, iirc, that the defense must ATTEMPT to get information on their own and not expect the prosecution to do all of their legwork for them. This is very reasonable, imo and I don't recall seeing an appeal of this order.

FACT 4 - In fact, iirc, Mr. Ashton notified the FBI to treat any defense requests as if they came from the prosecution when notified of the FBI's reluctance at some time AFTER the hearing you reference.

Summary: I am not willing to jump on a bash the prosecution bandwagon or try to twist the facts to suit a pro-defense without a lot more evidence than the defense has presented. Not all prosecutors are Mike Nifong and if memory serves, it was other prosecutors that brought Nifong down. To assume otherwise, we may as well consider all early twenty something mothers of 2 year olds to be prospective murderers; I mean if we're painting entire groups with a brush designed by one or two people.