Andrea Lyons ~ Tapes and Lectures And RECENT MEDIA

[countzero]

Well shoot ... I might be tempted to download her "free" book on my iPad and read it while I'm on the treadmill. However one of two things bad would happen. I would increase my speed to the point of falling off or I would pitch my iPad across the room.

I love my iPad. So no angel of death row for me.

 

[Just Jayla]

Well shoot ... I might be tempted to download her "free" book on my iPad and read it while I'm on the treadmill. However one of two things bad would happen. I would increase my speed to the point of falling off or I would pitch my iPad across the room.

I love my iPad. So no angel of death row for me.

Have to repeat it again, cause I am fascinated that Ms. Lyon does not boast this in her book:

http://justicereform.net/essay_07-04.html

yeah, yeah, I linked this earlier in this thread, but it bears mentioning again because I am CERTAIN Ms. Lyon will fail to share this in her book....This article is clearly written by someone of a certain political persuation, and gives little weight to the most important sentence-That statutes of limitations were in place and in order to resolve the issue, the law had to be changed and grandfathered-Um, by legislators, not by a court. I suppose if our society operated on emotion, it would only be fair for a judge to reinvent the wheel in this case, too-But thank the Almighty, we are not a society guided by emotion (we would be a socialist, chaotic, rotted mess), rather by logic and rule of law. I am sure Ms. Lyon espouses the emotional State.

BTW, I still find it fascinating that she took up with a known terrorist in this little crusade-read the caption under the first picture, the terrorist was not there, perhaps she was out plotting to bomb the Pentagon or the Capital again....Ms. Lyon comes off as a hyprocrite, to stand shoulder to shoulder with a woman who, while defending the men mentioned in this article, had this to say about the Tate-LaBianca murders, lauding the Manson family:

"First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!"

I will not read the book because I do not read books written by, again, hypocritical people of that persuation-They never make any logical sense. Not to mention AL's comment about female prosecutors-And without violating TOS, Ms. Lyon does not have a lotta room to talk about androgyny.

I harp on this because if Mr. Ashton were to have so much as burped and said "excuse me" in the same room with Timothy McVeigh, we would not hear the end of it. Ms. Lyon walked the streets of Chicago with Dohrn in a 60's style "fight the power" crusade, and we hear/read not a peep.

 

[Purple Iris]

Just Jayla ~

Whoa ~ I had no idea of these other things that you pointed out!
I'm going to go read that link now; Thank You.

I really can't say what I think of this person either, without violating the TOS, so, will leave it at that.

I only put that link in for her book cause it was free, and, also, that sight has been giving away quite a few free downloads on misc books and topics.
I just wanted to share with people and save them some money.

Thanks again for the heads up.

 

[MissJames]

Have to repeat it again, cause I am fascinated that Ms. Lyon does not boast this in her book:

http://justicereform.net/essay_07-04.html

yeah, yeah, I linked this earlier in this thread, but it bears mentioning again because I am CERTAIN Ms. Lyon will fail to share this in her book....This article is clearly written by someone of a certain political persuation, and gives little weight to the most important sentence-That statutes of limitations were in place and in order to resolve the issue, the law had to be changed and grandfathered-Um, by legislators, not by a court. I suppose if our society operated on emotion, it would only be fair for a judge to reinvent the wheel in this case, too-But thank the Almighty, we are not a society guided by emotion (we would be a socialist, chaotic, rotted mess), rather by logic and rule of law. I am sure Ms. Lyon espouses the emotional State.

BTW, I still find it fascinating that she took up with a known terrorist in this little crusade-read the caption under the first picture, the terrorist was not there, perhaps she was out plotting to bomb the Pentagon or the Capital again....Ms. Lyon comes off as a hyprocrite, to stand shoulder to shoulder with a woman who, while defending the men mentioned in this article, had this to say about the Tate-LaBianca murders, lauding the Manson family:

"First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!"

I will not read the book because I do not read books written by, again, hypocritical people of that persuation-They never make any logical sense. Not to mention AL's comment about female prosecutors-And without violating TOS, Ms. Lyon does not have a lotta room to talk about androgyny.

I harp on this because if Mr. Ashton were to have so much as burped and said "excuse me" in the same room with Timothy McVeigh, we would not hear the end of it. Ms. Lyon walked the streets of Chicago with Dohrn in a 60's style "fight the power" crusade, and we hear/read not a peep.

First of all,YOU :rocker:
Maybe it all becomes relative.
I've been searching for very comfortable dress shoes .I started out with shoes around $ 75 . I could invest that much for a really good shoe,$100 tops..As I searched and researched shoes that would look awesome,and still be comfortable for a lot of walking,I creeped up to the $180-$250 range. Wow! $250 for shoes I would only wear 10 or 15 times a year? Back to searching and I read an article about a brand that is touted as reeeeally comfortable AND beautiful ,but they run $300 to $400 .I want those shoes! But I just can't justify it .I'll go with the "cheap "ones for $180 :crazy:
It's all relative.
You hang out with baby killers and creeps on death row and lowly terrorists don't seem so bad :sick:

 

[sleutherontheside]

http://www.wbez.org/feed/story/1454/rss.xml

Attorney Andrea Lyon welcomes the end of the death penalty in Illinois
7 minute audio interview scroll to bottom of link for mp3 download


and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-lyon/death-penalty-governor-quinn_b_834077.html

 

[strawberry]

http://www.wbez.org/feed/story/1454/rss.xml

Attorney Andrea Lyon welcomes the end of the death penalty in Illinois
7 minute audio interview scroll to bottom of link for mp3 download


and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-lyon/death-penalty-governor-quinn_b_834077.html

Huh. Well, she should have lots of time on her hands now...maybe she'll come back to FL.

 

[Aedrys]

:seeya: Hey Baez! Andrea is free! You know you want her back!

 

[sleutherontheside]

Bumpity Bump in honor of AL's voir dire trick being THWARTED from use.

I have a mind like a steel trap.

 

[Trapshooter]

Thank you so much SOTS!!!! :blowkiss:

 

[Oakley]

So...I am about a third of the way through listening to the other AL podcast located at the link I provided above. Here is is again...
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss48591.xml

This one discussed the Public Defender Toolbox. In the first 21 minutes there are 2 statements she makes that I find very noteworthy.

1st. I can tell autopsy jokes.
2nd A friend told me I have a unique ability that I can bond with psychopaths.

Additionally she discusses the fact that "Juries are not like us....many of them are Republicans."

When discussing case loads and PD being overwhelmed, she tells an example of walking into court Monday morning and meeting new clients after their arraignment. She said...."When you see that new client walk in with a thick file and a big cross around his neck you know it's going to be a bad day."


She also expresses her opinion that the Freedom of Information Act is the best thing that ever happened. Gave a website to generate a letter to request info. Hmmmmmmmmmmm yet the Sunshine Laws are presenting an issue for her???? Can't have it both ways dear.

I have also noted that AL has no issue with using profanity in her lectures AT ALL. Off to listen to more......this is so very interesting.

Wow. So AL is prejudiced, it seems, against Christian Republicans? And this is professionalism?

ETA: Just realized I missed the 1 & 2 bolded statements that are equally as ludicrous. Is she for real?

 

[BlOnDe_GuRrL]

Here is one she did yesterday with Steve Malzberg..

http://www.wor710.com/pages/419284.php

I am getting ready to listen but apparently it gets heated.

Andrea Lyon discusses her book Angel of Death Row on the Steve Malzberg Show. Andrea became very combative when asked about the Casey Anthony Trial, which she is the defense attorney for, and would not support her statements exclaiming Casey Anthony is innocent. Quote from intro to story.

You can't forward through it and there are other stories prior to it....just a heads up. Steve uses racy language that may offend some.

i'm dying to listen to this but the link isn't working
or i should say, i can't find the pod cast :'(


gahhhh NM.. i found it! http://www.wor710.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=4311671

 

[elementary]

So...I am about a third of the way through listening to the other AL podcast located at the link I provided above. Here is is again...
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss48591.xml

This one discussed the Public Defender Toolbox. In the first 21 minutes there are 2 statements she makes that I find very noteworthy.

1st. I can tell autopsy jokes.
2nd A friend told me I have a unique ability that I can bond with psychopaths.

Additionally she discusses the fact that "Juries are not like us....many of them are Republicans."

When discussing case loads and PD being overwhelmed, she tells an example of walking into court Monday morning and meeting new clients after their arraignment. She said...."When you see that new client walk in with a thick file and a big cross around his neck you know it's going to be a bad day."


She also expresses her opinion that the Freedom of Information Act is the best thing that ever happened. Gave a website to generate a letter to request info. Hmmmmmmmmmmm yet the Sunshine Laws are presenting an issue for her???? Can't have it both ways dear.

I have also noted that AL has no issue with using profanity in her lectures AT ALL. Off to listen to more......this is so very interesting.

RE: bolded.

What arrogance! Like this is something to be proud of?

She may have 'bonded' with a psychopath, but psychopaths are not remotely capable of bonding except to their own fantasies. Psychopaths are attracted to the opportunity (and to the psychopathic style/atmosphere). If AL provides an opportunity they will take it which makes AL not special at all. It rather seems like a mutual admiration society the way she boasts about it. It seems to me that she finds psychopaths especially potent when it comes to winning at their defence. I mean, just imagine it, if she can get a psychopath/sociopath off, the ultimate challenge (reference the perp, for example), then she truly is the queen of winners. She's so far up in the stratosphere in terms of her magical power and skills. Yet, at the same time, she is willing to let an innocent man suffer and be destroyed for years in prison all the while knowing he is innocent and in possession of proof.

Given the above, I find her quite a weird duck, with a perverse agenda that seems to have more to do with her drive to win at all costs and ego than genuine empathy and striving for justice. Quite the little niche she has carved out for herself. Just the title of her book shows the supreme esteem in which she holds herself.

 

[rhornsby]

RE: bolded.

What arrogance! Like this is something to be proud of?

She may have 'bonded' with a psychopath, but psychopaths are not remotely capable of bonding except to their own fantasies. Psychopaths are attracted to the opportunity (and to the psychopathic style/atmosphere). If AL provides an opportunity they will take it which makes AL not special at all. It rather seems like a mutual admiration society the way she boasts about it. It seems to me that she finds psychopaths especially potent when it comes to winning at their defence. I mean, just imagine it, if she can get a psychopath/sociopath off, the ultimate challenge (reference the perp, for example), then she truly is the queen of winners. She's so far up in the stratosphere in terms of her magical power and skills. Yet, at the same time, she is willing to let an innocent man suffer and be destroyed for years in prison all the while knowing he is innocent and in possession of proof.

Given the above, I find her quite a weird duck, with a perverse agenda that seems to have more to do with her drive to win at all costs and ego than genuine empathy and striving for justice. Quite the little niche she has carved out for herself. Just the title of her book shows the supreme esteem in which she holds herself.

Seriously? You should lighted up, it if very clear that she was saying that tongue in cheek.

 

[mitzi]

Seriously? You should lighted up, it if very clear that she was saying that tongue in cheek.

Richard, was it tongue in cheek when Andrea stated that women who are prosecutors "wear strap-ons"? She sure has alot of "unusual" opinions for someone who you are implying is just a "jokester"!

 

[rhornsby]

Richard, was it tongue in cheek when Andrea stated that women who are prosecutors "wear strap-ons"? She sure has alot of "unusual" opinions for someone who you are implying is just a "jokester"!

Mitzi, I do not know what your occupation is, but I do know that anyone who is in an adversarial profession speaks off color and off record about the people they oppose and the obstacles they encounter every day in the course of their work.

Personally, I have used much more disparaging comments when discussing my frustrations when dealing with over zealous prosecutor, unreasonable judges, and irrational jurors.

But to call someone unprofessional because of something they said behind closed doors is hypocritical.

 

[logicalgirl]

Mitzi, I do not know what your occupation is, but I do know that anyone who is in an adversarial profession speaks off color and off record about the people they oppose and the obstacles they encounter every day in the course of their work.

Personally, I have used much more disparaging comments when discussing my frustrations when dealing with over zealous prosecutor, unreasonable judges, and irrational jurors.

But to call someone unprofessional because of something they said behind closed doors is hypocritical.

I agree with you about the off colour stuff behind closed doors, but I try to avoid circumstances where I am being taped and my comments plastered all over the internet for anyone to read. A little discretion never hurts our public image.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

Not sure if this has been posted yet..sorry if it's a repost. Just want to add, I am really annoyed at how AL and LKB can go on these media tours after leaving the defense team and give thier opinion on the case and Casey and it is said to be legal. :maddening:

IMO, I feel something is up, maybe a book or movie deal. Who knows, but it really irritates me that these women feel most of us are ignorant enough to believe the BS the DT are spewing out. I pray Pray Pray that the jury on this case is taking it very serious, enough is enough and Caylee needs Justice!:truce: Sorry, didn't meant to rant :maddening: :truce:

Casey Anthony: Andrea Lyon talks to ‘20/20′ Friday night "Snip" Posted: 09 Jun 2011 12:32 PM PDT
Andrea Lyon, a former defense attorney for Casey Anthony, will talk to ABC’s “20/20″ about the current defense strategy.

The program airs at 10 p.m. Friday on WFTV-Channel 9.
Full Article: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent...=Yahoo!+Mail

 

[DollyPardonMe]

Not sure if this has been posted yet..sorry if it's a repost. Just want to add, I am really annoyed at how AL and LKB can go on these media tours after leaving the defense team and give thier opinion on the case and Casey and it is said to be legal. :maddening:

IMO, I feel something is up, maybe a book or movie deal. Who knows, but it really irritates me that these women feel most of us are ignorant enough to believe the BS the DT are spewing out. I pray Pray Pray that the jury on this case is taking it very serious, enough is enough and Caylee needs Justice!:truce: Sorry, didn't meant to rant :maddening: :truce:

I had just recently posted on another thread how LKB was really getting on my nerves by talking about this case but AL had the decency to keep quiet. Now, I hear she will be speaking up on 20/20! What made me think that any part of this DT team past or present had the least bit of decency:waitasec:

 

[sleutherontheside]

Bumping in light of AL appearing on Dr. Drew tonight.

Time to revisit AL's playbook don't ya think???

 

[sleutherontheside]

Interesting article quoting Susan Bandes (an AL associate).

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-moms-of-suspects-20110614,0,3378102.story

"It's pretty obvious that when someone you love and respect tells you that this is what you need to do, there's nothing more powerful than that," said Susan Bandes, a DePaul University law professor. "You have to sort out whether the government can leverage those moral and emotional concerns to get around their constitutional obligations."

"Sending in an undercover mom is an end run around the government's known obligation" to a suspect's rights and would be "highly objectionable," she later wrote in an email.