Andrea Lyons ~ Tapes and Lectures And RECENT MEDIA

[logicalgirl]

An excerpt from.... http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=andrea_lyon


If it is possible to settle your
case with a plea for life or a term of years, you should work to
do that. Many factors play into the ability to negotiate: strength
of the prosecution’s murder case, strength of the aggravation
case, whether it is an election year (is the judge going to worry
about how he looks to the electorate?), whether you are an
opponent the prosecution respects, and a host of other issues.

I think that if people read this article......it can give a great deal of insight into what we are seeing. I offered the link before, but here it is again.

Yes, thanks - this time I read the whole article and I can see her formula quite clearly and it fits with her actions.
Her actions also tell me she knows Casey is guilty, but that has nothing to do with this article, or maybe it explains how, even when.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Yes, thanks - this time I read the whole article and I can see her formula quite clearly and it fits with her actions.
Her actions also tell me she knows Casey is guilty, but that has nothing to do with this article, or maybe it explains how, even when.

It's really a good one isn't it? AL has said many times....."it's not about guilt or innocence, but about saving a life". When the focus is saving a life, presenting testimony that will "allow" the jurors to "feel" becomes a priority. I am appalled as anyone else that RK is getting thrown under the bus, but I also see it as part of their plan to "offer a reason to doubt". Most of us expect "reasonable doubt" to be reasonable. What I am seeing more and more in this case, is that it's not going to be about "reasonable doubt", but instead offering jurors "permission" or a "reason TO doubt".

It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth to even type that....Now, I am off to wash that thought down with a glass of wine.

 

[Linz]

There is nothing wrong with any media outlet, be it TV, radio, print et al.... participating in a high profile story. How they conduct their interviews however, can always be evaluated and judged. Many opinions will weigh in, and frankly in terms of media reach, that might be considered ideal. I don't think that any interviews that AL has given are horrible, or anything less than what we would expect.

Do I think that AL boarded the KC train for personal gains?....Sure. Do I think she is committed to impacting the results of KC's trial?.....Yep again.

I am not disgusted by her statements and behavior because I am looking at them from the perspective of........"What makes her tick?". I am genetically wired as impatient, curious, even nosy. I thrive on knowing the "workings, methods, and playbook" of any number of situations. I like to be prepared. In this case......AL was thrown in as a wild card (IMO)....I enjoy knowing what "tells" to anticipate.

AL is a talented woman. While I abhor her client and the actions she is charged with, it doesn't lessen my interest in what "play" may be coming next?

I am sensitive to the passionate feelings associated with this case. I share them too......just wanted to make sure that people understand the "motive" behind my "sleuthing" AL. Don't we all want to be able to watch hearings, and ultimately a trial....and be able to say "I know where she is going with this." ?

As far as the contradiction between the defense "complaints about media" and "participation in media"......I can only assume that the defense is preparing for a denial of COV....thus they are attempting to "level the playing field" as part of their plan "B".

JMO

Thanks for your post! I agree with what you wrote; I haven't made up my mind yet about AL, except that she seems competent to handle the intricacies of this trial. (I don't think she'll be able to get much more than LWOP for KC, maybe that's why I've had no emotional reaction to her.) I also agree, the more information we have, the better we can anticipate her strategies, interpret her reactions, etc.

So this is already a valuable thread, and primarily because of the information you've gathered and shared here with us. I'm not exaggerating- scrolling through it, you notice link after link to articles, interviews... not to mention those lectures I haven't listened to yet. If this case makes it to trial, I'll be referencing this constantly. Thank you.

 

[ynotdivein]

(...)Most of us expect "reasonable doubt" to be reasonable. What I am seeing more and more in this case, is that it's not going to be about "reasonable doubt", but instead offering jurors "permission" or a "reason TO doubt".

It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth to even type that....Now, I am off to wash that thought down with a glass of wine.

Maybe this question belongs in the lawyers thread but... if your suspicions are correct, and defense will be aiming to obfuscate by muddying the waters of "reasonable doubt" with suggestions of "permission/reason TO doubt" in order to sidetrack the jury, then what is the State's best strategy to neutralize that tactic? And what role will the judge play in all this?

Almost don't want an online answer, since I suspect defense is using everything from WS-lurking to the reading of tea leaves to craft a strategy. Oh, the webs we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

 

[denjet]

An excerpt from.... http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=andrea_lyon


If it is possible to settle your
case with a plea for life or a term of years, you should work to
do that. Many factors play into the ability to negotiate: strength
of the prosecution’s murder case, strength of the aggravation
case, whether it is an election year (is the judge going to worry
about how he looks to the electorate?), whether you are an
opponent the prosecution respects, and a host of other issues.

I think that if people read this article......it can give a great deal of insight into what we are seeing. I offered the link before, but here it is again.

Yes it does give insight into death penalty defense lawyers ... why they do what they do ... FYI I too find it very interesting to know how Andrea thinks and operates ... especially as this case goes along and unfolds ...

This excerpt gives me hope that the Anthonys' life will be dragged through the mud the way the defense has done to witnesses and players in the case:

Mitigation—reasons to punish with imprisonment rather than death—is any evidence that might tend to explain the client’s actions, family history, mental health issues, physical health matters, or the impact the client’s execution would have on his or her loved ones. The rules of evidence are relaxed at a penalty phase; in most states, this means that anything “relevant and reliable” is admissible. A capital defender thus faces the daunting tasks of
investigating and preparing to meet the evidence against the client in the trial, as well as investigating and preparing to meet the aggravating evidence at a penalty phase, in addition to locating and presenting mitigating evidence—much of which is a matter of shame to the client and his family.

I'm guessing it won't just be about Cindy's take on family dynamics or her parenting skills ... I'm especially interested in what the estranged relatives have to say ... I don't think Cindy's ego will allow any blame to be placed on her or how she raised her children .... unless she can turn it into a pity party for herself ... JMO

 

[denjet]

I also found this excerpt interesting:

it certainly could be argued that a conscientious defense attorney should file and litigate only those motions that she had, at the least, more than a suspicion or a hunch were necessary. For instance, she would not file a motion to dismiss the charges based on allegations of prosecutorial misconduct unless she had very solid evidence of that misconduct and the conduct was sufficiently egregious to warrant such a motion. Indeed, even if it were that egregious, she might decide not to file it, because of trial strategy or because she thought the motion unlikely to succeed. She could do so, secure in the knowledge that should more evidence come to light later on, and she could not reasonably have located it through the exercise of due diligence, she could mount a challenge in a federal habeas corpus proceeding.


WHAAATT ?? I can think of a number of Lyon's motions that she had NO solid evidence to base them on !!

 

[Just Jayla]

Boy, she couldn't be more obnoxious if she's tried!
What a spiteful woman she is ...

She was pretty busy last week ... surprised she even had time for the rescheduled hearing ... she's certainly getting a lot of exposure for herself from this case ...

Exactly, she has a stinky personality, JMO.
To me, I don't dislike her because she is defending KC. I dislike AL because she rode her high horse into Orlando, 1157 miles away from home, and proceeded to tell Floridians that they are: She-males, probably ugly judges, killers, mobs, using the DP because that's how they can win cases, and wrong about their application of DP law (and the judges should be changing that from the bench).

 

[sleutherontheside]

Exactly, she has a stinky personality, JMO.
To me, I don't dislike her because she is defending KC. I dislike AL because she rode her high horse into Orlando, 1157 miles away from home, and proceeded to tell Floridians that they are: She-males, probably ugly judges, killers, mobs, using the DP because that's how they can win cases, and wrong about their application of DP law (and the judges should be changing that from the bench).

I don't think AL would be my first choice in a public relations position, but her personality it a good fit for her position. "Advocate"........any good advocate will exhaust all options and pull out all their tricks in order to reach their ultimate goal.

At times, their efforts must be more intense than others. I don't think AL has any particular prejudice against FL jurors, judges, or attorney's........she has made these same remarks time after time in lecture after lecture and in interview after interview. Because she travels so much with her lectures.....because her classes are always full of new students, she has formulated her "Shtick", her lesson plan, and has coined her "sound bites and catch phrases".

In interviews, after being introduced with a narrative outlining her experience and number of cases she has tried I have heard her make a comment to the effect of "Don't ask me how long that's been"...then she laughs at her little joke about her age and sometimes people bite on it, and others they let it go.....The point is, she parrots the same exact info over and over.

Andrea is proud of her accomplishments....she should be.....BUT if she wishes to accomplish her goal here in Florida, for this client, she is going to need to soften her image and gauge her actions and behavior according to this region. She has discussed wearing pink or light blue when dealing with jurors in order to soften her appearance, and darker colors when she want to present herself in a more authoritative and intimidating position. I think it will take more than selective wardrobe decisions to accomplish that.

 

[Just Jayla]

I don't think AL would be my first choice in a public relations position, but her personality it a good fit for her position. "Advocate"........any good advocate will exhaust all options and pull out all their tricks in order to reach their ultimate goal.

At times, their efforts must be more intense than others. I don't think AL has any particular prejudice against FL jurors, judges, or attorney's........she has made these same remarks time after time in lecture after lecture and in interview after interview. Because she travels so much with her lectures.....because her classes are always full of new students, she has formulated her "Shtick", her lesson plan, and has coined her "sound bites and catch phrases".

In interviews, after being introduced with a narrative outlining her experience and number of cases she has tried I have heard her make a comment to the effect of "Don't ask me how long that's been"...then she laughs at her little joke about her age and sometimes people bite on it, and others they let it go.....The point is, she parrots the same exact info over and over.

Andrea is proud of her accomplishments....she should be.....BUT if she wishes to accomplish her goal here in Florida, for this client, she is going to need to soften her image and gauge her actions and behavior according to this region. She has discussed wearing pink or light blue when dealing with jurors in order to soften her appearance, and darker colors when she want to present herself in a more authoritative and intimidating position. I think it will take more than selective wardrobe decisions to accomplish that.

BBM-I am sure you are right, she seems to have the same opinions about people wherever she goes. But people tend to get a bit more offended when someone who is not even part of your community comes in and criticizes your POV.

She comes from a state where there is a moratorium on the DP. In Illinois and a state like Maryland, clearly most people agree with her-She can safely blast juries and judges because the public in large part feels like she does.

In Florida and a state like Virginia, to go in with guns blazing on this issue is not the right approach, IMO. We are comfortable with our decision to utilize the DP and would expect a super-solid Constitutional argument against it. The approach that she encourages lawyers to use is a hardline approach, and she feels, with some merit, that the only way to be consistent, commited and candid about her wishes to abolish the DP is to remain rigid on the topic and do not waiver no matter where you practice.

However, I think this model is better suited for the legislature, not the courtroom. In the courtroom, she should make sure that the laws of that state are applied fairly to her clients.

My opinion is that she might consider teaching young lawyers this: When
in Rome (or Florida, or Texas, or Virginia), learn how the Romans do. Understand their position, come to know the roots of their beliefs, know how their laws were shaped. Then, use what you know as a starting point to address why this case (or any) should be an acception to their rules. Not an affirmation of hers.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Bump for review of SOP by the defense.

 

[The World According]

Sleuther, I have been wondering...in your research of her have you seen any of her documents she filed in other cases? I am very curious to know if it is from her camp or Jose's that these very poorly written motions originate. For a long time, I assumed the culprit was Jose, because she has soooo many more years of experience than him. Now that it has come up about the lady from her university taking over the P. R. job, I have been wondering does she really allow her students to prepare these motions...and furthermore, not check them before they are e mailed or faxed to Baez to print and sign. I am just stunned that after the public thrashing they take over the documents , they still haven't gotten it together and made a concentrated effort to do better. I know it is her SOP to file motion after motion after motion...but are they normally as sad, tired and pitiful as these in this case, if you know?

TIA!!!!

 

[sleutherontheside]

Sleuther, I have been wondering...in your research of her have you seen any of her documents she filed in other cases? I am very curious to know if it is from her camp or Jose's that these very poorly written motions originate. For a long time, I assumed the culprit was Jose, because she has soooo many more years of experience than him. Now that it has come up about the lady from her university taking over the P. R. job, I have been wondering does she really allow her students to prepare these motions...and furthermore, not check them before they are e mailed or faxed to Baez to print and sign. I am just stunned that after the public thrashing they take over the documents , they still haven't gotten it together and made a concentrated effort to do better. I know it is her SOP to file motion after motion after motion...but are they normally as sad, tired and pitiful as these in this case, if you know?

TIA!!!!

I have not researched motions filed by her team on other cases. I am sure that they are out there. I will look when I have some time.

 

[sleutherontheside]

http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/books/2057492,chicago-lit-andrea-lyon-022110.article

Also, to flesh out her stories, she admits to juggling certain events around.

“I took some liberties,” Lyon said. “I would put a conversation with a guard in to help further the story in a particular chapter when that conversation may have happened in a different case altogether. But it helps tell the story of what I was facing, or what my client was facing.”

So she inserted events from one case into the story of another???? To tell a better story???? Or to sell more books???? Shall we now call her book fiction??????

 

[LambChop]

http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/books/2057492,chicago-lit-andrea-lyon-022110.article

Also, to flesh out her stories, she admits to juggling certain events around.

“I took some liberties,” Lyon said. “I would put a conversation with a guard in to help further the story in a particular chapter when that conversation may have happened in a different case altogether. But it helps tell the story of what I was facing, or what my client was facing.”

So she inserted events from one case into the story of another???? To tell a better story???? Or to sell more books???? Shall we now call her book fiction??????

Absolutely because that is what it is. Fiction based on factual events.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Absolutely because that is what it is. Fiction based on factual events.

Funny that book stores and Amazon have it classified as non-fiction and /or biography.

 

[sleutherontheside]

College of Law Professor Andrea Lyon was mentioned on Orlando, Fla.’s WDBO-TV in a Feb. 16 story about a change in media contacts for the Casey Anthony defense team. per http://newsroom.depaul.edu/DePaulinNews/index.html

Why may I ask is this "newsworthy"? Oh...... unless making news is the priority.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

College of Law Professor Andrea Lyon was mentioned on Orlando, Fla.’s WDBO-TV in a Feb. 16 story about a change in media contacts for the Casey Anthony defense team. per http://newsroom.depaul.edu/DePaulinNews/index.html

Why may I ask is this "newsworthy"? Oh...... unless making news is the priority.

DePaul seems to have some pretty interesting priorities. They let Lyon go across country instead of helping out people in their own state. Pretty transparent and disgusting.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Meadows to Host "Media and Human Rights in America" Symposium Andrea Lyon will be speaking.
http://www.smu.edu/Meadows/NewsAndEvents/2010/100304-HumanRightsSymposium.aspx


On Wednesday, April 7, 2010, the symposium will take place from 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. at the Meadows Museum and will include four top-notch panels, focusing discussion on how the media impacts human rights in America. The symposium will feature themed sessions concerning justice in journalism; new media and human rights; media and the death penalty; and media, race, ethics and justice.

This will be a free event and open to the public. I'd sure like to hear the lectures from her at this event.

 

[The World According]

Speaking engagements can be very lucrative, indeed. I trust that because of the exposure she has gained from this case...she will reap rewards such as more opportunities and be able to demand a higher fee , well into the future. I trust that was not lost on Andrea when she kicked around the pros and cons of joining the defense team.

I liken it to a major corporation sponsoring a charity...very often it is done quite publicly to get as much media good will as possible...rarely ever do they quietly write a check with no fanfare. There is nothing wrong with that....I am only pointing out the what is in it for me question is common.

I still remember OJ's civil lawyer, Yale calling up his old buddy Gabe ( also a lawyer ) and saying....I cannot pay you...but do ya wanna be famous?
The next thing we know, there is Gabe, shiny new shoes and big smile at the defense table.

 

[denjet]

Meadows to Host "Media and Human Rights in America" Symposium Andrea Lyon will be speaking.
http://www.smu.edu/Meadows/NewsAndEvents/2010/100304-HumanRightsSymposium.aspx


On Wednesday, April 7, 2010, the symposium will take place from 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. at the Meadows Museum and will include four top-notch panels, focusing discussion on how the media impacts human rights in America. The symposium will feature themed sessions concerning justice in journalism; new media and human rights; media and the death penalty; and media, race, ethics and justice.

This will be a free event and open to the public. I'd sure like to hear the lectures from her at this event.

OH boy, I'll clear my calendar ! Not ... I wouldn't attend anything she's speaking at if it took place in my living room ... I'll bet she'll be more careful about her language when she speaks !!