Book released by Defense Atty Nov 2015 #1

[lewcch3]

Hi ya Lewcch, thanks for the info. So, what you are saying is when she (repeatedly) complained about her attorney this action voided the attorney/client privilege? OMG how deliciously rich :laughing::laughing::laughing:

I absolutely love this...can you imagine the absolute rage she flew into when she found out (or maybe finds out) that her attorney is going to put her on front street for the whole world to see :great::clap::cheer::cheer:

Hi Mindmatters! Not sure about repeated complaints to others by JA that voided the A/C privilege, Nurmi used this discussion as his reasoning for not violating that confidentiality. Sorry if was too vague, but not sure just how much can paraphrase or use from BK's site but tried to be as succinct as possible.

At any rate, Hope for More has a much better description of this post by BK - see Hope's post # 317 of this thread.

Howe

 

[Mindmatters]

BK 's take- the legal community Arizona is quote unquote astounded that Nurmi has published a book, and that Martinez is being allowed to publish his book, both while appeals are ongoing. She seems to suggest that this timing is linked to possible bar investigations of both.

She does say that N writes in the book the killer waived privilege when she discussed with Troy Hayden the fact that N didn't call witnesses who could testify to bruises on her arm , even though N says she knew why they couldn't be called.

(There is an exception to AC privilege if the Atty is responding to defend himself against accusations made by his client.

I'm not an atty, but seems like a bit of a stretch, and doesn't absolve him of his ethical obligations under AZ rules of conduct).

BK says that she assumes that all of the confidential information including the book was waived by such public comments, but that his book will likely be under scrutiny as will JM's.

Of interest.....she says she read one page of N's introduction, where he says that the killer became incredibly irritated when she was called Ms. Arias, which is why he calls her that throughout the book. WTH or LOL?

Hi Hope and thanks!

Has BK purchased and read Part 1? IMO (and factually) There is a distinct difference between a legal responsibility and an ethical responsibility, nothwithstanding, I am absolutely stunned that he will tell all about her from a legal standpoint...ethically it is a different story IMO. But either way, I would think that he has decided not to practice any longer if he is really doing a "tell all" expose on his client.

BBM 1-- Do you know if this "exception" is specific regarding the "accusation", i.e., convict tells TH that KN didn't bring info regarding bruises into trial (accusation) so KN can address ONLY the info (bruising and witnesses) SHE released. Or if she makes any accusation then the Attorney is within his rights to discuss any and all information protected under AC Privilege?

BBM 2---I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that he would ADMIT he purposely antagonized his own client this is a freaking BOMBSHELL if true.

Not gonna lie, I am glad he is revealing the truth about this vile ***** (if for nothing else than for the Alexander family), but I am wondering how this will affect people's perceptions of being defended by attorneys and/or the justice system in general.

 

[AZlawyer]

Trying to say this as succinctly as I can, and hope to be told -- no, that's absurd.

I'm connecting the dots of Nurmi's many motions etc. about excessive publicity denying her a fair trial with her appellate attys twice suggesting that the COA be disqualified because excessive publicity led to an appellate judge discussing her case before her appeal was heard , plus her attorneys going after JM and his book , again on the basis of excessive publicity potentially denying her the right to an untainted hypothetical retrial, and right on cue comes Kieffer, the DT's mouthpiece , with an article about how social media led to "over involved" trial watchers attempting to influence her juries, and now, this.....odd, over the top book by Nurmi.

Translated, any possibility that all this is about a strategy to try to win a new trial based on some novel federal appeal about the saturation of social media coverage denying a defendant due process?

Ummmm, I guess it could be a strategy to argue undue publicity for a REtrial, but that's getting ahead of ourselves a bit. I don't see how it would be a strategy to GET a retrial--how would that work? "I demand a retrial, because the publicity is even WORSE now so there's no WAY it could be fair...I mean...wait...I said that wrong...."

BBM - Can she use the fact that her lawyer wrote about the trial (and about her by proxy) to get a new trial? Can she claim ineffective assistance of council due to anything he writes in his books? I really doubt she gave her consent for him to write a book because she hates Nurmi almost as much as she hates Juan.

His book is not going to be admissible on the appeal or in an ineffective assistance proceeding.

AZL!!!

Is it at all possible that JSS, in a sealed hearing about KN's requests to be released from the DT, would have granted post-trial latitude to KN's talking re: strategy. I mean, good Lord. His client basically insisted he allow her to lie under oath. As much as I disliked his demeanor, he DID rally the only argument with which he was left.

Hum. I'm beginning to feel a leeeeetle sympathy for 'ole KN. Talk about a rock and a hard spot ...

JSS has no power to release KN from his ethical obligations and would never dream of doing so.

BK 's take- the legal community Arizona is quote unquote astounded that Nurmi has published a book, and that Martinez is being allowed to publish his book, both while appeals are ongoing. She seems to suggest that this timing is linked to possible bar investigations of both.

She does say that N writes in the book the killer waived privilege when she discussed with Troy Hayden the fact that N didn't call witnesses who could testify to bruises on her arm , even though N says she knew why they couldn't be called.

(There is an exception to AC privilege if the Atty is responding to defend himself against accusations made by his client.

I'm not an atty, but seems like a bit of a stretch, and doesn't absolve him of his ethical obligations under AZ rules of conduct).

BK says that she assumes that all of the confidential information including the book was waived by such public comments, but that his book will likely be under scrutiny as will JM's.

Of interest.....she says she read one page of N's introduction, where he says that the killer became incredibly irritated when she was called Ms. Arias, which is why he calls her that throughout the book. WTH or LOL?

Jodi's chatting about her conversations with counsel would waive privilege as to the content of those particular conversations, but not as to everything else IMO.

The exception to the ethics rule about confidentiality for defending yourself is limited. It doesn't necessarily mean you can write a book trashing your client. You have to try to do the least damage possible to your client's right to confidentiality while defending yourself, and you have to limit your defense to the issues raised by the client.

If KN really didn't have JA's permission to write this book, he should be very concerned about a bar inquiry.

 

[Hope4More]

ummmm, i guess it could be a strategy to argue undue publicity for a retrial, but that's getting ahead of ourselves a bit. I don't see how it would be a strategy to get a retrial--how would that work? "i demand a retrial, because the publicity is even worse now so there's no way it could be fair...i mean...wait...i said that wrong...."



his book is not going to be admissible on the appeal or in an ineffective assistance proceeding.



Jss has no power to release kn from his ethical obligations and would never dream of doing so.



Jodi's chatting about her conversations with counsel would waive privilege as to the content of those particular conversations, but not as to everything else imo.

The exception to the ethics rule about confidentiality for defending yourself is limited. It doesn't necessarily mean you can write a book trashing your client. You have to try to do the least damage possible to your client's right to confidentiality while defending yourself, and you have to limit your defense to the issues raised by the client.

If kn really didn't have ja's permission to write this book, he should be very concerned about a bar inquiry.

thank you, azl!!!!!!

 

[Hope4More]

Hi Hope and thanks!

Has BK purchased and read Part 1? IMO (and factually) There is a distinct difference between a legal responsibility and an ethical responsibility, nothwithstanding, I am absolutely stunned that he will tell all about her from a legal standpoint...ethically it is a different story IMO. But either way, I would think that he has decided not to practice any longer if he is really doing a "tell all" expose on his client.

BBM 1-- Do you know if this "exception" is specific regarding the "accusation", i.e., convict tells TH that KN didn't bring info regarding bruises into trial (accusation) so KN can address ONLY the info (bruising and witnesses) SHE released. Or if she makes any accusation then the Attorney is within his rights to discuss any and all information protected under AC Privilege?

BBM 2---I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that he would ADMIT he purposely antagonized his own client this is a freaking BOMBSHELL if true.

Not gonna lie, I am glad he is revealing the truth about this vile ***** (if for nothing else than for the Alexander family), but I am wondering how this will affect people's perceptions of being defended by attorneys and/or the justice system in general.

BK ordered the book and will read it. She says she DID read that one page which DID have Nurmi writing that he uses Ms. Arias throughout because he knows how much she hates it.

AZL says he should be worried about a bar complaint if he didn't get permission from her. Permission or not, basically admitting to writing a book in order to piss off an ex-client seems a VERY bad way to drum upon business and perhaps more a reason to worry about knocks on the door by folks in white med jackets looking grim..

 

[samspace070]

Hi Hope and thanks!

Has BK purchased and read Part 1? IMO There is a distinct difference between a legal responsibility and an ethical responsibility, but I am absolutely stunned that he will tell all about her from a legal standpoint...ethically it is a different story IMO. But either way, I would think that he has decided not to practice any longer if he is really doing a "tell all" expose on his client.

BBM 1-- Do you know if this "exception" is specific regarding the "accusation", i.e., convict tells TH that KN didn't bring info regarding bruises into trial (accusation) so KN can address ONLY the info (bruising and witnesses) SHE released. Or if she makes any accusation then the Attorney is within his rights to discuss any and all information

BBM 2---I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that he would ADMIT he purposely antagonized his own client this is a freaking BOMBSHELL if true.

Not gonna lie, I am glad he is revealing the truth about this vile ***** (if for nothing else than for the Alexander family), but I am wondering how this will affect people's perceptions of being defended by attorneys and/or the justice system in general.

This is poetic justice for that monster. I bet she gave Nurmi and her other lawyers a horrible time. She is demanding and arrogant and thinks she knows it all. She demanded he go after Deanna and J. Demarta. And he did it too. I was wondering what Nurmi and Willnot thought about that interview, now we know.

She thought she was so cool telling TH all about how she was screwed over by her defense team. She also said she had a picture of TA dressed as a priest, chasing a naked four year old around with a bible in his hands, on her hard drive. And the defense team wouldn't put it in evidence. I didn't believe her then and I don't now. I wonder if Nurmi will address that issue. I was under the impression her hard drive had been destroyed. (By her probably)

 

[Mindmatters]

Yet there it is.

From whatever source, or from him alone, her once-attorney has turned colors on her, big time.

Yes, that is what has me confused. For the life of me I can't imagine any lawyer taking such a risk!! Of all people AN ATTORNEY knows full well what the extreme consequences of doing such a thing would bring. I may not like the guy very much but I don't think he is a stupid man at all. It just seems something is missing here :thinking:

 

[ElleElle]

NONE of which came out in public interviews, and all of which had to be from interviews or investigations covered under AC privilege or client confidentiality rules.

The cruelty to animals was actually explicitly litigated. JM tried to bring it in and JSS ruled against him.

Don't you think he can only write about his feeeeeelings towards her. Does he have fact that she was mean to animals? If it is not fact, can he write about it?

 

[Wing Ding]

Does anyone know what books were confiscated in her jail cell she referred to? She said she had written some notes in the margins and the LE confiscated them but later found out it was nothing but Nurmi refused to get them back for her. More code to you think????

I only know of the photography magazine that was intended to get to Matt McCartney (through a third party).

The only mention of books that I recall were the ones Dr. Fog and ALV gave JA when they were treating her. I mean interviewing her. I mean coaching her. I mean testing her.

If it was the magazine you're thinking of, samspace070, it may not have gotten back to her because it was confiscated and eventually entered into evidence in the trial. I don't know if Nurmi had told JA that she couldn't get it back, or if he did, she blames him anyway because nothing is ever her fault.

 

[ElleElle]

Yes, that is what has me confused. For the life of me I can't imagine any lawyer taking such a risk!! Of all people AN ATTORNEY knows full well what the extreme consequences of doing such a thing would bring. I may not like the guy very much but I don't think he is a stupid man at all. It just seems something is missing here :thinking:

Maybe he is planning a career change? Like a promoter of weight loss supplements?

 

[Mindmatters]

So a question for anyone who may know, or AZL :loveyou:.

As I stated upstream, is there a legal distinction between facts and opinions as it relates to AC and an attorney writing a book that is about his client? Thanks

 

[Hope4More]

Don't you think he can only write about his feeeeeelings towards her. Does he have fact that she was mean to animals? If it is not fact, can he write about it?

Appears that he did. I remember JM trying to bring in the fact she squeezed a cat so hard she either did harm it or clearly intended to. JSS ruled it inadmissable.

That info, IIRC, seems to have come from the notes of one of the DT's psych experts.

 

[Mindmatters]

Don't you think he can only write about his feeeeeelings towards her. Does he have fact that she was mean to animals? If it is not fact, can he write about it?

LOL and Yes, this is what I was thinking earlier Elle. Don't know if it is correct because ethics and responsibilities are so interdependent, therefore it just seems crazy that this is ok with the bar? I mean, everyone knows that people will INFER that these feelings/opinions are based on facts that he is privy to as her Attorney.

IDK what to think about it all--but one thing is for sure, I hope he does TELL ALL about this and I am not the least bit concerned if he is in trouble for doing so.

 

[Hope4More]

Paraphrased from BK's quote from N's book about why Ms. Arias.

He says he took the "high road" by calling her M.A. after she began complaining about him to courts and "others."

She would "scream" at him when he used it, and "behind the screams" were threats she would ruin him and his practice if he "did not obey her commands."

(So maybe he wants us to believe he is taking the high road in his book by calling her by her formal name).

Which seems to have reduced her to frothing frenzy because.....why? I'm guessing because he was clearly immune to her "charms" despite her cute little updates about her privates.

 

[Mindmatters]

Paraphrased from BK's quote from N's book about why Ms. Arias.

He says he took the "high road" by calling her M.A. after she began complaining about him to courts and "others."

She would "scream" at him when he used it, and "behind the screams" were threats she would ruin him and his practice if he "did not obey her commands."

:gthanks: for the intel Hope.

BBM-Well, while this is what we all knew despite a lack of facts, it is really nice to get confirmation :biggrin:

 

[Frigga]

Hearing #jodiarias phone calls led the DT 2 go 2 LV (behind her back) to interview a suitor for possible evidence they hid. Think he was #1

I THINK LV guy (living w/mama) was guy who helped #jodiarias w/fake letters. He gave up whatever he had but no use 2 her defense




Wasn't #1 Marc McGee? IIRC, he was identified in court as #1, but Juan kept exposing him. :thinking:

Or was it Gus Searcy? ... IIRC, he was the #1 witness (called as DT's first witness)

My guess is Gus or Matt.

 

[Frigga]

LOL and Yes, this is what I was thinking earlier Elle. Don't know if it is correct because ethics and responsibilities are so interdependent, therefore it just seems crazy that this is ok with the bar? I mean, everyone knows that people will INFER that these feelings/opinions are based on facts that he is privy to as her Attorney.

IDK what to think about it all--but one thing is for sure, I hope he does TELL ALL about this and I am not the least bit concerned if he is in trouble for doing so.

BBM- THAT really would be poetic justice- all the way around.

 

[Frigga]

I only know of the photography magazine that was intended to get to Matt McCartney (through a third party).

The only mention of books that I recall were the ones Dr. Fog and ALV gave JA when they were treating her. I mean interviewing her. I mean coaching her. I mean testing her.

If it was the magazine you're thinking of, samspace070, it may not have gotten back to her because it was confiscated and eventually entered into evidence in the trial. I don't know if Nurmi had told JA that she couldn't get it back, or if he did, she blames him anyway because nothing is ever her fault.

There were two books I could swear I remember her having- being discussed- one was Shanna Hogan's book about the killer and the other was (IIRC) Jose Baez' bulls*** book about defending his client/baby killer. Anyone else remember this- these?

 

[Caylee Advocate]

My guess is Gus or Matt.

Yes, but neither of them "lived" in Vegas, however Gus took his motorhome there when he was doing "business". That dude is one shady character. I wish I could find more about the DT traveling to Vegas, I thought once I had read about them going to CA. to interview a witness, but Vegas is news to me. Too much slime to remember it all. :laughing: Too bad we don't have access to expenditure reports.

 

[Mindmatters]

Hope4More writes...

Which seems to have reduced her to frothing frenzy because.....why? I'm guessing because he was clearly immune to her "charms" despite her cute little updates about her privates.

Ummm, what!?!? Is this a rumor or did Nurmi actually put this out there... and WTF :doh: hwow:?

Would you mind filling me in Hope?

BTW: "frothing frenzy", ROTFLMAO and great descriptor!!!