Book released by Defense Atty Nov 2015 #1

[Hope4More]

For those with access to BK. She just posted a BK Live video about Nurmi's book.

And...last note about her blog. She seems to think there is some possibility JM in writing his book "handed " the killer a "gift" for her appeals and PCR .

 

[Mindmatters]

For those with access to BK. She just posted a BK Live video about Nurmi's book.

And...last note about her blog. She seems to think there is some possibility JM in writing his book "handed " the killer a "gift" for her appeals and PCR .

BBM--Thanks Hope, this is stunning "news" to me. Has she said why she believes this?

Kinda reeling at the thought that Juan would do anything that would jeopardize the hard-fought conviction he got on this insidious convict :stormingmad: :crying:.

I hope this is purely speculation and not fact lease: :crossfingers: .

 

[nrdsb4]

I got interested in this case very late into it. So forgive me my ignorance.

Who is BK?

 

[Mindmatters]

I got interested in this case very late into it. So forgive me my ignorance.

Who is BK?

Hi Nrdsb. BK=Beth Karas.She is a reporter/commentator who followed and covered the Aria trial very, very closely. She has a website, Karas on Crime, in which she covers criminal trials. HTH

 

[RickshawFan]

Well, she was just giving him an update.

I suppose you're right: jail might change the nether geography. You don't want to see my list of possible methods.

 

[Frigga]

For those with access to BK. She just posted a BK Live video about Nurmi's book.

And...last note about her blog. She seems to think there is some possibility JM in writing his book "handed " the killer a "gift" for her appeals and PCR .

To be fair, remember that Beth believed the initial lies from the defense team about the computer. I take things from her with a grain of salt- I like her- but I am careful after some of her 'legal' opinions during the trial.

 

[G&AMom]

To be fair, remember that Beth believed the initial lies from the defense team about the computer. I take things from her with a grain of salt- I like her- but I am careful after some of her 'legal' opinions during the trial.

I was going to say something similar, Frigga. I like Beth, and think she is head and shoulders above most of those who comment on this case, but she is not always right.

 

[LinTX]

Overall I like her, but Beth has been wrong on a couple fairly big issues, and for some reason I always come to the conclusion that she holds some degree of bias against JM. I too think JM has probably been very careful about what is in his book, and wouldn't be at all surprised if he's asked for input from other attorneys. I did pre-order it, but am actually prepared for it to not be all that interesting because of that.

On her podcast/video, I noticed that she doesn't understand why anyone would have any qualms about buying Nurmi's book, she says "ethics aside" (meaning the professional ethics of writing it) and "why wouldn't you"? She pushes the sell pretty hard, IMO. My personal feeling about that is based on both his case/trial behavior and even about what he's doing with this book. I refuse to put any of my money in his pocket, because to me, that is rewarding disgusting behavior. Am I a little hypocritical for reading the snippets that others are posting, and for taking some pleasure in what he's putting out there about JA? Yep, I think I probably am, no argument. But my money is staying in my ethical/hypocritical pocket...

 

[RickshawFan]

Hello to all, it has been a while!!!

I still have to catch up (haven't started this thread yet) but just read where Nurmi has written a book about the sadistic convict he represented

A few thoughts/opinions about this new development:
1) he released this "book" now (hence in three parts) to beat Juan to the punch, :sick::maddening:
2) IMO He would have had to have let his license to practice go in order to divulge any "factual information" on the convict (right??), so I expect the info to be "opinion" based, :thinking:
3) I absolutely will not put money in his pocket but I am curious :blushing:,
4) While I do not like him, nor do I believe he had to go to the extraordinarily disgusting lengths he went to during the trial in order to adequately defend "it", I do believe he wanted to get free of her and disliked her intensely, and
5) Because his was a forced knowledge and experience of the real evil of this convict, he probably had no choice but to defend her like he did for fear of the convict destroying his professional an/or personal life with her lies and manipulations

Ok, now I am off to catch up on the news :hanging:

Good post.

Much as I think Nurmi's defense tactics were despicable, I also feel sorry for him. After all, he got Jodi lobbed to him as a public defender. He was doing a very difficult job and providing a service to the community even if that job meant he was defending the worst of the worst. It's those accused that need public defenders. And our system of justice depends on public defenders as well as defense for the worst of the worst.

All the other public defenders assigned to this case managed to drop the "hot potato." Nurmi got stuck with it. He did everything he could to dump it on someone else. I'm sure he was angry enough with how he got railroaded into this case to stretch it out and make enough to retire, since it was going to ruin his reputation.

I also don't think we should be slamming him as a person. As far as I can tell, he's as private as Martinez and we don't know him except as a professional. I believe we should focus on what he did rather than who he is. I think his aptitude is fair game (e.g. "New Zealand is in Europe" LMAO), but not comments about his physique.

Wilmott, though, I have no sympathy for at all. She volunteered for the job and seemed to have lapped up the whole deal to such an egregious extent that she served on a paid domestic violence panel with ALV. Plus she was in way over her head, although she always seemed thrilled with her performance; this is immature as well as incompetent.

End of lecture.

 

[RickshawFan]

It does indeed appear that JA's big mouth has landed her in trouble with attorney/client privilege: in BK's latest blog, she notes that Nurmi writes in his book that JA waived that privilege when she complained to Troy Hayden that her defense team did not call witnesses that supposedly saw the bruises on her arm (caused by TA) when she knew the reasons why they were not called.


Yup, she likes to talk so much, she's talked herself into another hot spot! LOL

I don't understand why Jodi talking to a reporter would have abrogated attorney/client privilege. Can you clarify?

 

[RickshawFan]

Hi Nrdsb. BK=Beth Karas.She is a reporter/commentator who followed and covered the Aria trial very, very closely. She has a website, Karas on Crime, in which she covers criminal trials. HTH

BK also graduated from a top notch college, has a law degree (Fordham?), and is very sharp. Her opinions aren't always correct, however: sometimes they veer towards pessimistic. Her private channel is a newish startup (less than 1 year) and it is courageous of her to take her career in this direction. The site is still getting fine-tuned, but she tries very hard and provides information/documentation that isn't available elsewhere.

 

[Hope4More]

BBM--Thanks Hope, this is stunning "news" to me. Has she said why she believes this?

Kinda reeling at the thought that Juan would do anything that would jeopardize the hard-fought conviction he got on this insidious convict :stormingmad: :crying:.

I hope this is purely speculation and not fact lease: :crossfingers: .

He wouldn't. And his bosses wouldn't let him if he had an extended bout of temporary insanity or bonked his head so hard he forgot what was at stake and did anything at all to risk her conviction or life sentence.

I very very rarely am swayed to admire and respect anyone in a professional capacity as much as I do JM. He 's hard hitting and tough and can be scathing ( all qualities I admire but that clearly make BK uncomfortable), but I am entirely convinced he is as ethical as they come.

 

[samspace070]

For those with access to BK. She just posted a BK Live video about Nurmi's book.

And...last note about her blog. She seems to think there is some possibility JM in writing his book "handed " the killer a "gift" for her appeals and PCR .

I disagree, BK has in the past and present not tried to hide her dislike of Juan. She has defended KN again and again, even his writing of this DEBASING book about Arias. So when she talks about Juan handing a gift to the killer, I believe it is the other way around, It is NURMI that has handed her the gift but BK doesn't say that, why?:thinking:

 

[lewcch3]

I don't understand why Jodi talking to a reporter would have abrogated attorney/client privilege. Can you clarify?

It's my understanding that once she discusses information related to discussions with her attorneys with anyone else, she automatically waives that confidentiality.

There were a couple of posts way upstream that discussed this and I believe also that AZL stated the same.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[samspace070]

BBM--Thanks Hope, this is stunning "news" to me. Has she said why she believes this?

Kinda reeling at the thought that Juan would do anything that would jeopardize the hard-fought conviction he got on this insidious convict :stormingmad: :crying:.

I hope this is purely speculation and not fact lease: :crossfingers: .

I think it is speculation from her colored view point. AZL hasn't said that and neither has some other commentators. Nurmi on the other hand could cause a problem, because she wrote that long letter to the judge complaining about his behavior before the retrial.

BK makes the excuse for KN by saying he was defending himself from what CMJA said in her interview with TH. But in that same interview she out and out called Juan a liar over and over again. She said he hid evidence etc. etc. So doesn't Juan have the same right as KN to defend himself from this scurrilous attack by this monster???

 

[samspace070]

To be fair, remember that Beth believed the initial lies from the defense team about the computer. I take things from her with a grain of salt- I like her- but I am careful after some of her 'legal' opinions during the trial.

I am with you Frigga, I have subscribed to her site for the information about texts and the journal entries not her blog and not her talking about the case. I will probable watch the podcast with Clement, because I like his analysis on so many trials and people. BK is a lot like Jean Casaras (probable spelled that name wrong) neither one likes Juan for some reason. Monica Lindstrom is real bad about Juan. I watched court TV for years, and BK was on there a lot so was Jean C. Monica Lindstrom is a defense lawyer from AZ, so her dislike of Juan is understandable. M. Keifer is an out of control journalist on a crusade to bring him down. I can't stand M. Kiefer and won't read anything he writes.

 

[G&AMom]

IANAL, but I have heard that bar associations have somewhere you can present a question about whether it is ethical to do something, where a lawyer could call and ask if they can do such-and-such.

Could any of our legal experts weigh in on whether that's true?

 

[samspace070]

Overall I like her, but Beth has been wrong on a couple fairly big issues, and for some reason I always come to the conclusion that she holds some degree of bias against JM. I too think JM has probably been very careful about what is in his book, and wouldn't be at all surprised if he's asked for input from other attorneys. I did pre-order it, but am actually prepared for it to not be all that interesting because of that.

On her podcast/video, I noticed that she doesn't understand why anyone would have any qualms about buying Nurmi's book, she says "ethics aside" (meaning the professional ethics of writing it) and "why wouldn't you"? She pushes the sell pretty hard, IMO. My personal feeling about that is based on both his case/trial behavior and even about what he's doing with this book. I refuse to put any of my money in his pocket, because to me, that is rewarding disgusting behavior. Am I a little hypocritical for reading the snippets that others are posting, and for taking some pleasure in what he's putting out there about JA? Yep, I think I probably am, no argument. But my money is staying in my ethical/hypocritical pocket...

LOL, I so agree LinTx. Hypocrite I am. I read every snippet from his book posted on twitter or WS, I also am a subscriber to BKs site and I watched the video she gave today. Very very bias and yes she was pushing KN's book hard. I will not spend one thin dime on his book, a book which BK assures everyone he wrote himself, whereas Juan has a ghost writer that BK knows. She had to put that in there. If KN wrote his own book, that could explain why he had to self publish.

Without even knowing what Juan has written she condemns him for unethical behavior but not KN. :thinking: Juan is too smart and so is Bill Montgomery. Juan will not cross any lines like KN did, IMO. The ABA doesn't do a whole lot to attorneys that cross the ethical lines at least not in my state, MO. So I seriously doubt they will do much with Nurmi. But I bet CMJA is climbing the walls and her supporters are flooding KN's twitter and mail box and phone with hate mail. LOL

 

[AZlawyer]

It's my understanding that once she discusses information related to discussions with her attorneys with anyone else, she automatically waives that confidentiality.

There were a couple of posts way upstream that discussed this and I believe also that AZL stated the same.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Yes, she would waive confidentiality as to what she said, but not as to everything else.

IANAL, but I have heard that bar associations have somewhere you can present a question about whether it is ethical to do something, where a lawyer could call and ask if they can do such-and-such.

Could any of our legal experts weigh in on whether that's true?

Yes, we have an Ethics Hotline, but you can only call about your own behavior, and only if you haven't made a decision yet. So I couldn't call to ask what they think about KN's book haha. Plus they hardly ever answer the phone....

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

IANAL, but I have heard that bar associations have somewhere you can present a question about whether it is ethical to do something, where a lawyer could call and ask if they can do such-and-such.

Could any of our legal experts weigh in on whether that's true?

In the two states I am licensed in, yes that is true.