LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,902
- Reaction score
- 24,591
I am not sure I agree with all of that. I think Nurmi put people on the stand he knew was lying (in essence suborning perjury) #1 witness he knew was lying JODI ARIAS. I think he would have put other witnesses on that he knew was lying except he knew Juan would impeach them easily and get more from them than he wanted. He knew how his pathological client would give Juan the run around with her aggravating non stop nonsense, just like she did him so he wasn't worried about her. Besides he couldn't control her. But the mother and sister were out of the question, they were obvious liars and easily impeached. Do more damage than good. The father, was just too honest for Nurmi's purpose. Matt McCartney had already been run over by the prosecutor and wanted nothing to do with testifying after that. So Nurmi had no noble purpose in not calling these witnesses.
He can be in major trouble with the Bar for putting someone on the stand he knows is lying. I know this for a fact, I've known several lawyers in my life on a personal basis, including a former close friend. The whole Dream Team knew OJ was lying, but you notice-he didn't testify in the criminal case, only the civil one. Many defense attorneys won't ask their clients if they are guilty, because they don't want to know.