I dont understand how any of that works; if a person was able to retain a lawyer by whatever means prior to being arrested; wouldn't that negate having an attorney provided for you at any point after that?
How does that usually work?
As for the attorney who held the press conference; I cant imagine he got the reputation for being a very good/effective and therefore expensive lawyer out of just thin air....he must have the wins to support his good reputation, but like many here have said, his demeanor at his press conference as well as his written statement on behalf of the parents that was released prior to that sort of surprised me, or at least wasnt what I expected. Perhaps his being a good lawyer is partly due to speaking very casually in public, like a "normal" person recounting a case about a friend or an acquaintance instead of a lawyer recounting the case of a client. Perhaps that's just his "friendly poodle" demeanor while in public and in a courtroom he's more like a " fierce bulldog?" I could see how that might give him an edge; gain the trust and likeability of the general public and give other lawyers who he may go up against a false sense of security in expecting an easy win?
No idea, just rambling at this point really. I definitely find him interesting to say the least; I dont think he's as easy to read/figure out as I may have initially figured after watching the press conference the first time.
