Cyndy Short Press Conference~31 October 2011

[EarlyT79]

I thought it a bit odd that CS was announcing daily press releases, tours of the home, etc. Her intentions may have been good-hearted to help the perception of the family in the community, but there's a fine line between appropriate media interaction and overexposure.In high profile cases, every word, sigh, body movement is scrutinized. With each statement, presser, tour, interview, you risk your message being misconstrued or twisted. In advocating for a client publicly, you need to be able to control the message.

Regardless JT's reasons for representing the family (and considering the role of an attorney is to protect clients), I think it was a good decision not to allow those things to happen. That's not to say it's necessarily in Lisa's best interests - unfortunately, her best interests and those of his clients may not be one and the same.

That said, it's a shame CS is off the case completely since she has an easy, earnest manner about her and could have been a big help to the family in dealing with local media and the community.

Sensible words Sherbie.

Color navy-by me

 

[SilkySifaka]

I do wonder about that, particularly in light of the contradictory statements regarding time of questioning by LE and JT. I'm wondering if the boys were questioned by independent investigators brought in by BS or JT, and Short was displeased by their tactics. Or perhaps she saw it have a negative effect on the boys.

Or, perhaps she's concerned about false memories, if LE are coming across as targeting DB. I can think of a few reasons why she wouldn't want the boys questioned again, and since she's privy to more information on the case than me, I'm thinking she's probably got a good reason. I think there's more to this than plain stonewalling.

Plus, if it were her against it and JT for it, then why did JT cancel? Very confusing.

I can see why imo. He had a 2nd attorney going rogue on him, doing things he didn't approve of, so he had to fire her..talk to the family about that and cancel media appearances made without his ok. Then interviews were meant to be Friday when he fired her (or the day before he fired her), he wasn't in KC and needed to get another co counsel, find someone reliable to drive the parents and kids there..going on their own would have led to a gauntlet imo they have no experience in traversing. He also wants someone to be a witness behind the glass door IMO and that wasn't going to be done in a few hours.

So he cancelled those for logistics reasons as CS said.

IMO

 

[Emeralgem]

Plus, if it were her against it and JT for it, then why did JT cancel? Very confusing.

Snipped...

BBM.. I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around this too...Doesn't make a heck-of-a-lotta sense to me...JMHO

 

[Donjeta]

Plus, if it were her against it and JT for it, then why did JT cancel? Very confusing.

Snipped for space.

I don't think JT is for it any more than CS was, he just is more inclined to give the public the impression that he is very cooperative and about to give his blessing. But we'll see the stars aligned against the interview and it will be postponed and cancelled again. x I thought he was very slippery when he spoke about letting the boys be interviewed. He said, absolutely, it's very important for the boys to be interviewed, but it was not important enough to make the logistics work... He said he wants to make sure it's all done in a very professional and non-traumatic way - but I thought they had already agreed about all that when the children were supposed to go on Friday. He said it was not productive to tell the media when and whether there is an appointment, which I took to mean that he doesn't want it to make the news when they stall and cancel and eventually decline and there is no appointment.

Just MOO and I'll be very happy to be wrong.

 

[Amster]

Having a press conference to bash the lead counsel is pretty juvenile and unprofessional IMO. JT may be aggressive and at times obnoxious, but if you were in a heap of trouble, you would want him. He is a superb litigator and strategist and, like all great litigators, a control freak.

No....I would want him nowhere near me.

 

[gitana1]

I don't know Ms. Short's motives with this presser. But, I will say this, what an excellent opportunity to promote herself and her services:

- My clients and I love each other; my being fired was a grand-standing attorney's choice

- I have utmost faith and dedication to my clients; I will fight for them and profess their innocence even if it's on my own time

- I have a large caring staff and I stay engaged; I keep my feet on the ground working for my clients

- I am aggressive and compassionate

Maybe Ms. Short truly believes in DB/JI and wants to help find Lisa. Maybe she is making sure it is known to potential clients that she was not fired directly by her highest-profile clients, while promoting herself and her services to a much larger audience than she'd usually get. Maybe both.

Bye Ms. Short. Help find Lisa using your local resources, good on you (sincerely). You were dismissed, fair or not. Thank you for the final (I hope) press conference.
:seeya:

I agree.

I think I'm criticising her for having any whiny, self-serving press conference AT ALL when a simple PROFESSIONAL statement along the lines that she and JT had differences in the way they wanted to proceed with the case and therefore she had regretfully decided to step down would have done. No, I don't absolve JT either, I'm disgusted by just about everyone who is supposedly advising this family, they are ALL in it for themselves IMO.

I didn't see it, so I don't know if her tone was whiny. Many posters do not think it was. However, I think a short, professional statement to the press, in writing, would have been preferable. I absolutely think she was looking out for herself and her business, rather than for baby Lisa. And looking out for baby Lisa is not her job, so I get that. I just feel that a lot of integrity is flying out the door in connection to this case.

I may get a time out for this,but their is a whole lot of bashing going on with the people in KC- LE,Media and now a lawyer-It just wrong!!! JMO,JMO!! These people just can't get it right I guess!!!! Not all LE,Media and Lawyers are bad !!

No, but as a lawyer, I disagree with what she did here. I'm on the fence. I don't criticize everything the pro-innocence side does or says. But I feel there are too many people involved in this case who are looking out for number one, and not baby Lisa, the truly innocent person in all of this.

If I had a reputation like her-I would be on TV trying to repair it to.Her profession is her bread and butter.The rumors hitting the community that you were fired by a guy like JT and having all the other rumors flying-yes I would be telling people of MY community the reason why I left a high profile case.JMO

Yes. I agree. But a written statement would have been more professional at this stage, IMO. Every presser of this sort takes the focus off finding this baby, and onto the circus atmosphere. That's scary to me.

I liked her too, surprised myself! And I don't blame her one bit for wanting to clarify what happened. She has a business, she doesn't want to be seen as incompetent. The majority of people are going to think she was kicked off the case because she wasn't good enough. That doesn't really inspire confidence in a defense attorney. People hire defense attorneys that can win, not ones that get "fired" from cases. I would have done the same thing if I felt it would affect my livelihood. MOO

I understand her reasons for wanting to do it, but I don't like it. It seemed like grandstanding and perhaps she felt it was necessary, but a written statement would have been more professional, IMO.

I haven't seen her at all yet and am not sure about her tactics, but there does seem to be a turf war going on here. And the flashier sorts seem to be winning out. I heard another local defense attorney state that he was baffled and disturbed by the decision to let this woman go. That she is an excellent defense attorney. I think this family is making some major mistakes, taken in by smarmy people who impress with their flash and bluster. That's a shame because it leads us no closer to finding Lisa.

And that being said, I think that even local, dedicated professionals are being somewhat influenced by the notoriety of this case. Like Ms. Short. I can only hope that LE and the state's attorney's office don't go the same route as everyone else connected to this case has.

 

[vlpate]

Is there evidence or data that establishes that holding up a baby's picture or referring to them by one pronoun vs. another pronoun vs. their name leads to better outcomes like finding the baby or the truth?

Or does the evidence merely suggest these particulars make those people not involved in the case feel better?

Honestly, we here in KC are not suffering from a lack of Baby Lisa photos, or use of her name. Seriously, she's everywhere -- thankfully.

Frankly, IMO, I prefer people in my community act like CS and actually worry more about matter-of-fact honesty that focuses our city on finding this little girl and worry less about a dog a pony show meant for pacifying the critics and national press -- that's the kind of thing JT can bill this "benefactor" for.

I think the evidence suggests that the more exposure a child's picture receives, the better the chances are that someone might recognize them. You know, milk cartons and all? It's not about KC suffering from a lack of photos, I don't think anyone said that - it's about national exposure being a huge gift that everyone, including the Bradwins, let pass them by.

Dog and pony show.... again, they should ride that pony for all it's worth because someday another child's story will come along and steal the show.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Snipped for space.

I don't think JT is for it any more than CS was, he just is more inclined to give the public the impression that he is very cooperative and about to give his blessing. But we'll see the stars aligned against the interview and it will be postponed and cancelled again. x I thought he was very slippery when he spoke about letting the boys be interviewed. He said, absolutely, it's very important for the boys to be interviewed, but it was not important enough to make the logistics work... He said he wants to make sure it's all done in a very professional and non-traumatic way - but I thought they had already agreed about all that when the children were supposed to go on Friday. He said it was not productive to tell the media when and whether there is an appointment, which I took to mean that he doesn't want it to make the news when they stall and cancel and eventually decline and there is no appointment.

Just MOO and I'll be very happy to be wrong.

Amazing how much you and I think alike, Donjeta. I was just about to type these exact thoughts.

JT clearly sets up an escape route in this interview, so that later, when he's questioned about why he said he'd allow the interviews, and then reneged, he can say, "I never said the boys would be interviewed, what I said was..."

 

[chieftess]

Is there evidence or data that establishes that holding up a baby's picture or referring to them by one pronoun vs. another pronoun vs. their name leads to better outcomes like finding the baby or the truth?

Or does the evidence merely suggest these particulars make those people not involved in the case feel better?

Honestly, we here in KC are not suffering from a lack of Baby Lisa photos, or use of her name. Seriously, she's everywhere -- thankfully.

Frankly, IMO, I prefer people in my community act like CS and actually worry more about matter-of-fact honesty that focuses our city on finding this little girl and worry less about a dog a pony show meant for pacifying the critics and national press -- that's the kind of thing JT can bill this "benefactor" for.

BBM...
Hitting the thanks button didn't seem like enough
As a KC native, IMO, most of us are not star struck nor impressed by someone who is from NYC.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

I can see why imo. He had a 2nd attorney going rogue on him, doing things he didn't approve of, so he had to fire her..talk to the family about that and cancel media appearances made without his ok. Then interviews were meant to be Friday when he fired her (or the day before he fired her), he wasn't in KC and needed to get another co counsel, find someone reliable to drive the parents and kids there..going on their own would have led to a gauntlet imo they have no experience in traversing. He also wants someone to be a witness behind the glass door IMO and that wasn't going to be done in a few hours.

So he cancelled those for logistics reasons as CS said.

IMO

And all this evidence that the attorney was going rogue on him just came to him the day before the boys were to be questioned and the firing could not wait until after they were? Not seeing the sense in that.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Is there evidence or data that establishes that holding up a baby's picture or referring to them by one pronoun vs. another pronoun vs. their name leads to better outcomes like finding the baby or the truth?

Or does the evidence merely suggest these particulars make those people not involved in the case feel better?

Honestly, we here in KC are not suffering from a lack of Baby Lisa photos, or use of her name. Seriously, she's everywhere -- thankfully.

Frankly, IMO, I prefer people in my community act like CS and actually worry more about matter-of-fact honesty that focuses our city on finding this little girl and worry less about a dog a pony show meant for pacifying the critics and national press -- that's the kind of thing JT can bill this "benefactor" for.

Who is to say Lisa is still in KC? I am sure the national media will cover this news conference.

 

[Velouria]

LOL...I don't have sound so I'm reading the posts here and it sure sounds like it was all about her. :innocent:

Oh brother.

BBM

Just like her former clients, unfortunately.

MOO

 

[gitana1]

Having a press conference to bash the lead counsel is pretty juvenile and unprofessional IMO. JT may be aggressive and at times obnoxious, but if you were in a heap of trouble, you would want him. He is a superb litigator and strategist and, like all great litigators, a control freak.

I think I'd want him if I were guilty. Maybe not even then, though:

http://20poundsofheadlines.wordpres...of-joe-tacopina-headline-the-devils-advocate/

JT takes the cases no one else wants, the lost causes. He doesn't care if they are guilty or not, he does work hard to get them off. But, for a fee. He charges $750.00 an hour.

Now, here's the thing, we know he can't be getting paid for this case. So why has he taken it? Publicity. And I don't think very highly paid, high profile, flashy lawyers who have shown they have no scruples and who are suddenly taking a well-known case for free, necessarily have their client's best interests at heart. They may swoop in for a bit to make sure their name is attached to the case, and then swoop out. At his level, it doesn't matter if he does a great job for them or not. And at his level, some of these guys tend to let their fame go to their heads. It becomes all about them, not the case or the clients. That's dangerous. :twocents:

 

[SilkySifaka]

And all this evidence that the attorney was going rogue on him just came to him the day before the boys were to be questioned and the firing could not wait until after they were? Not seeing the sense in that.

No but there was obviously a tipping point during the week. She was fired on Thurs iirc. You know..ok daily press releases was one thing, he probably didn't like it but..then came the presser announcement and then media tour..I doubt he fired her on a whim but he wasn't necessarily going to until they had it out.

He may have not planned to until the last time they spoke before he did.

It was a busy week for CS in the plans she made. If she started really obstructing his determined strategy by not accepting that as lead attorney he called the shots, it could have happened quickly (the firing itself)

Either way the easiest thing to do given that there was no one else IN KC to help with the logistics at that point was to cancel and reschedule.

 

[Peazzzer]

Any way I look at it, DB is responsible for Lisa being gone.Her drinking and having her adult time is a bogus, lame, excuse imo, for the lifestyle she chose to live,-I am not judging her as she is not the first or the last to have this lifestyle. CS seems to have a good reputation and I hope she will try to find her. Why not, as LE seems to be the only ones trying to find her, without anyone helping. The whole mess is just wearing me out and I feel that DB, JI, and JT are wanting us all to throw up our hands in exasperation! Yes, I'M thisclose, but I'm not going away.

 

[cowtowner]

I think the evidence suggests that the more exposure a child's picture receives, the better the chances are that someone might recognize them. You know, milk cartons and all? It's not about KC suffering from a lack of photos, I don't think anyone said that - it's about national exposure being a huge gift that everyone, including the Bradwins, let pass them by.

Dog and pony show.... again, they should ride that pony for all it's worth because someday another child's story will come along and steal the show.

This PC was not national. If the national media picks it up, there's no reason they can't put a picture of the baby up in a side-by-side.

 

[Amster]

JT didn't fire CS....DB and JI did. They want nothing to do with local people....media, LE, attorneys....I so wish the locals would listen. No donations to keep them in wine and ciggys. No shots of DB crying on cue at vigils. Just ignore them.

 

[cowtowner]

Who is to say Lisa is still in KC? I am sure the national media will cover this news conference.

The national media was not at the PC. The local media covered it. The same local media that is running every single tidbit with the girl's picture in the masthead.

 

[SilkySifaka]

I think I'd want him if I were guilty. Maybe not even then, though:

http://20poundsofheadlines.wordpres...of-joe-tacopina-headline-the-devils-advocate/

JT takes the cases no one else wants, the lost causes. He doesn't care if they are guilty or not, he does work hard to get them off. But, for a fee. He charges $750.00 an hour.

Now, here's the thing, we know he can't be getting paid for this case. So why has he taken it? Publicity. And I don't think very highly paid, high profile, flashy lawyers who have shown they have no scruples and who are suddenly taking a well-known case for free, necessarily have their client's best interests at heart. They may swoop in for a bit to make sure their name is attached to the case, and then swoop out. At his level, it doesn't matter if he does a great job for them or not. And at his level, some of these guys tend to let their fame go to their heads. It becomes all about them, not the case or the clients. That's dangerous. :twocents:

Gtana, he is known for victims advocacy as well. In fact he has been involved with a few high profile cases in that capacity for families. (and I mean families where there was no doubt they were innocent)

He is very very good at what he does and yes that is why LE go to him when they are in trouble. It is easy to just think publicity hound but he has no real need for extra publicity, he is known around the country and by many around Europe too where he takes cases.

I think he took this one because he saw the parents were being targeted and believed they were not involved. Whether he will stay if there is a trial is a different scenario, he may not be willing to do pro bono work in that case (if he is now) given the extra work or he might.

He likes to win and does win. Not every case but a good number, enough to give him the reputation he has which is if you need a defense attorney he is a good one to have. He has to my frustration won a couple of LE ones which I wish he hadn't lol - his client in the abner louima case for example.

Then again top flight defense attorneys have egos as big as Texas. So yes there is that part of it, but I don't see him taking cases where he doesn't care. He has no need for it, he can pick and choose. Plus those alpha male egos do not taking losing lightly at any time

 

[cowtowner]

JT didn't fire CS....DB and JI did. They want nothing to do with local people....media, LE, attorneys....I so wish the locals would listen. No donations to keep them in wine and ciggys. No shots of DB crying on cue at vigils. Just ignore them.

Uh, I'm a local -- listen to what?

With all due respect, what are we locals missing that this uber-informed national audience is so keenly aware of?

Please don't tell my neighbors and I we shouldn't be donating to efforts to find a missing child in our community. Please don't tell our media what to film. We prefer to be wide-eyed -- we are the Show Me State, after all.