FL - Abraham Shakespeare, 42, lottery winner, Polk County, 7 April 2009 #5

[Jesikah1]

I think that she is a sociopath. and I think that she might run, but I don't think that she will kill herself. She has no fear from what it seems and feels as though she will be able to outsmart everybody. Also, from what we have seen she is perfectly comfortable playing the victim. The sad part is, she will probably be just fine behind bars, she'll just fill her emptiness by manipulating those around her, but for far lesser stakes.

The amazing part to me is how bad she is at the con, like when reading her "son's" posts, the language got more elementary and the spelling regressed the more this "person" posted. trying to act as though all the previous posts came from a child. It was so obvious, yet if this was her, she has been running scams for years. Not all that successfully, but she doesn't seem to get any real punishment either. This case better change that...should she end up being responsible.

I think that her ex-husband has a role in this given her responses to any mention of him. For the most part, she has said everybody else is to blame (well except for the sheriff) for everything but got very defensive when his name was brought up, always stating how much of a straight shooter he is. I am curious about this, although don't know how to interpret it, just feel as though it is important. So I guess my question to all you guys is at this point, what role do you think the POI had in the murder? Were they the mastermind, or was there somebody else connected to them pulling the shots?

I know that all this has been discussed, but would love to know what people are thinking now that the most important question about this case has been answered. I apologize for rambling, but this person in question just dumbfounds me, is there any explanation for their actions other than just pure evil?

 

[Boyz_Mum]

Wasn't the lawyer's last name Franklin?
Yep.
http://www.realpagessites.com/franklinlawfirm/index.html
He's a criminal attorney for 20 years. I'm sure along the way he has represented all sorts of guilty people and to ensure they got due process of the law. After 20 years, you would think he would have seen it all. So what do you have to do to get an experienced criminal attorney to drop you? What really bad thing must you have done to have him come out and say it is for moral or ethical reasons?

Great questions!

If you were an attorney and someone (client) gave you too much info (as DM did here and we're not attorneys) would you drop the client because you feel they're guilty? Would that be a "moral reason" to drop a client? DM talked a lot here. If she talked that much here, would/could she have said a lot more in his office?

Regarding "ethics", if this attorney worked with anyone associated with the case (for example, if he worked alongside HDS or even with AS when he got in trouble) would that be an "ethical reason" to drop DM as a client?

I'm curious to know his reasons for dropping DM. I do wonder if it's possible that he may have been a part of something that will eventually tie into this case or cases that may arise from it.

At first when I read that he dropped her as a client, I felt a little apprehensive about him. Now, I'm not sure I feel that way because I don't know a lot about being a criminal lawyer and wonder what types of things can get in the way of presenting a successful defense?

JMO and just my own questions, too.

 

[Boyz_Mum]

Wonder what she wrote all the other forums!

If she was upset about what was said here imagine what she thought about the others who do not have a Tricia!!!

I am not sure what DM posted at other forums or as comments that appear after some of the articles. The reason I honestly believe she posted here, in her own name (and then blamed it on everyone she thought she could) was because this site has had what appeared to be the most comments in one place and 'was' the only site I could find that was 'digging' into the case. (Thanks wth and lbminn!) I also believe that DM was trying to appeal to the compassion that is shown on this site (the people who post here and the mods and administration).

All JMO.

 

[Susan1]

I'm sure in his 20 years of criminal experience, he has defended quite a few people who have told him that they were guilty of crimes. I believe at that point he has an obligation as an attorney to not let them take the stand if he knows they will perjure themselves. Instead, the client takes the 5th and sits it out.
If the client still insists on taking the stand and the lawyer knows they will perjure themselves, I guess the lawyer would be morally and ethically obligated to drop the client.
But you are right. This is not a large legal community and it is very possible he could have worked with another person who appears to be likely to be charged in the some of the same crimes. And when the finger pointing starts between the two defendants, that could create a conflict. I'd say that would be a real good ethical reason to drop your client.
I wonder how she chose him as an attorney. He's in Bartow. She's in Plant City / Lakeland. I wonder who recommended him.

 

[Jesikah1]

Not to be cynical, but do you think his motivation for dropping her might have to do with probable guilt, the freezing of ill-gained assets, and not being able to pay for considerable legal fees?

Or could he have been conned by her or an associate?

His statements have sure been curious and could mean a variety of things. I hope that for once this guy has disassociated himself from DM because of ethical reasons as opposed as being yet another player in this crazy web.

 

[Susan1]

Does anyone remember what the lawyer said when he dropped her about more may be forthcoming? Reason I ask is because as her lawyer, he has a duty to keep what they discuss confidential, nothing more forthcoming, UNLESS she tells him about a crime she is going to commit in the future. I believe at that point he would be obligated to tell the police and drop her as a client. I'm not real sure about this. Maybe there is a lawyer amongst us who could tell me if I'm right.

 

[Jesikah1]

If she is lucky, and I hope she is not, with the national attention the case is getting, she may get a high profile lawyer who will take it for the publicity. She doesn't qualify for a public defender now that she has taken all Abraham's money. It really burns me that she will now use his money to defend herself for what she has done to him. It's like the ultimate slap in the face.

Wow, so she will be able to use the money gotten from Abraham towards anything she wants until when? I mean I know that nobody has been charged but I thought if charged, money suspected of being gained illegally would be frozen. I must be mistaken on this, how sad

If convicted of defrauding Abraham and/or murdering him would the suspects turned convicted have to repay all the money? (I know that this rarely happens, but is that how it is supposed to happen in cases like these?)

 

[Susan1]

Not to be cynical, but do you think his motivation for dropping her might have to do with probable guilt, the freezing of ill-gained assets, and not being able to pay for considerable legal fees?

Or could he have been conned by her or an associate?

His statements have sure been curious and could mean a variety of things. I hope that for once this guy has disassociated himself from DM because of ethical reasons as opposed as being yet another player in this crazy web.

I hadn't even thought about that. Excellent point. Abraham is found murdered. They move to have all the assets frozen, just like Michael Ford had Abraham's assets frozen for awhile. Since there is an excellent chance that unlike Ford, the family would win and be able to get Abraham's assets back, then there would be no money for the lawyers in what will probably be a very expensive trial to have to defend.

And more would be forthcoming, just not from him. When the assets are frozen, it becomes public record and the media will cover it.

I so hope that happens.

 

[Jesikah1]

Does anyone remember what the lawyer said when he dropped her about more may be forthcoming? Reason I ask is because as her lawyer, he has a duty to keep what they discuss confidential, nothing more forthcoming, UNLESS she tells him about a crime she is going to commit in the future. I believe at that point he would be obligated to tell the police and drop her as a client. I'm not real sure about this. Maybe there is a lawyer amongst us who could tell me if I'm right.

Taken from the following link: http://policelink.monster.com/train...y-client-privilege-in-criminal-investigations
"The Crime-Fraud Exception: Clark v. United States, 289 U.S. 1, 15 (1933)
The most important exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege as related to criminal investigations is the Crime-Fraud Exception which holds that attorneys are required to disclose confidential client information and/or communications to the court when necessary. Specifically, disclosure is required as a means preventing the client from abusing the attorney-client relationship by using as a means to facilitate criminal activity."

 

[Susan1]

You know who really needs a high profile attorney to help them is Abraham's family; his mother and his children. That money should have gone to them. Michael Ford was able to freeze Abraham's assets pretty darn quick. The prosecutor will put them away for any crimes they committed. But what they need is a really good civil attorney to come in and protect their financial interests from these vultures.

 

[Jesikah1]

You bring up some really good questions Susan1. I have another one. I always thought that criminals were not allowed to admit guilt to their attorneys and still plead not guilty. I know that defense attorneys represent people they "think" or highly suspect as being guilty all the time, but I thought they did not want clients to admit anything. Does this ring true to anybody else? Or have I just watched too much T.V.?
My father is an attorney, albeit in contract law, but perhaps I could get his perspective on the matter, as there are surely guilty parties in business law

 

[Boyz_Mum]

You bring up some really good questions Susan1. I have another one. I always thought that criminals were not allowed to admit guilt to their attorneys and still plead not guilty. I know that defense attorneys represent people they "think" or highly suspect as being guilty all the time, but I thought they did not want clients to admit anything. Does this ring true to anybody else? Or have I just watched too much T.V.?
My father is an attorney, albeit in contract law, but perhaps I could get his perspective on the matter, as there are surely guilty parties in business law

I am not sure but I don't think a defense attorney wants a client to tell them if they're guilty and if the client were to do that, I would think morally and ethically the lawyer would 'drop' the client? DM didn't seem to be able to stop talking. She gave newspaper interviews and posted comments here. Maybe she talked herself into the proverbial "corner" and gave the attorney no other choice? How adequate can legal counsel be if the lawyer thinks or knows a person is guilty?

JMO.

 

[LadyL]

If she is lucky, and I hope she is not, with the national attention the case is getting, she may get a high profile lawyer who will take it for the publicity. She doesn't qualify for a public defender now that she has taken all Abraham's money. It really burns me that she will now use his money to defend herself for what she has done to him. It's like the ultimate slap in the face.

can't they freeze 'her' assets if she is accused of fraud in the commission of a murder or whatever the actual name of the charge is?

I've seen it done in cases here

 

[Susan1]

You bring up some really good questions Susan1. I have another one. I always thought that criminals were not allowed to admit guilt to their attorneys and still plead not guilty. I know that defense attorneys represent people they "think" or highly suspect as being guilty all the time, but I thought they did not want clients to admit anything. Does this ring true to anybody else? Or have I just watched too much T.V.?
My father is an attorney, albeit in contract law, but perhaps I could get his perspective on the matter, as there are surely guilty parties in business law

I was so intrigued by this point, I could not wait for your dad to wake up so I had to go google it up. And here is what I found:
http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com/can-lawyers-lie.aspx
Go about 1/2 way down to:
Can Lawyers Defend Clients They Know are Guilty?
They say that the lawyer can defend the client they know is guilty AND they can plead Not Guilty because everyone is innocent until proven guilty. What it goes on to say is that the lawyer cannot allow the client to take the stand if they know the clients will perjure themselves. Another article even went so far to say that if the client did perjure themselves, the lawyer has to speak to the judge privately and let the judge know. Another case where they can break confidentiality.
I use to work for legal aid (paralegal) and our firm would represent many people charged with crimes who would admit their guilt to the attorney. I worked the civil unit so I wasn't as familiar with just how that works.

 

[Susan1]

I don't remember Rusty Franklin being one of the ones they found dirt on. There was a Franklin Jackson, I believe, who was Abraham's business partner in the beginning, but I don't think he was an attorney. Back then it was Cedric.

 

[Jesikah1]

This is sort of off-topic but this scenario would be the type that I would be fearful of getting involved in. (If I was in the legal profession.) There are just so many nefarious characters running around.

I remember in mid-December I got a scam call on my cell phone from a Florida area code and got kind of paranoid, because of this case. I mean anything can be connected from the internet, as proven in this case! Enough to where I called the number's carrier to make them aware of what was being done from the number. I am sure that this was just coincidence, but the people associated with DM scare me even more than DM herself, as we just don't know how deep these connections run and where they originate from.

 

[Jesikah1]

Thank You Susan1 for clearing that up! I guess I have watched too many movies Very interesting points for sure.

 

[Boyz_Mum]

Thank you Susan1!

Now I'm really anxious to see what comes out of the attorney dropping DM as a client. I hope someday we hear an explaination/reason.

 

[LadyL]

I don't remember Rusty Franklin being one of the ones they found dirt on. There was a Franklin Jackson, I believe, who was Abraham's business partner in the beginning, but I don't think he was an attorney. Back then it was Cedric.

yep, that must be it
too many details,too little time
thanks susan

 

[Susan1]

This is sort of off-topic but this scenario would be the type that I would be fearful of getting involved in. (If I was in the legal profession.) There are just so many nefarious characters running around.

I remember in mid-December I got a scam call on my cell phone from a Florida area code and got kind of paranoid, because of this case. I mean anything can be connected from the internet, as proven in this case! Enough to where I called the number's carrier to make them aware of what was being done from the number. I am sure that this was just coincidence, but the people associated with DM scare me even more than DM herself, as we just don't know how deep these connections run and where they originate from.

I know how you feel about the paranoid bit. We trust police officers to protect confidential information. For example, if you give a police officer a tip about a violent criminal who is still walking the streets, you expect that your name will not come up unless it goes to Court and they need you as a witness. But when you get these dirty cops who will give these criminals confidential information if the price is right, like the one Dorice just recently paid off and who is on suspension, then the system breaks down. Who is going to want to given information if there is a chance your identity gets into the hands of a police officer who sells it to the highest bidder? So, I got a bit paranoid when the cop got arrested for giving a suspect private information. Again, our police forces have been great. They unearthed the story, they suspended him and they gave the story to the media. No cover up there.
When I found out he was giving her information, I did get paranoid.