Thanks you, thank you. He's GOT to know his client is lying, yet he's trying to get her to lie even more dramatically!! The entire SD claim is simply a way to trash Travis. Nurmi KNOWS it was not SD, but has no problem eliciting false testimony from his client.
There are ethics involved, and IMO, Nurmi has crossed the line of obligation long ago. We also know he lied to Sky - was this part of his "obligation"?
I agree with Sky's opinion of him as a snake.
I agree that this JA defense is very troubling since it is HIGHLY likely that the entire defense team knows the self defense story is a total fabrication. Similarly Jose Baez promised a totally concocted implausible indeed risible story that George killed Casey. Baez naturally had to know this alternative theory was ludicrous yet he set about presenting it as if it truly happened. Baez was and is highly unethical and his ilk denigrates US jurisprudence. The defense attorney community all claim they are duty bound to do ALL possible to free their client or mitigate the sentence their clients receive. Defense lawyers are officers of the court and swear to be HONEST and NOT to suborn perjury. Nurmi et al are CLEARLY violating this code of ethics unless Nurmi et al are insane.
Jose Baez et al also violated the code of ethics and continues to do so with a broad smile. The OJ Simpson lawyers however did not violate this code of ethics. The Simpson team attacked the states evidence and credibility which tactic is totally appropriate and proper.
So the new age of Media Circus Trials where a defense team provides us with far flung ridiculous stories PLUS Media Talking Head *advertiser censored* opining how brilliant such moves are has reduced these serious matters as nothing more than low brow crime TV entertainment.
I also believe crime channels and networks ie In Session are complicit in this degradation of jurisprudence since these high profile trials are treated as nothing more than sporting events. The daily trial clips are treated as football replays for the viewing audience. For TV network executives justice is irrelevant and jurisprudence means bleeping out the word ejaculation.
Talking heads squeamishly talk about - that dirty word - ______ sex and that erect _____ while smirking and implying to the viewing audience how ghastly- how outrageous and then privately note with grave interest what their overnight ratings were.
The In Session talking head forum is geared strictly as a shouting match - just like Housewives of NJ are supposed to scream at each other. It boosts their ratings. If the talking heads were ever confronted with this charge they would sanctimoniously deny any degrading effects of their show or comments and invoke the audience right to know. The female commentators spend more time getting their faces foreheads and lips botoxed and arranging their TV compatible wardrobe than actually viewing the trial transcript.
Sadly, outrageous defense tactics when TV coverage is present - and TVs love of train wrecks and the grotesque are part of the American low brow culture. It indicates that trial lawyers, murderers, breathless TV commentators characterize a new genre of American entertainment.
