LYONS AUDIO TAPES and BS VIDEO GONE? Discussion with R HORNSBY here

[Soju]

But I say this about every case I handle, my goal is to obtain the best possible resolution for my clients given the facts, the evidence, and the applicable law. At the time I saw an attorney who was exploiting his client's celebrity to the detriment of obtaining the best resolution possible. That made me angry as a criminal defense attorney.



And the only way a defense attorney can do that is to challenge each piece of evidence in the hope enough pieces are excluded and the State has to re-evaluate what they are willing to offer to resolve the case.

snipped with respect.

First, thank you for making yourself available to us.

When you talk about your approach to cases in finding the best resolution for your client, would you be above using the techniques set forth by Ms.Lyon?

Can you give your honest opinion on the things she said?

 

[RR0004]

I have to say (almost with regret) that I appreciate your candid answer to my question. In some ways I can see your point, but in other ways, I truly feel you were hoping to inject yourself into this case, where you felt a fellow attorney was failing miserably.

I want to believe your original motives, but I am also afraid that you have failed to further any objective legal intellect into this circus, when it was so sadly needed.

What we are looking for is legal insight into this case as it stands now and progressing forward. I would love for all the name calling to end, as it does not promote our needs and wants.

What I fear the most is what we have witnessed over the past few days (by all parties involved) will jade our opinion of our current legal system.

Do you share this fear? Please feel free to enlighten us.

Geez...you're such a mindreader. The Q and A we have going on now is exactly what we want. We're too far into this to hear anymore bs. I find the whole incident perpetrated against BS just another ring in the circus. I think the parties should be mindful of that...if they want to maintain an audience.

 

[rhornsby]

But worthy of tattling about?

Without a doubt it is worthy of tattling. I don't care if Ms. Lyon would not have said one inflammatory thing, the bottom line is these materials were dishonestly obtained to benefit Ms. Belich.

Think about it. Belich was all over Baez for "tainting the jury pool" with his Kronk theory - accusing him of being dishonest.

So what headline does she run with the dishonest materials? Anthony Defense Attorney Calls Jurors Killers.

And if you actually read what she said in context, she said some jurors will vote to kill your client and you don't want the killers on your jury (DUH!).

 

[RR0004]

I ain't him, but Baez asked. From the title of the email, Baez seemed to have posted right after the bail reduction hearing failed. I would surmise that Baez posted something like 'everyone is being so MEAN to me! What shall I do!' and Hornsby basically said, "Well, shut up. And shut Cindy up, too."

Blaise

Thanks...I had a lot of trouble following the type.

 

[chefmom]

My honest answer is absolutely not, actually just the opposite. No one likes what we do, but if we didn't exist, the entire country would be locked up.

This case is a train wreck because of Baez's initial handling, I think any other lawyer would have worked this case from a different angle.

Casey Anthony's behavior alone would make this case difficult to win, the "Kronks" of the case are just interesting sideshows from a legal perspective.

You can put all the lipstick you want on this pig, its still a pig...

I, personally, do not have any bias against defense attorneys as they are necessary in order for our constitution to be upheld. However, in this particular case, it seems that the defense is willing to pull out all stops no matter if they are in the right or not, no matter if other innocent people are damaged, no matter if true justice is served, as long as they are victorious. THAT is why so many here have a problem with Baez and Co. and the way they are handling this case. You start off with a mother who parties it up for 31 days without reporting her child missing, then lies and misdirects LE when they are finally involved, add in an attorney who proclaims his clients innocence that he will only be able to show in court because it does his client no good to reveal what she knows about her daughters whereabouts, and you have the makings of a three ring circus. Calling this case a pig is being overly nice. JMHO

 

[RR0004]

Deja vu! "Okay close your eyes......" Hmm? That sounds exactly like the closing argument of one Counselor Jake Brigance in A Time To Kill. Great movie!

So did Baez send his "any help or assistance" to every lawyer in the Orlando area?
Thanks!

ETA: If you thought Baez was a "fake" or whatever the term you used, why did you respond to his call for help?

I whole-heartedly agree with RR004....it is not so much Baez that we despise, it is his completely mockery of our legal system and his court antics that have us outraged.

Yup, why indeed? Are we aware of anyone else?

 

[Rlaub44]

My honest answer is absolutely not, actually just the opposite. No one likes what we do, but if we didn't exist, the entire country would be locked up.

This case is a train wreck because of Baez's initial handling, I think any other lawyer would have worked this case from a different angle.

Casey Anthony's behavior alone would make this case difficult to win, the "Kronks" of the case are just interesting sideshows from a legal perspective.

You can put all the lipstick you want on this pig, its still a pig...

If you would be so kind, one more question, and then I'm off to bed. Given what you know about this case so far, if you were defending Ms Anthony, do you think you may have recommended your client consider a plea deal?

And, seeing how Baez has functioned up until now, do you believe he might have ever considered a deal but was/would be overruled by his client, or do you think he may be convincing Casey that they have everything well in hand and are eager for trial?

OK, that's two questions ... thanks again for your candor.

 

[Blaise]

Wow, sounds like a Private Club for defense attorneys. They don't want to give out the secret handshake and proprietary decoder ring to prosecuting types and us Great Unwashed in the jury pool. Unless we pay royalties for their intellectual property.[/QUOTE=cecybeans;4484828]

Since it is a tax funded system all of this should be open to the public. We deserve to know what is going on in our own system.

How is a private seminar a tax funded system?

Blaise

 

[RR0004]

Without a doubt it is worthy of tattling. I don't care if Ms. Lyon would not have said one inflammatory thing, the bottom line is these materials were dishonestly obtained to benefit Ms. Belich.

Think about it. Belich was all over Baez for "tainting the jury pool" with his Kronk theory - accusing him of being dishonest.

So what headline does she run with the dishonest materials? Anthony Defense Attorney Calls Jurors Killers.

And if you actually read what she said in context, she said some jurors will vote to kill your client and you don't want the killers on your jury (DUH!).

IMO one is worthy of further investigation...and the other isn't. Anyway, I thought it was all about a leveled playing field and all that. I also don't understand why some compare the defense with the media. It's not the defense vs media...the media is NOT the State. So who the heck cares what they do. We, the public, have the right to make up our own minds. If you were so morally repulsed then fine...go tattle...but it's really not flattering to do this to a fellow attorney...especially for all the "world" to see. You don't have a dog in this fight, do you?

ETA: and since when does dishonesty bother a criminal defense attorney? (and I'm speaking from experience)

 

[kew17]

I am unable to comment because I have never listened to the seminar audio - I did not go to this death penalty seminar this year, I went to a different one.

So for me to comment on something out of context would be improper.

Without a doubt it is worthy of tattling. I don't care if Ms. Lyon would not have said one inflammatory thing, the bottom line is these materials were dishonestly obtained to benefit Ms. Belich.

Think about it. Belich was all over Baez for "tainting the jury pool" with his Kronk theory - accusing him of being dishonest.

So what headline does she run with the dishonest materials? Anthony Defense Attorney Calls Jurors Killers.

And if you actually read what she said in context, she said some jurors will vote to kill your client and you don't want the killers on your jury (DUH!).

Thank you for your response, and I can appreciate that....

BBM = oh wait, so you did "read what she said in context"? Or am I confused?

I guess my concern and question is, you seem to defend Ms. Lyon's remarks and actions, yet, you "call out" one of your own, Mr. WS and for lack of better words, gloat, over his possible repercussions of your complaints. You have been hot on his heels, yet I sense your defense of Ms. Lyons extreme behavior and comments. And, are you not doing the same to him that you are accusing him of doing to Lyons? I don't get it? I do appreciate your candor and response, however.

 

[Trapshooter]

IMO one is worthy of further investigation...and the other isn't. Anyway, I thought it was all about a leveled playing field and all that. I also don't understand why some compare the defense with the media. It's not the defense vs media...the media is NOT the State. So who the heck cares what they do. We, the public, have the right to make up our own minds. If you were so morally repulsed then fine...go tattle...but it's really not flattering to do this to a fellow attorney...especially for all the "world" to see. You don't have a dog in this fight...it really isn't your place IMHO.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

BRAVO!!! RR0004 you hit the nail on the head!!! :clap: He really DOESN'T have a dog in this fight!

 

[RR0004]

How is a private seminar a tax funded system?

Blaise

I think it was explained in some posts a ways back...something to do with the venue.

 

[RR0004]

:clap: :clap: :clap:

BRAVO!!! RR0004 you hit the nail on the head!!! :clap: He really DOESN'T have a dog in this fight!

...ah, but maybe he does?

oxoxox

 

[RR0004]

Mr. Hornsby...I hope you sleep well tonight. Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. Maybe you can talk some more about AL's inappropriate comments tomorrow?

 

[kew17]

IMO one is worthy of further investigation...and the other isn't. Anyway, I thought it was all about a leveled playing field and all that. I also don't understand why some compare the defense with the media. It's not the defense vs media...the media is NOT the State. So who the heck cares what they do. We, the public, have the right to make up our own minds. If you were so morally repulsed then fine...go tattle...but it's really not flattering to do this to a fellow attorney...especially for all the "world" to see. You don't have a dog in this fight, do you?

ETA: and since when does dishonesty bother a criminal defense attorney? (and I'm speaking from experience)

RR - you be in my brain again! You do that often! lol Like minds, my dear, like minds! Guess Mr. Hornsby exited, I was hoping for a response. Maybe tomorrow...it is late in Orlando.

 

[MD MOMMY]

Richard...so what are the chances of your brother sending my kids a Zhu Zhu pet?? I think I'm going to have two crying toddlers on X-mas if I don't find some of these rodents and rodent houses LOL.

Just a side note..apparently his brother is the Zhu Zhu toy creator..which is only the hottest and hardest to find toy on the planet.

Back on topic this entire thread is very enlightening.:dance:

 

[RR0004]

Thank you for your response, and I can appreciate that....

BBM = oh wait, so you did "read what she said in context"? Or am I confused?

I guess my concern and question is, you seem to defend Ms. Lyon's remarks and actions, yet, you "call out" one of your own, Mr. WS and for lack of better words, gloat, over his possible repercussions of your complaints. You have been hot on his heels, yet I sense your defense of Ms. Lyons extreme behavior and comments. And, are you not doing the same to him that you are accusing him of doing to Lyons? I don't get it? I do appreciate your candor and response, however.

I'm confused...and that's my last word for the night.

Except...Is he commentator or a lawyer? I don't get what business is it of his what KB does? Does KB report on how he does his job? (Well maybe she will now. LOL)

 

[Horace Finklestein]

How is a private seminar a tax funded system?

Blaise

I meant the legal system is tax funded and we have the right to know what is going on with its officers. There was some seriously devious stuff in that recording.

 

[rhornsby]

Thank you for your response, and I can appreciate that....

BBM = oh wait, so you did "read what she said in context"? Or am I confused?

I guess my concern and question is, you seem to defend Ms. Lyon's remarks and actions, yet, you "call out" one of your own, Mr. WS and for lack of better words, gloat, over his possible repercussions of your complaints. You have been hot on his heels, yet I sense your defense of Ms. Lyons extreme behavior and comments. And, are you not doing the same to him that you are accusing him of doing to Lyons? I don't get it? I do appreciate your candor and response, however.

No, you are not confused. I have not listened to the audio - but I have read the transcription of the "killers" part WFTv included in their online story.

 

[rhornsby]

I'm confused...and that's my last word for the night.

Except...Is he commentator or a lawyer? I don't get what business is it of his what KB does? Does KB report on how he does his job? (Well maybe she will now. LOL)

Oh no, make no mistake I just dislike Kathi Belich as a reporter (I sit in bed and tell my fiance, that fricking Kathi Embelish is at it again).

My real problem was with Mr. Sheafer, Ms. Embelish would report on Casey Anthony stories and Mr. Sheaffer would make up law to support her stories.

And so people would say things to me like, well that is not what Bill said. And so once I actually reviewed some of his major pieces, I realized he was basically making the law up.

I guess a comparison would be the Wall Street Journal reporter who just made up imaginary headlines. That was what BS was doing with his legal commentary - what's that Ms. Embelish, you need me to say what so you can sound aggressive and informed.

I mean if you guys just want me to tell you what you want to hear, say so. I will just put an asterick by any response so you know it is BS (no pun intended).