Police say parents are not answering vital questions #3

[AZlawyer]

JI & DB’s position (if I understand correctly) = they‘ll submit to further in-person interrogation only if joint.
(Yes, I understand a few reasons why they may want joint.)

Tacopina & Picerno (IIUC) = now “representing” both JI & DB, not just one or the other.
If LE arrested both (IIUC) = they’d both have separate attorneys, not “share” one.

-------------------------------------------------------------IS THERE A LEGAL EXPERT IN THE HOUSE? --------------------------------------------------

This may seem like a Q for ask an attorney thread, but there may be other implications re interrogations, so posting here.

Do Mo & NY bar asscns’ conflict of interest provisions prohibit either Tacopina & Picerno (previous counsel UMKC Law Prof & Cindy Short)
from rep’ing either JI or DB? If the answer is yes,

1. would all atty’s now or previously involved be prohibited from rep’ing either JI or DB individually?

2. If so, prohibited when?
--- JI & DB did submit to separate interrogations, would an attorney accompanying each of them to separate interviews/interrogations,
that is, even pre-arrest, face conflict of interest issues?
---Or only post-arrest or post-charges?

3. If either JI, DB, or both were arrested and sought separate counsel and if both were to agree to and sign conflict of interest waiver,
would that “fix” the conflict problem for the attys? Or would the conflict not be client-waivable?

Could these issues be influencing the current attorneys’ tactics or approach here?

Thanks in advance.

These are not questions with black-and-white answers.

I think there is a POTENTIAL conflict of interest already. It may be in the interest of J or D to throw the other one under the bus, for example, and having joint counsel means they will never get that advice. This, however, is IMO the kind of conflict of interest one could get a waiver on after disclosure of the details of the conflict (in writing). IMO the waiver could certainly apply through separate questioning, although it's possible that LE requested that they be interviewed separately and SIMULTANEOUSLY (in different rooms but at the same time) to ensure there is no communication. In that case, you'd need 2 lawyers but they could be from the same firm, etc.

IMO if one of the 2 is arrested, it would depend on the circumstances whether or not one attorney could continue to represent both of them. If the "best" advice for each of them would conflict, the attorney should withdraw from representing at least one client. IMO this would so often be true that withdrawal would be the best policy in that situation. Whether he would have to withdraw from representing both would depend on the circumstances, again--there is no easy answer.

 

[al66pine]

AZlawyer,

Thank you very much for your response post 463 and explanation.

Thanks a million.

 

[MissJames]

Even if someone did follow Natalee's case or others, I don't think Tim Miller is a name that would stick in their mind years later. People have a hard time remembering the names of victims and their killers, why would Tim Miller stand out?

The OP said she asked the LEO why TES was not involved ,not Tim Miller. Tim founded and runs the organization, but it is the organization ,itself,that s well-known,especially among LE . JMO

 

[MissJames]

In general. I have never interacted with Kansas City Police. I'm referring to the police departments, state highway patrol, and sheriff departments that I've dealt with at work (in another state). Still, the theme from various departments is much more closed mouth. I'm not sure if that's a state thing, or the department culture of KCPD, or something else - but for now, I'm remaining skeptical.

Skeptical of what ? That the OP actually spoke with a KCPD officer or that he told her what she claims? Or are you skeptical of the LEO ,himself? I'm confused.

 

[AnaTeresa]

Skeptical of what ? That the OP actually spoke with a KCPD officer or that he told her what she claims? Or are you skeptical of the LEO ,himself? I'm confused.

I really don't want to turn this into a debate or derail the thread. I feel my previous posts are sufficiently clear.

 

[Detective Klimpt]

I don't know which thread to put R. Rugen's stuff. Today he posted on FB that he has chatted face to face with JB. I get the feeling this is one POI that will be off the suspect list, according to Rugen. Rugen continues to pester (MOO) Dane, sending him texts. I suspect he got Dane's new cell number because of his being a PI. I think Rugen has also gotten the phone numbers that Dane called on MW's phone. I never thought Dane was involved in any way in the BL case.

 

[huckleberryhound]

It/s kind of interesting to me that the parents are still together, now over 2 months later, that suggests that either : 1- they are both guilty. Or, 2- JI completely believes
in DB's innocence. Usually it seems in cases like this if there is some evidence against
one parent, the other parent is pretty quick to break away. And , lying to police is
one thing , but how do you lie to your spouse, day after day, and never have them
suspect. And, in this case, the parents arent even married , so it would be very
easy for them to walk away from each other.

 

[askfornina]

It/s kind of interesting to me that the parents are still together, now over 2 months later, that suggests that either : 1- they are both guilty. Or, 2- JI completely believes
in DB's innocence. Usually it seems in cases like this if there is some evidence against
one parent, the other parent is pretty quick to break away. And , lying to police is
one thing , but how do you lie to your spouse, day after day, and never have them
suspect. And, in this case, the parents arent even married , so it would be very
easy for them to walk away from each other.

i think about this often. they've only been together 3 years or so! his family seems to support her also.

 

[natsound]

It/s kind of interesting to me that the parents are still together, now over 2 months later, that suggests that either : 1- they are both guilty. Or, 2- JI completely believes
in DB's innocence. Usually it seems in cases like this if there is some evidence against
one parent, the other parent is pretty quick to break away. And , lying to police is
one thing , but how do you lie to your spouse, day after day, and never have them
suspect. And, in this case, the parents arent even married , so it would be very
easy for them to walk away from each other.

Can you point out some cases where the other spouse breaks away? I see the opposite happen. I've brought this up before... remember Diane Schuler, who got drunk and high and killed herself and several others, including her own daughter, in a car crash? Her husband defends her, depsite the fact that their two year old little girl was one of the victims, and the fact that the mother's toxicology test proved she was under the influence.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-07-27-wrongway-ny-crash-suit_n.htm

Casey Anthony's parents defended her as well, despite the overwhelming evidence. These are the examples I recall off the top of my head. I think it's denial topped off with fear that causes family members to defend in such cases.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

Can you point out some cases where the other spouse breaks away? I see the opposite happen. I've brought this up before... remember Diane Schuler, who got drunk and high and killed herself and several others, including her own daughter, in a car crash? Her husband defends her, depsite the fact that their two year old little girl was one of the victims, and the fact that the mother's toxicology test proved she was under the influence.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-07-27-wrongway-ny-crash-suit_n.htm

Casey Anthony's parents defended her as well, despite the overwhelming evidence. These are the examples I recall off the top of my head. I think it's denial topped off with fear that causes family members to defend in such cases.

In the Shuler case I think he he is trying to avoid a civil suit more than his wife's honour. As for GA he said what Cindy wanted to hear when talking to the media, but he also went behind Cindy's back and talked to LE and was pretty honest in his statements to them. :twocents:

 

[natsound]

In the Shuler case I think he he is trying to avoid a civil suit more than his wife's honour. As for GA he said what Cindy wanted to hear when talking to the media, but he also went behind Cindy's back and talked to LE and was pretty honest in his statements to them. :twocents:

No, actually Schuler's husband defended her. He went on TV and defended her. GA spent a long time defending his daughter. A very long time. These examples are beside the point, of course, but it seems to me that there's a good chance family members will defend family members, and screen out all the suspicion and criticism. It doesn't happen every time, but it happens.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

No, actually Schuler's husband defended her. He went on TV and defended her. GA spent a long time defending his daughter. A very long time. These examples are beside the point, of course, but it seems to me that there's a good chance family members will defend family members, and screen out all the suspicion and criticism. It doesn't happen every time, but it happens.

BBM I realize he defended her, my point was, he could face a civil suit, he really had no choice but to defend her. GA only defended FCA to the media, but to LE he told them on video that he knew what he smelled in the trunk of the car.
I agree it's a moot point in this case.

 

[cityslick]

No, actually Schuler's husband defended her. He went on TV and defended her. GA spent a long time defending his daughter. A very long time. These examples are beside the point, of course, but it seems to me that there's a good chance family members will defend family members, and screen out all the suspicion and criticism. It doesn't happen every time, but it happens.

The difference here though is it's his family that's standing by her, a person they have no direct tie to other than being the mother of their granddaughter/niece/etc. Not only that, but I would think his family's priority is believing JI is innocent and if they had any suspicion of DB, they would try to distance him from her (and themselves from her as well).

 

[Sherbie]

If I recall correctly, Sharon Rocha (Laci Peterson's mom) initially stood by Scott Peterson. Sometimes people just can't fathom someone they knew/loved could do such a thing. I don't really think it tells us much, other than there wasn't something prior to the event to cause family or acquaintances to think a person capable of doing something horrible.

 

[Donjeta]

Standing by the family members and believing in their innocence is often the only way the family can hold on to the hope that the missing person is still alive. JMO.

 

[natsound]

The difference here though is it's his family that's standing by her, a person they have no direct tie to other than being the mother of their granddaughter/niece/etc. Not only that, but I would think his family's priority is believing JI is innocent and if they had any suspicion of DB, they would try to distance him from her (and themselves from her as well).

I was discussing JI standing by DB, not JI's family standing by JI.

 

[Elley Mae]

If I recall correctly, Sharon Rocha (Laci Peterson's mom) initially stood by Scott Peterson. Sometimes people just can't fathom someone they knew/loved could do such a thing. I don't really think it tells us much, other than there wasn't something prior to the event to cause family or acquaintances to think a person capable of doing something horrible.

Right, Watch TV and when they report on a rapist,or pedophile being arrested most times the neighbors will stand there and say what a wonderful person they were, or that they had no idea bodies were buried in the back yard. (all hypothetical of course). Or course parents are going to be their for family in these situations, I would be shocked if they didn't show up.

 

[MissJames]

I just caught the end of "Disappeared" on OWN. It was about Britanee Drexel who disappeared not far from my town. Once again ,the lengths to which Britanee's family and friends have gone to, in an attempt to find her,is striking when compared to Baby Lisa's family. Britanee's younger siblings miss her.Working to find Britanee is what they do .
Baby Lisa's parents need to go back to LE and start talking. Their family will remain under a cloud of suspicion if they don't start working to find their baby girl,or find out what happened to her. Those two boys will never be able to go back to a normal life,unless the parents start working with LE. How normal can it be to just move on ? It's not and it will affect the boys forever.

JMO

 

[madge]

Was watching Michelle Parker's family just last night and their efforts to keep their daughters name and face out there and thinking oh, the difference.

It's very frustrating for me to watch the parents just hide and move on. I'm trying to stay away from this forum so much.

Best Xmas gift ever would be for her to be found, I don't think she's alive but a body to put closure.

 

[GoodGurl]

Are there any reports of local media seeking interviews with them at this point?