Jodi taking care of a child?? SCARY!!!! The idea of her taking care of kids truly makes me shudder.
Luckily it was only for a couple of months t most.
Other than the verified attorneys here, none of us are qualified to render an expert opinion on anyone's representation. We are layfolk
This is to another previous poster, not to the one above.
And TBO, her representation is earnest and profound, in that they have a very difficult client to represent in a trial with overwhelming evidence to her guilt.
You give the general public way too much credit as far as our opinions being a threat in any way or as a venue to an appeal.
If my opinion is that important here, I want some coins in my kettle please
Yeah, there seems to be a serious misunderstanding of what ineffective assistance of counsel is. Not scoring the points you want to score with a witness is not ineffective assistance. It means either you are working with a bad set of facts or the witness is uncooperative or too difficult to shake.
Ineffective assistance would mean things like falling asleep during trial, allowing in evidence you should not have, and could have omitted, not moving for a change of venue when necessary, not presenting exculpatory evidence, things like that.
Nurmi and Wilmott are good attorneys. They are doing a very good job with what they have. Which is nothing.
I don't happen to like either of them. Okay? I don't like Nurmi for his personal decision to defend sex offenders and for participating in accusing a murdered man of awful things that are not true. I don't like Wilmott for her participation in the same, and her condescending attitude irritates me.
But I'm able to separate my personal feelings to a large degree when I look at how they are doing their job, because of my background as an attorney. Based on that, they are doing a good job. They are going to lose, but they are doing fine and there will be no successful appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel based on their performance in court.
I think people have a hard time separating their personal emotions about this case from what is actually occurring in the courtroom sometimes. We hate jodi for what she did so we hate her attorneys for defending her and her witnesses for their opinions and we thus see every last thing about each of these players we dislike, as negative and horrible, down to the way they sit, the way they wear their hair and the clothes on their backs.
Everything they say is stupid and wrong and everything they do is stupid and wrong.
But that's coming from emotion, not - here's a word we all know now, thanks Dr. Demarte! - "objective" fact.
And that's perfectly normal. It's why people hire professionals to represent them, provide medical treatment for them, advise them as to their finances, etc. Because when we are too close to something and our emotions are in play, it's very difficult to see things objectively.
