- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,658
- Reaction score
- 57,231
I'll side with this. AL's history is one of activism and a principled stand on something she believes in. Agree or disagree, she does go all out for her cause.
I side with RH and believe that the money is more a convenient excuse to pull the plug that the actual underlying causes. At this point the current money setup should only effect the use of her student staff and experts, and her travel expenses. This should not be a show-stopper.
Whereas the normal and common reason for an attorney to leave would be that either a client or co-council is simply not listening to their sound legal advise. I'm thinking the seeds for this have been long simmering. The conflicts with JB over funding and declaring KC indigent being the big item. The client and defense have been rather blatantly ignoring her very basic requests that they must get the family involved. Visitation must resume, and the client must be seen as a sympathetic human being. The final nail was probably the motion to recuse HHJS. She went from a somewhat sentimental and sympathetic judge who she could work her mitigation magic on, to the firmest fairest judge in the state. The one who has not only sentanced a woman to death, but went and witnessed the execution. The one that has no tolerance for tears or theatrics in his courtroom. In the end she was left with a poorly funded long distance case in which noone, neither the client, nor the questionable co-council was listening to her. That would be the time to go.
So she goes all out for her case until money or disagreements (ego) get in the way? I think she's committed to herself first (legacy) and clients are a means to that end. She's supposed to be the genius, she wrote a book about herself, seems like she would stick it out regardless of what else was happening.