2015.10.20 Elizabeth Parker - Defense Attorney representing CWW

[nifwor1967]

Yep, I remember too!

I hear ya! But...really? A little premature statement without seeing the evidence. PROPAGANDA!

 

[RagingClue]

I cannot fathom the mind set of a criminal lawyer where the evidence clearly points to guilt. I guess lying and becoming desensitized go hand in hand.

That, in itself really makes me question ethics and how these folks(criminal lawyers) live their lives. Sigh. Justice for TS.

 

[No it's not]

I will have to look up the quote, but I remember something along the lines that 'he has no evidence CWW was in FL' & that the D.A. has not furnished any evidence to the contrary.

Wright's attorney has not decided if he'll appeal the extradition. He tells us he has enough evidence to show Wright was in Missouri when Teresa Sievers was killed in her Bonita Springs home.

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/30036319/sievers-murder-suspect-drops-request-for-bond#.ViryKpWFMaQ

-Nin

 

[human]

W

Wright's attorney has not decided if he'll appeal the extradition. He tells us he has enough evidence to show Wright was in Missouri when Teresa Sievers was killed in her Bonita Springs home.

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/30036319/sievers-murder-suspect-drops-request-for-bond#.ViryKpWFMaQ

-Nin

He didn't appeal, so does that mean he no longer has the evidence?

 

[Bobbywoo]

The "digital footprint" is totally explainable if CWW & JRR used a rental car!
"In another famous case a Payless customer expected a bill for $259.51. He was instead slapped with a bill for $3,405.05, which was reached by adding a $1 per mile to each of the 2,874 miles he had driven, because he had crossed the California state line into Nevada and, later, he drove into Arizona. That triggered the fines, because the contract prohibited leaving the state.

In many more cases, numerous Florida car rental companies are notorious for literally shutting off engines of cars that cross state lines. The cars may be restarted upon agreement to pay new fees. "
https://www.mainstreet.com/article/...-on-you-and-your-driving-heres-how-they-do-it
Maybe a relative got a rental car for them. Hate to be all "Hollywood" on ya' but isn't that the 2nd thing every detective asks? DID YOU CHECK ALL THE CAR RENTAL COMPANIES?

I got a giggle out of your post. In Florida Payless is a shoe store. And in my exhausted mind I was trying to figure out why that person needed to buy so many shoes and why they got penalized for every mile they drove out of the state to buy all those shoes! It's been a long day for me, I plead insanity!

 

[FelicityLemon]

W

He didn't appeal, so does that mean he no longer has the evidence?

:silly:---------------:laughing:---------------:clap:---------------:blowkiss:

 

[FelicityLemon]

I cannot fathom the mind set of a criminal lawyer where the evidence clearly points to guilt. I guess lying and becoming desensitized go hand in hand.

That, in itself really makes me question ethics and how these folks(criminal lawyers) live their lives. Sigh. Justice for TS.

I suspect that some defense lawyers are sociopathic in that the guilt or innocence of a client really doesn't matter. It's the idea that not only does everyone *sigh* deserve a defense, but it's a challenge to try and outsmart or outmaneuver the prosecution, sometimes the judge, but always the jury.

Fun and games.

 

[Russian Blue]

I suspect that some defense lawyers are sociopathic in that the guilt or innocence of a client really doesn't matter. It's the idea that not only does everyone *sigh* deserve a defense, but it's a challenge to try and outsmart or outmaneuver the prosecution, sometimes the judge, but always the jury.

Fun and games.

I think it all boils down to money. Willing to do anything for money.

 

[creepingskills]

I cannot fathom the mind set of a criminal lawyer where the evidence clearly points to guilt. I guess lying and becoming desensitized go hand in hand.

That, in itself really makes me question ethics and how these folks(criminal lawyers) live their lives. Sigh. Justice for TS.

Let me preface this post by saying none of the following is personal, and while I am biased, I do understand why its easy to vilify criminal defense attorneys. Most of the time, criminal defense attorneys are appointed by a judge to represent indigent clients, even private criminal defense attorneys usually take court appointed cases. If every criminal defense attorney rejected appointments based on a preliminary 'feeling' of guilt based on speculation of what the evidence might be, how could we guarantee the right to attorney? A fair trial? I think these Constitutional protections are important to safeguard, which would be impossible without defense attorneys, and I think this is how they 'live their lives'. I do understand this notion is easy to dismiss if you or a loved one have never been accused of a crime, or otherwise in need of an advocate.

Criminal defense isn't a very lucrative area of law, especially if you're working for the public defenders office. In my state, public defenders make less than the cost of tuition for one year of law school. The majority of defense attorneys are not liars, or unethical, or desensitized. They are true advocates in an adversarial system, overworked and underpaid (IMO). They pursue this area of law because they believe in the legal system, regardless of the client. Just like the surgeons who operated on the Tsarnaev, defense attorneys are just doing a job without making personal judgments about the patient/client.

I suspect that some defense lawyers are sociopathic in that the guilt or innocence of a client really doesn't matter. It's the idea that not only does everyone *sigh* deserve a defense, but it's a challenge to try and outsmart or outmaneuver the prosecution, sometimes the judge, but always the jury.

Fun and games.

BBM. The same could be said for 'sociopathic' prosecutors, who all too often, unethically refuse to turn over exculpatory evidence in order to advance their case or 'win'. But, if they really believe the defendant is guilty that is somehow more ethical than defending a guilty client within the parameters set by the MANY rules governing trial practice and legal ethics. Prosecutors hold much more power and that is why the burden is theirs to prove.

Its more than just an idea that everyone deserves a competent defense, it is what makes our legal system great. If you only deserve a defense when you look innocent, how could we be sure defendants who are sentenced to death, or prison were really in fact guilty? The burden is on the state to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If the state does THEIR job competently, both in the LE investigation process and trial, the judge/jury will return a guilty verdict.

The jury is never outsmarted, they decide what to believe, they are the fact-finders. In the OJ Simpson case, the jury chose to believe that the prosecution's star witness was not credible because he was a racist. The defense didn't lie, the cop was racist and personally, I think OJ was guilty. The judge determines what the jury will see/hear re: evidence, so if the prosecution is out-maneuvered or outsmarted blame the prosecutors, or the judge who let the info in. I can assure you with a court appointed defense attorney, they're making less than the prosecutor with less resources, and they're juggling more cases at once. Not really fun games.

 

[creepingskills]

I think it all boils down to money. Willing to do anything for money.

A friend of mine who works for the public defender's office is paid less than another friend who is a public school teacher. When you're carrying $150k of law school debt, hardly sounds like she's doing it for the money.

 

[Webjunkie]

I got a giggle out of your post. In Florida Payless is a shoe store. And in my exhausted mind I was trying to figure out why that person needed to buy so many shoes and why they got penalized for every mile they drove out of the state to buy all those shoes! It's been a long day for me, I plead insanity!

bbm Payless IS a shoe store in MO too , so I went there too LOL.
I've never heard of Payless Car Rental, but I guess there must be one.
What kind of car rental doesn't let you drive out of state? That's what most people use them for isn't it?

 

[Webjunkie]

Wright's attorney has not decided if he'll appeal the extradition. He tells us he has enough evidence to show Wright was in Missouri when Teresa Sievers was killed in her Bonita Springs home.

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/30036319/sievers-murder-suspect-drops-request-for-bond#.ViryKpWFMaQ



-Nin

I was looking at this link. It's funny that there is another "Scott"...
SMS: Sheriff Mike Scott, Lee County (Florida) Sheriff's Office.
Governor Rick Scott's extradition warrant.

 

[beach]

I will have to look up the quote, but I remember something along the lines that 'he has no evidence CWW was in FL' & that the D.A. has not furnished any evidence to the contrary.

Wright's attorney has not decided if he'll appeal the extradition. He tells us he has enough evidence to show Wright was in Missouri when Teresa Sievers was killed in her Bonita Springs home.

http://www.nbc-2.com/story/30036319/sievers-murder-suspect-drops-request-for-bond#.ViryKpWFMaQ

-Nin

So no one gets confused (like I just did) - that NBC2 article is almost 6 weeks old (Sept. 15th) and was written before his CWW's extradition hearing in MO. The article quotes Daris Almond, the attorney who represented him while he was still incarcerated in Missouri.

Just want to make sure no one interprets it as coming from the Elizabeth Parker (topic) and the Florida law firm now representing CWW. (in other words, old news and not relevant since he has already been extradited)

 

[Lilibet]

Creepingskills, THANK YOU for that post about defense attorneys, prosecutors and our legal system. I hope everyone reads every word and takes it to heart in every case. You are a huge asset to WS.

:yourock:

 

[Matlacha]

. . . The same could be said for 'sociopathic' prosecutors, who all too often, unethically refuse to turn over exculpatory evidence in order to advance their case or 'win'. But, if they really believe the defendant is guilty that is somehow more ethical than defending a guilty client within the parameters set by the MANY rules governing trial practice and legal ethics. Prosecutors hold much more power and that is why the burden is theirs to prove. . . .

I was going to post very much the same sentiment. Prosecutors should be interested in justice, but most, it seems, just want a high conviction rate. The ability to buy tainted testimony by making deals with other inmates is just one example of prosecutorial abuse. Still, I don't believe taxpayers should be on the hook for the defense of sociopaths, or even the innocent. The right to a fair trial is guaranteed; the right to have someone else foot the bill is not. If you want more of something, they say, subsidize it. By subsidizing free legal defense, we arguably get more crime than we'd have otherwise, not to mention clearly guilty sociopaths hanging on for decades until (in PA, at least) a squishy soft governor comes along to stay the execution of a white murderer/rapist of a 16-year-old girl because blacks are over-represented in death penalty cases.

 

[human]

I do have to disgree with some lawyer stuff. There are not a lot of jobs for lawyers nowadays so they do have to maybe take what they can get just to work.

Everyone needs a competent defense and generally speaking rich white do quite well in defense. Heck, some rich are too affluent to have a consequence.

I really dislike when attorneys do things to sway the jury from the truth either way.

It is not about justice but rather making a name for yourself in some of these trials.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Of course, everyone deserves the right to be represented in court. Innocent people get arrested, charged, tried and convicted, too. My *sigh* is for people who are caught dead to rights, sometimes confess with excruciating detail, and then recant even in the face of hard evidence and are still are granted time and expense for a "defense". Some guilty people get convicted only to be rewarded with a retrial due to a technicality. But, the technicality also helps when an innocent person is convicted.

Absolutely putting forth a theory or motive that 1) is a LIE or (abused woman, domestic violence), or 2) makes no sense (self-defense?) is a game - you know it's baloney, your client pulled it out of her hat, but you try to do the best with it - that's a game. The trial of Travis Alexander's murderer is an excellent example of throw it against the wall and see what sticks.

Pffft! The OJ trial and resulting verdict was... I don't even know what to say about that fiasco without spewing, so I'll stick with pffft!

Fun and games - absolutely. Not for all attorneys, of course. I was making a generalization to make a point. Watch some trials of showboating attorneys. To call it a game was not meant to diminish the gravity. Maybe I should have used the word strategize, challenge, competition.

And yes, there are sociopathic attorneys both defense and prosecution, judges, bailiffs, doctors, window washers, etc. Somewhere I saw a breakdown among professions. CEO - 1, Lawyer - 2.

If no one is outsmarted, how can there be such a thing as wrongful conviction?

The goal is to win. For some attorneys it's to win for their client whether innocent or guilty (or for the people - the state), and for others it's a win for themselves.

Public defenders are salaried and make peanuts compared to what private defense attorneys can charge. I have no idea what the court pays private attorneys who are court ordered to defend someone. Anybody know? I remember one begging to be let off and being very anxious to get back to his private practice.

 

[Webjunkie]

Of course, everyone deserves the right to be represented in court. Innocent people get arrested, charged, tried and convicted, too. My *sigh* is for people who are caught dead to rights, sometimes confess with excruciating detail, and then recant even in the face of hard evidence and are still are granted time and expense for a "defense". Some guilty people get convicted only to be rewarded with a retrial due to a technicality. But, the technicality also helps when an innocent person is convicted.

Absolutely putting forth a theory or motive that 1) is a LIE or (abused woman, domestic violence), or 2) makes no sense (self-defense?) is a game - you know it's baloney, your client pulled it out of her hat, but you try to do the best with it - that's a game. The trial of Travis Alexander's murderer is an excellent example of throw it against the wall and see what sticks.

Pffft! The OJ trial and resulting verdict was... I don't even know what to say about that fiasco without spewing, so I'll stick with pffft!

Fun and games - absolutely. Not for all attorneys, of course. I was making a generalization to make a point. Watch some trials of showboating attorneys. To call it a game was not meant to diminish the gravity. Maybe I should have used the word strategize, challenge, competition.

And yes, there are sociopathic attorneys both defense and prosecution, judges, bailiffs, doctors, window washers, etc. Somewhere I saw a breakdown among professions. CEO - 1, Lawyer - 2.

If no one is outsmarted, how can there be such a thing as wrongful conviction?

The goal is to win. For some attorneys it's to win for their client whether innocent or guilty (or for the people - the state), and for others it's a win for themselves.

Public defenders are salaried and make peanuts compared to what private defense attorneys can charge. I have no idea what the court pays private attorneys who are court ordered to defend someone. Anybody know? I remember one begging to be let off and being very anxious to get back to his private practice.

FelicityLemon, That IS very interesting:

http://mic.com/articles/44423/10-professions-that-attract-the-most-sociopaths

10 Professions That Attract the Most Sociopaths
　
1. CEO
2. Lawyer
3. Media
4. Salesperson
5. Surgeon
6. Journalist
7. Policeman
8. Clergyman
9. Chef
10. Civil Servant

And the lowest rates of psychopathy:
1. Care Aide
2. Nurse
3. Therapist
4. Craftsperson
5. Beautician/Stylist
6. Charity Worker
7. Teacher
8. Creative Artist
9. Doctor
10. Accountant

[SUB][SUP]
[/SUP][/SUB]

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

FelicityLemon, That IS very interesting:

http://mic.com/articles/44423/10-professions-that-attract-the-most-sociopaths

10 Professions That Attract the Most Sociopaths
　
1. CEO
2. Lawyer
3. Media
4. Salesperson
5. Surgeon
6. Journalist
7. Policeman
8. Clergyman
9. Chef
10. Civil Servant

Chef?

I mean, I can see all the others, but chef ?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Webjunkie]

Chef?

I mean, I can see all the others, but chef ?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Chef--knives???
:gaah:
I am happy to report I am none of the above, and I passed this test:
http://illnessquiz.com/sociopath-test/