- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 17,785
- Reaction score
- 109,559
"a source close to the family says"....
Yet Kirk Nurmi hated Jodi Arias, but was forced to stay on her case and defend her.He's an attorney. He probably deals with it constantly.
Jmo
I had a good friend who was a defense attorney. She told me that they don't ask their clients if they are guilty.He's probably tolerant of distorted truths and manipulation in himself, being a lawyer!
"a source close to the family says"....
I think I'll pass on that rumor. These keep changing all the time. First, the family hired the guy, but he quit over money. Next he quit because the family wasn't going to spend money to hire Jackson. Now the family is upset that he just quit for some reason and wants him to come back?
Just made-up stories to get clicks. JMO of course.
I don't see any possible way that he's placed in either an Assisted Living situation or even more unthinkable- with his siblings. They are victims of this crime too. They lost their parents due to him.Bbm.
Re. the bolded, I think there is a valid fear that Nick could be released if placed in an assisted living facility or a mental health hospital ?
Imo, he could be dangerous even if stabilized and taking his proper, prescribed meds.
IF he's released (& that is a BIG IF) will his siblings be asked to house him ?
What if he relapsed ?
So many concerns if he's placed in a hospital, with an eye towards rehabilitation.
This discussion is about Nick and this crime, alone.
I do think at this time it was a crime, and not a blackout where he didn't know what he was doing, etc.
Imo.
Or maybe the judge orderered him off the case. That's what everybody seems to keep ignoring. It's entirely possible that Jackson had a conflict of interest if he previously represented Rob, just like with Donna Adelson and Rashbaum in Florida. And FYI, I DO think Jackson is a showboater.I think all we really know at this point regarding Jackson is what we have seen publicly.
He accepted Nick’s case, then rejected Nick’s case, and upon both accepting and rejecting he made sure to be in front of the cameras.
We really don’t know who hired him and for whatever reasons he quit. Maybe grandiose reasons, maybe trivial. Maybe a difference of opinion with Nick, maybe the family didn’t want to pay.
Maybe he thought he’d have a tough time winning the case because the victims were so famous and beloved.
Maybe he really relished grabbing the new case he landed with another rich kid defendant, whose victims are more anonymous.
All of it so far is maybe, maybe, maybe.
JMO
"a source close to the family says"....
I think I'll pass on that rumor. These keep changing all the time. First, the family hired the guy, but he quit over money. Next he quit because the family wasn't going to spend money to hire Jackson. Now the family is upset that he just quit for some reason and wants him to come back?
Just made-up stories to get clicks. JMO of course.
For some reason, I've never followed a trial that he was involved in, so I'm glad to get the views of all of you who have.I think all we really know at this point regarding Jackson is what we have seen publicly.
He accepted Nick’s case, then rejected Nick’s case, and upon both accepting and rejecting he made sure to be in front of the cameras.
We really don’t know who hired him and for whatever reasons he quit. Maybe grandiose reasons, maybe trivial. Maybe a difference of opinion with Nick, maybe the family didn’t want to pay.
Maybe he thought he’d have a tough time winning the case because the victims were so famous and beloved.
Maybe he really relished grabbing the new case he landed with another rich kid defendant, whose victims are more anonymous.
All of it so far is maybe, maybe, maybe.
JMO
I don't see any possible way that he's placed in either an Assisted Living situation or even more unthinkable- with his siblings. They are victims of this crime too. They lost their parents due to him.
I think she must have said something about her brother to LE that night. Obviously, as he lived there and was not home at the time, LE is going to ask her --->>who else lived here--->>>Oh, your brother? , Ok, tell me more....I am not sure which anonymous source close to the investigation I believe. In my mind, both are valid possibilities. She either told them he was "dangerous" or she didn't but without knowing who is behind all these anonymous tidbits being tossed out to the various media outlets it is impossible to determine which thing is true. MOO
This source is too similar to National Enquirer type attention grabbing light on facts
Domestic abuse can be physical, mental, economic or sexual.
It’s an overall term that includes DV and relates to the body of the post I replied to that said NR probably had threatened to kill many times and probably planned it long term and the Reiners portrayed as no way to escape him despite reports to their dedication of resources for NR and the family.
That they were numbly abused by instead of knowingly, by choice, part of their disturbed son’s life.
I believe the charge is two accounts of first degree murder.
All imo
at some point, regardless of who called 911, as the person who made the awful discovery of body/bodies, Romy would be the person interviewed by LE. MOO and again, I would not be surprised if she did indicate that her brother who resided on the property was in a mental health crisis or might be "dangerous". We will not likely know the truth of this matter until trial. Until then, either version of Romy told LE dangerous or that didn't happen is as viable as the other.
I guess I am confused as to why you appear to have taken my opinion post as being critical of yours or argumentative?I actually know that Romy would be asked questions by LE both at the active scene and later.
Did I give the impression that I thought Romy would not be interviewed or that she wouldn’t be honest with investigators immediately?
My opinion was that the roommate being a friend and neighbor knew of the problems of the family; had an immediate thought and served the Nick tea to the responding authorities while RR was still processing the event.
All imo
I guess I am confused as to why you appear to have taken my opinion post as being critical of yours or argumentative?
As mine said, in the absence of evidence, it is entirely possible things happened as you theorized. Just as it is also entirely possible that things happened as TMZ initially described. In other words, your theory is just as valid as mine. Did I give you the impression I was arguing with you or personalizing in my post?
NO worries whatsoever. I wasn't in any way trying to be argumentative or dismissive. you've shared links to why you theorize as you do and I've shared mine supporting my own theory. Either of us could be correct or not. Sorry if you felt I was picking at you that was not my intent.I’m sorry that I misunderstood the post.
I did try back up my opinion with updated reputable msm links and quotes.
Please accept my apologies for getting froggy with my reply.
all imo