windrower said:
So what is attorney Jane Fisher-Byrialsen’s stake with BM?
Upset that the $15 million suit is going away?
Besides knowing Iris, and being co-attorneys (or whatever they were) on the suit, are they friends?
Is Jane the reason there is a conflict with the public defender’s office?
Or is attorney David Beller the reason?
And how convenient, if either of them, because since there is a conflict, they’ve asked to be appointed BM’s “public defender” attorneys, at the state’s expense, since the public defender’s office cannot provide attorneys for this case.
Shades of Judge Murphy having to recuse himself from BM’s case the first time around because of witness SD (with help from Iris?) creating a conflict between Murphy and the lawyer she chose to represent her on the trespassing charge.
Is Iris still being a puppet master for BM?
Just all feels a bit too, um, choreographed, shall I say?
---------
Seattle1 said:
IMO, your instincts here are spot on
@windrower !
Impossible for Iris not to have her thumbprint on the scale!
Don't have to go further than IE's former defense practice website-- that converts to PEP-- where she announces how BM's case caused her to cease her criminal law practice for her non-profit endeavor. Click on the "Board Members" tab and surprise (no surprise), you'll find Jane-- cited as the co-founder of PEP, along with board member Iris.
...
Moving on to defense attorney Davide Beller, he and his firm conveniently have a connection to the Office of Alternative Defense Counsel (OADC) -- the organization the state public defender's office turns to when their office has an ethical conflict of interest and can't represent the defendant.
From David Beller's Bio:
David served as President of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, proudly serving 1000 criminal defense lawyers, paralegals and investigators. He is a frequent guest lecturer at the University of Denver College of Law and at Metropolitan State University. He is a faculty member of Colorado Alternate Defense Counsel and National Criminal Defense College, teaching trial skills to Colorado criminal defense lawyers.
-------
@windrower and
@Seattle1 -
The idiom to have "a thumb on the scale" alludes to a a cheating tactic that unfairly benefits one party involved in an interaction.
Where is the cheating here? How are the circumstances you describe untoward in any way? What is the unfair benefit to Morphew?
Do you doubt that the Public Defender has a conflict of interest? If so, what facts can you offer?
Why would Joan Fisher-Byrialsen not seek appointment to serve as Morphew's counsel? Iris Eytan and Joan Fisher-Byrialsen have represented Morphew when he faced these charges in the 11th JD, and in the civil lawsuit that's still pending. Both are leaders in the defense bar, which is a fairly small community. Since Eytan has stepped away from active defense practice, there is no one better prepared to defend Morphew than Fisher-Byrialsen.
David Beller is also a leader in the criminal defense bar. Of course they all know each other. Of course Fisher-Byrialsen - faced with two top prosecutors - is going to bring in serious help.
One thing is for sure: Morphew will be well represented. How is that giving him an unfair advantage?