Cyndy Short Press Conference~31 October 2011

[Sherbie]

I thought it a bit odd that CS was announcing daily press releases, tours of the home, etc. Her intentions may have been good-hearted to help the perception of the family in the community, but there's a fine line between appropriate media interaction and overexposure.

In high profile cases, every word, sigh, body movement is scrutinized. With each statement, presser, tour, interview, you risk your message being misconstrued or twisted. In advocating for a client publicly, you need to be able to control the message.

Regardless JT's reasons for representing the family (and considering the role of an attorney is to protect clients), I think it was a good decision not to allow those things to happen. That's not to say it's necessarily in Lisa's best interests - unfortunately, her best interests and those of his clients may not be one and the same.

That said, it's a shame CS is off the case completely since she has an easy, earnest manner about her and could have been a big help to the family in dealing with local media and the community.

 

[SilkySifaka]

Does anyone else get the impression that maybe this was more of a clarification conference. Lets face it, when a respected atty is off a [high-profile] case, rumors can fly (and they did).

Do you think she could be cited with making her clients "look bad" in any way for leaving the case (makes them look guilty or leaves a question publicly), so she needed to make sure this "break-up" was done in a much more professional fashion; rather than a JT "She's fired" media frenzy, she was clarifying the true reasons of what the actual reasons were than she "abandoned" her clients?

I think it is more likely she would be cited or censured for calling out the attorney her clients are with rather than for parting ways with them.

There are lots of professions with rules about that sort of thing, not sure if legal is one of them.

 

[~n/t~]

You can write to her on her website.

Yes I realize that but why would anyone write to her and not call LE with a tip?

Well, I suppose if someone is intimidated by LE they would try some other avenue. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but I don't think she should be filtering which ones are credible or not. That's not her job.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Guess we'll have to wait and see what local attorney will take JT up on an offer to join the "team"? Maybe part of CS's rationale for the presser was to prevent a KC colleague from taking the bait without knowing exactly what their role will be: Second fiddle. :innocent: jmo

 

[~n/t~]

http://www.mccallisterlawfirm.com/Bio/CyndyShort.asp

I hope the irwins didnt shoot themselves in the foot! :angel:

Don't think so.

http://www.tacopinalaw.com/

:angel:

 

[Scamperoo]

They are NOT her clients, and she has no obligation to them. If she thought they were guilty, she would just shut up. The fact that she made a point of saying she thinks they are innocent means something.

As she her self said (in the KCS) JT "Kansas City attorney Cyndy Short said she had heard reports that New York lawyer Joe Tacopina had fired her from the case.

“He’s not in a position to fire anyone,” Short told The Star. “I work for the client, not him.”


http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/27/3233889/interviews-of-baby-lisas-young.html

 

[cowtowner]

Thanks for the welcomes.

I took CS's PC as a way to put some clarity to these:

1. She wanted to make it known that she cares about this case and clarify why she isn't working the case anymore. (Simple answer - her philosophy and the JT's didn't match up)

2. She wanted clear up that there's no bad blood between her and the parents. I think she disagrees with the LE pursuit of the parents (and she's had way more contact with both the parents and LE to draw this conclusion from than ANY of us do)

3. She wanted to make it known she believes the child was taken and that she believes the parents were not involved.

4. She wanted to make it known that there ARE other leads and that LE are aware of them and checking them out.

5. I think she realizes that local media will reach the people THERE and a PC from that direction might garner local folks attention and thus keep people looking for Lisa.

JMO.

I share your opinion. HOnestly, speaking from a local's perspective, CS has the most credibility of anyone involved in this case. The fact that she's come out and reinforced/reminded us that we have a missing girl we need to find, is important.

People are honestly getting tunnel vision. So many people are putting the cart of prosecution ahead of the horse of investigation.

CS is the most credible person in this case, and she's one of the more credible atty's in KC. To have her clearing the air and attempting to re-focus the case on investigation rather than prosecution is valuable to Lisa and the family. (and it shows she has a sense of civic responsibility -- something a lot of us here feel is in short supply with JT and BS)

 

[Quizzical]

(I really wanted to hear WHY she is so against the boys being interviewed again. Her lil statement about "it will do more harm than good to those boys" last week has me spinning. I just don't understand that AT ALL. And I would have like for one of the reporters to have asked her why she feels that way - get some QUALIFIERS people c'mon.)

BBM
Does anyone know where the link is for this? I have seen it mentioned before and am curious about it since JT was actually the one to cancel the interviews.

 

[yllek]

Some really good points made in this thread, imo.

- CS answered the questions we have
- CS made it clear that she did not leave voluntarily (no confusion as to her leaving because she doubted her clients)
- CS made it clear as to why she left and who initiated her dismissal
- CS made it clear that she believes in the family and intends to stay involved in the search for Lisa
-CS had an excellent opportunity to promote herself and her services here. She did so, imo. Whether that was one of her motives or just an offshoot of her dedication to her ex-clients, no harm, no foul, imo.

I hope CS can help in the local search for Lisa. I do not, however, wish to see her in future PCs related to feelings about JT, defense of the parents, her feelings about the PI... Imo, too many cooks in the kitchen as it stands and too much conflicting information. I hope she bows out gracefully now and we only see her again if her private search efforts render valid information in relation to finding Lisa. I hope she does not go on a media tour about the inside workings of the case and why she was dismissed. No LKB-type after-the-fact analysis desired by me; just muddies the waters, imo. JMO.

 

[luckyme]

Don't think so.

http://www.tacopinalaw.com/

:angel:

Sorry we will have to agree to disagree. :seeya: I saw him in action in the mcguire trial. Wasnt pretty! moo

 

[katshep]

I agree, no need to hold a presser for that. I feel the family is better off without her, she's been making some really loud mistakes. JT will find, if he has not already, other local counsel. I don't feel she has enough experience with a case that has this sort of magnitude. JMO, MOO, and all that jazz.

Having a press conference to bash the lead counsel is pretty juvenile and unprofessional IMO. JT may be aggressive and at times obnoxious, but if you were in a heap of trouble, you would want him. He is a superb litigator and strategist and, like all great litigators, a control freak.

 

[Scamperoo]

BBM
Does anyone know where the link is for this? I have seen it mentioned before and am curious about it since JT was actually the one to cancel the interviews.

See post 206# there is a link there.

 

[cowtowner]

Having a press conference to bash the lead counsel is pretty juvenile and unprofessional IMO. JT may be aggressive and at times obnoxious, but if you were in a heap of trouble, you would want him. He is a superb litigator and strategist and, like all great litigators, a control freak.

What did CS say that "bashed the lead counsel" in this press conference?

Did you watch it? Seriously, I'm asking because I watched it twice and I see no evidence that she bashed anyone at all.

 

[annalia]

Don't think so.

http://www.tacopinalaw.com/

:angel:

That's his own website, of course it's set up that way, promoting himself and his firm.

 

[Sherbie]

I think it is more likely she would be cited or censured for calling out the attorney her clients are with rather than for parting ways with them.

There are lots of professions with rules about that sort of thing, not sure if legal is one of them.

She didn't say anything even remotely close to warranting a bar reprimand, IMO.

ETA: Here's a link to the MO Rules of Professional Conduct - http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/mo/code/MO_CODE.HTM

 

[SilkySifaka]

That's his own website, of course it's set up that way, promoting his firm.

And the bio that n/t posted to is CS's own website, of course its set up that way, promoting her firm

IMO

 

[essies]

Dear God!! This is mushrooming so fast and so big as to rival Caylee's sad saga!! Layer upon layer of players and inconsistencies (or are thry "mistruths"?), strange "sightings", media frenzy, I could go on! The only element that is the same in these 2 cases is the fact that the true victim-the missing child seems to be lost lost amidst the noise!!:maddening:

 

[luckyme]

And the bio that n/t posted to is CS's own website, of course its set up that way, promoting her firm

IMO

If somebody in the family gets convicted in this case. Short was probally the best lawyer to help JT defend them. Now he will have to find someone else. Pitty! moo :twocents:

 

[Wendy101]

http://www.mccallisterlawfirm.com/Bio/CyndyShort.asp

I hope the irwins didnt shoot themselves in the foot! :angel:

I think they did this on what...day 2 or 3 of lisa missing.. they made a deal with national news..... this raised a few red flags for me..

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Yes I realize that but why would anyone write to her and not call LE with a tip?

Well, I suppose if someone is intimidated by LE they would try some other avenue. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but I don't think she should be filtering which ones are credible or not. That's not her job.

It's not an either/or proposition. You can contact both.