Cynthia Short-Local Attorney no longer representing Irwin and Bradley

[SilkySifaka]

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/k...8973/KCUR.News/Legal.Tempest.in..Child.Search

The Kansas City lawyer representing the parents has quit, contesting accounts that she, Cyndi Short, was fired by a New York Lawyer who signed on earlier.

also it sounds like JT plans to reschedule the boys interviews "as early as next week" according to the video on the MSM thread from today.

So may be she felt strongly the boys should not be interviewed

 

[epiphany]

http://www.kctv5.com/story/15902780...witterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&redirected=true

Peter said when Cyndy Short was hired on as local counsel the case started heading in the right direction but, after just nine days, Short was fired. Kiesling asked Deborah Bradley about Short no longer representing them and Bradley said that was the first she heard of it, leaving many to assume the conflict was between New York attorney Joe Tacopina and Short. It seems Tacopina is calling the shots and Peters said that's backwards.

"It's the client who decides who is representing them. For them not to know, there's a problem," said Peters.

 

[belle3]

im starting to think that maybe this was an opposing view on how to do things. Maybe CS knows that to get the boys to tell a version of the story would be very difficult becasue they are children and the parents and JT believe that they can control what the kids say in their interview to cast the parents in a better light, hence waiting so long to let them be interviewed. Maybe CS knows that relying on two small children to essentially lie, to protect the parents, is a stretch and would definitely do more harm to those two boys. That is totally my opinion!

 

[momshrink]

Just so you understand what I am saying... this means that if (for example) the client told the attorney that she was going to commit a murder tomorrow, the attorney could (must) break privilege. Nothing that has been done in the past would qualify for that.

And a non-violent future illegal activity would not count either. If (for example) the client told the attorney that she was going to give money to her accomplice, the lawyer can NOT break privilege.

Trying to catch up - have not read all of this thread, but what if the client told the attorney where a child's body was. What is the attorney's obligation? Trying to remember from FCA case, but am stuck.

 

[matou]

The only other clue to Short's abrupt departure comes from a quote she gave the Kansas City Star, when she expressed concerns against allowing Lisa's brothers to be re-interviewed.

"I've done research and see more potential for harm than good with the interview." Short said late Thursday. "It won't happen tomorrow and maybe never."

This statement now conflicts with what New York Lawyer Joe Tacopina has told local law enforcement. Police tell NBC news that he plans to reschedule the interviews with the boys as early as next week.

Maybe NEVER???

http://www.ksee24.com/news/local/Attorney-Quits-Baby-Lisa-Case1-132850948.html

 

[gitana1]

Trying to catch up - have not read all of this thread, but what if the client told the attorney where a child's body was. What is the attorney's obligation? Trying to remember from FCA case, but am stuck.

The attorney can only break privilege if there is a risk of imminent death or other harm. The location of a body does not fall into that exception to the privilege rule. Also, in the case where a client states he or she is about do murder, they lawyer can break privilege but does not have to.

 

[matou]

Hi Gitana, what are the possible reasons for a lawyer to quit a case, other than your above post (risk of imminent death or other harm)? I thought a lawyer had to be fired from a case.

 

[gitana1]

Hi Gitana, what are the possible reasons for a lawyer to quit a case, other than your above post (risk of imminent death or other harm)? I thought a lawyer had to be fired from a case.

If charges have not been filed, they can withdraw as counsel pretty easily. The most common reasons for wanting to withdraw would be the client is not following your advice, the client is not aiding in their case, they are lying to you or, less commonly, you find something out that makes further representation repugnant to you.

 

[JeannaT]

Hi Gitana, what are the possible reasons for a lawyer to quit a case, other than your above post (risk of imminent death or other harm)? I thought a lawyer had to be fired from a case.

Lawyers can quit whenever they want if they're privately paid. If they are court appointed lawyers assigned to the indigent by the court, they have to ask to be released from that duty if they want to quit. IMO.

 

[epiphany]

"He [Joe Tacopina] wanted the two brothers, the siblings, to be interviewed, Cyndy Short didn't want that. That is a direct, strategical conflict," said Carl Cornwell, a local attorney.

http://www.nbcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...back-in-town-on-lisa-irwin-case#ixzz1cDRdstKT

 

[Tuffy]

Lawyers can quit whenever they want if they're privately paid. If they are court appointed lawyers assigned to the indigent by the court, they have to ask to be released from that duty if they want to quit. IMO.

I'm not so sure that they can, JeannaT. Hopefully, a lawyer on here will answer this better though.

This is what I've found:

Can my lawyer drop me as a client?

Yes, but not because he or she is not making money, or because a better, more lucrative case just walked into his or her door, or because the matter is taking longer than anticipated. If your case is in active litigation, the lawyer can’t just hightail it out without the judge’s authorization.

Some of the most common reasons the lawyer will drop a case include:

• conflict of interest;
• nonpayment of legal services already rendered;
• client-lawyer communication: the client does not keep his or her end of the bargain

.

http://attorneypages.com/help/ch10-mad-at-lawyer.htm

 

[Karmaa]

Trying to catch up - have not read all of this thread, but what if the client told the attorney where a child's body was. What is the attorney's obligation? Trying to remember from FCA case, but am stuck.

Technically the attorney could not break confidence. This is another reason that lawyers don't really want to know if a client is guilty or not. They don't want to be treated like a psychologist or a priest, as a sounding board for the guilty confessions of the client. And they don't want the moral dilemma of what to do when they know something like this. They have to believe in the right of everyone to get fair representation, but they are human too (at least that's what they tell us ). It's sometimes really hard to remember their belief if their client is a really bad dude.

 

[Karmaa]

I'm not so sure that they can, JeannaT. Hopefully, a lawyer on here will answer this better though.

This is what I've found:



http://attorneypages.com/help/ch10-mad-at-lawyer.htm

Jeanna is correct for the most part. the ABA has rules for all admitted lawyers, but individual states can have other requirements, which supersede the ABA, so there is always a chance that an individual state has different rules or legislation.

The ABA Model Rules only cover the relationship between lawyer and client when there is active litigation. Since there are no charges against DB or JI, Cyndy could have quit for almost any reason. However, I would say that in this case, it's almost certain that her leaving was agreed to by all parties, in which case the point is moot. Whether she was fired or quit, it's all the same in the end. It's just a matter of saving face, but I am sure that the terminology was negotiated.

 

[scandi]

Technically the attorney could not break confidence. This is another reason that lawyers don't really want to know if a client is guilty or not. They don't want to be treated like a psychologist or a priest, as a sounding board for the guilty confessions of the client. And they don't want the moral dilemma of what to do when they know something like this. They have to believe in the right of everyone to get fair representation, but they are human too (at least that's what they tell us ). It's sometimes really hard to remember their belief if their client is a really bad dude.

Pretty messed up IMO. Lawyers who don't care about their client's guilt, morals or innocence. Euftameda! It just hits low for me, realizing that honest or fair representation is #1. The American way, I know.

 

[jjenny]

Technically the attorney could not break confidence. This is another reason that lawyers don't really want to know if a client is guilty or not. They don't want to be treated like a psychologist or a priest, as a sounding board for the guilty confessions of the client. And they don't want the moral dilemma of what to do when they know something like this. They have to believe in the right of everyone to get fair representation, but they are human too (at least that's what they tell us ). It's sometimes really hard to remember their belief if their client is a really bad dude.

If a client confesses to the lawyer, then legally the lawyer can not go to court and say "my client is innocent." They can still argue reasonable doubt but they can not legally present defense they know is not true. So that's why lawyers don't usually ask the client if the client did it.

 

[katydid23]

I'm not so sure that they can, JeannaT. Hopefully, a lawyer on here will answer this better though.

This is what I've found:



http://attorneypages.com/help/ch10-mad-at-lawyer.htm

It is like Gitana stated. If there is not a trialgoing on,then a private lawyer can
leave the client for various reasons, and vice versa. But once the trial starts,if there is one, then not so simple to quit.

 

[matou]

Just posted in the MSN thread: CS will continue to look for Baby Lisa. She will give a news conference tomorrow morning about the search for Lisa.

http://www.kmbz.com/Cyndy-Short--I-will-continue-to-search-for-Baby-Li/11333882

 

[vlpate]

Just posted in the MSN thread: CS will continue to look for Baby Lisa. She will give a news conference tomorrow morning about the search for Lisa.

http://www.kmbz.com/Cyndy-Short--I-will-continue-to-search-for-Baby-Li/11333882

"Cyndy Short: I will continue to search for Baby Lisa

The local attorney, who is no longer counsel for the parents of missing Baby Lisa says in a statement released today (Sunday) that she will continue to search for the child as a concerned citizen. Cyndy Short announced Friday she was no longer the family's local attorney after reports surfaced that Short and lead attorney Joe Tacopina were butting heads after Tacopina tried to fire her. Short is holding a news conference about the search for Baby Lisa tomorrow morning. Bay Lisa has been missing nearly four weeks."

This is just strange and unheard of.....I think she was asked to cover for someone/something.

 

[vlpate]

If a client confesses to the lawyer, then legally the lawyer can not go to court and say "my client is innocent." They can still argue reasonable doubt but they can not legally present defense they know is not true. So that's why lawyers don't usually ask the client if the client did it.

And, an attorney cannot allow his/her client to lie on the stand. Baez would have been in BIG trouble had Casey taken the stand!

 

[matou]

"Cyndy Short: I will continue to search for Baby Lisa

The local attorney, who is no longer counsel for the parents of missing Baby Lisa says in a statement released today (Sunday) that she will continue to search for the child as a concerned citizen. Cyndy Short announced Friday she was no longer the family's local attorney after reports surfaced that Short and lead attorney Joe Tacopina were butting heads after Tacopina tried to fire her. Short is holding a news conference about the search for Baby Lisa tomorrow morning. Bay Lisa has been missing nearly four weeks."

This is just strange and unheard of.....I think she was asked to cover for someone/something.

What if Lisa is suddenly found? Can a fired lawyer or one who quit leave an anonymous tip as to the whereabouts of a missing person?