Just click the icon "+ on the lower far right of the post and it'll add it as a quote in your reply.
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #8
- Thread starter Coldpizza
- Start date
-
Australia - 3 dead after eating wild mushrooms, Leongatha, Victoria, Aug 2023 #14 *Arrest*- Latest: Smelly Squirrel
-
- Status
Just click the icon "+ on the lower far right of the post and it'll add it as a quote in your reply.
How awful a loss! Not so much all the
stuff (though I know how much work that must have been), but everything else too, especially photos. 
. Please may you find that thumb drive, and soon! Your memory is correct . She never accused Nurmi about writing a book (unless in chambers, which I heartily doubt), until he made public that he was in the process of writing the thing.
(Thanks for the reminder, Geevee).
I agree with Steve. That excessive publicity argument isn't gonna work, because it was the
herself, not Nurmi, who sought the publicity at every turn, from immediately after her arrest until, well, now.Nurmi in fact filed motion after motion to restrict publicity, including to forbid cameras in the court during both trials.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the argument Clark wants to have included in the COA appeal (or, to have be supplemented) is that JSS erred in ruling against the
's demand that Nurmi be removed as counsel.(Thanks for the reminder, Geevee).
I agree with Steve. That excessive publicity argument isn't gonna work, because it was the
Nurmi in fact filed motion after motion to restrict publicity, including to forbid cameras in the court during both trials.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the argument Clark wants to have included in the COA appeal (or, to have be supplemented) is that JSS erred in ruling against the
Nurmi's simple defense for his alleged hostile behavior towards her during his representation would be it was necessary because she relentlessly tried to inject herself into the process as co-council if not lead council, attempted to veto or micro-manage his strategy once she had agreed to it, and instead of understanding her role as client, was making it impossible for him to do his job, a job he admittedly didn't want but took seriously just the same, and finally, that his 'ineffective' and 'hostile' behavior in fact saved her from the dp.
(Thanks for the reminder, Geevee).
I agree with Steve. That excessive publicity argument isn't gonna work, because it was the
Nurmi in fact filed motion after motion to restrict publicity, including to forbid cameras in the court during both trials.
The more I think about it, the more I think that the argument Clark wants to have included in the COA appeal (or, to have be supplemented) is that JSS erred in ruling against the
BBM
Yeah, I would guess she figures it's her best hope of gaining a new trial (legal err on the part of the judge), Nurm did everything he could to limit the excessive publicity, he even got JS to allow her to testify in a sealed courtroom in #2, what more could he have done aside from muzzling her to prevent interviews?
Gee, I wonder who all he'll call as witnesses to her media attempts, Troy Hayden (replay her voice messages) - who else did she give interviews to or contact? Seems like Joe Arpaio gave her pretty liberal use of the phone.
If he admits it was impossible to properly do his job (even if it was his own client who caused it), does he play into her hand of ineffective counsel?
Arguments on appeal are inherently weaker with a LWOP sentence than in a DP sentence. With the DP, even the slightest error becomes a matter of life or death. With LWOP it becomes a much lighter weight on the side of the plaintiff: was justice served? What additional expense in terms of both time and money would be involved in granting a request for new council? Would the outcome likely be materially different etc. Since the actual outcome of Nurmi's continued representation was likely the best outcome for her, her argument falls apart.
It would only have been impossible if he gave in to her irrational demands, which he didn't, which is why she became hostile towards him and why he found it necessary to ignore her after a certain point. IOW it was for her own good, of course she is incapable of comprehending that. All she understands is that he frustrated her inner Einstein, who, when allowed out to play during pro per, went running back to Nurmi in short order.
Then there's the priming of social media with the distilled wisdom of the human race in support of her cause to the delight of her handful of supporters and the nonplussed stares of the general public.
She was little more than a prop on the courtroom stage who mined her supporters on social media for an angle which ended up a twisted circular path back to nowhere. No mitigating factor of record came from her.
Nurmi will never say she made it impossible to do his job. That would be an admission he provided her ineffective counsel, which he absolutely doesn't believe. IIRC, a lot of his book amounted to patting himself on the back for achieving what seemed to him throughout as highly improbable, which was saving her from the DP, despite her undermining him & fighting against all his best efforts.
Her direct appeal (to the COA) versus her (presumed) application for Post Conviction Relief:
Direct appeal: the COA will not (isn't allowed to) consider any new evidence, nor may they consider claims of ineffective counsel. A direct appeal is essentially only about whether or not JSS interpreted and applied relevant law correctly. Most of Nurmi's numerous motions related to this point- objections to her rulings, which laid the groundwork for appellate review.
The
can't petition for PCR until after all her state-level appeals are exhausted. So it will be then and only then she'll be able to go after Nurmi about her grievances directly related to his representation. Even if JSS agrees to hear her petition (she doesn't have to), the will have to prove that the trial's outcome would have been different had it not been for Nurmi's errors and meanness & badness, etc.Good luck with that,
. A different outcome in PP2 would have been the DP. And a different outcome in the guilt phase? She says now that Nurmi didn't give her the defense of her choice. Even if sealed records & her pro per stints & a whole pile of other evidence and facts don't shred that assertion, there is an inconvenient bottom line for her. The defense of her choice was, by her own admission at sentencing, a lie. To assert ninjas as the truth now is to also admit to perjuring herself on the stand hundreds of times. She's entitled to the defense of her choice, but not to a defense that is demonstrably based on a pack of self-serving lies.Relating to the possibility her appellate attorneys (plus or minus Clark) will argue that JSS erred in ruling against
's two requests to have Nurmi removed. Steve's point about what JSS did in fact consider is likely the bottom line. The wrote in her 2013 letter that JSS had ruled against her the first time on the basis that Nurmi shouldn't be replaced because of his knowledge of her case;( the time required to bring yet another attorney up to speed would have unnecessarily delayed completing a trial that had already gone literally years past the statutory timeframe for trial completion).That decision by JSS is called judicial discretion.
attorneys would have to convince the COA that JSS's ruling was not only a judicial error (different than discretion) but one so grievous that the was deprived of a fair trial.MDLR is obviously still willing to wade in murky waters for the
. But...she has never visited the in prison (Lumley), has never been on the 's visitors list, and IIRC, there was chatter a long while ago about MDLR not being in any kind of regular contact with .Excellent post, Hope. So, do you think she actually think she'll get a new trial out of this, or is it solely for spite? I can't decide what guides her more, delusional views or her bottomless capacity to inflict pain and destruction on whomever has displeased her (maybe it just depends on which way the wind is blowing that day).
MDLR is obviously still willing to wade in murky waters for the
All in her own defense no doubt. I guess as a friend she falls short, but as a paid escort she takes her job seriously, and wears it well I might add.
It's the job of the snow to fall, it's the condition of the ground that determines if it will stick. So her snow-jobs continue, as unlikely as it is to fall on receptive ground.
Who knows, but if I had to guess, I think she absolutely does believe she'll get a new trial based on Nurmi's "defective" representation, but that she's aware at least that the COA won't be the entity gifting her that.
I imagine she thinks she's solely responsible for Nurmi being disbarred, and likely feels mighty self-satisfied & empowered by bringing him down that far. As we know, though, her thirst for revenge is never slaked, not even by murder, and what else does she have to do anyway, except doodle & trace, watch her back, and scheme how to keep herself stocked with Beano, zit cream, sardines, and shank-proof toothbrushes (but still no toothpaste ever bought).
Who knows, but if I had to guess, I think she absolutely does believe she'll get a new trial based on Nurmi's "defective" representation, but that she's aware at least that the COA won't be the entity gifting her that.
I imagine she thinks she's solely responsible for Nurmi being disbarred, and likely feels mighty self-satisfied & empowered by bringing him down that far. As we know, though, her thirst for revenge is never slaked, not even by murder, and what else does she have to do anyway, except doodle & trace, watch her back, and scheme how to keep herself stocked with Beano, zit cream, sardines, and shank-proof toothbrushes (but still no toothpaste ever bought).
BBM
Now I feel like gagging. :sick:
Do you still visit Beth's site? Just curious if she's had anything posted we hadn't heard yet. Though I suppose word would get around if she did.
No, I haven't subscribed to Beth's site for over a year or so. I'd be surprised if she has anything new on the
, since she lost interest in the case long ago, and more to the point, said way back when that everything of interest had been put under heavy duty padlocks & seal, given the pending appeal and endless litigation.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
- Messages
- 13,305
- Reaction score
- 85,978
No, I haven't subscribed to Beth's site for over a year or so. I'd be surprised if she has anything new on the
Hope
so glad to come back and read your posts and Geevee and all the others. I have wondered how you all are.
And thanks for your insight. Always good.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 210
- Guests online
- 519
- Total visitors
- 729