The spokeswoman for Casey Anthony's defense team has resigned.

  • #121
Law students at DePaul do pro bono work:

http://www.law.depaul.edu/students/pro_bono/

To me there is a difference between doing pro dono work, i.e., students volnteering their own time/resources for credits and -- the organization doing pro bono work.

There is an investment and cost associated with using DePaul resources to defend KC and that's where it gets grey and I become concerned. There are many poor local individuals who are far more worthy of pro bono work and they are good practical case studies for the students to learn from.

It is not so much about helping the local community but both defending a high-profile killer in another State as well as using this all to promote a book. Notoriety.

I guess DePaul can feel that this markets and promotes them as well but it seems to cross the line of ethics and equity and fairness. IMHO.

What price Justice? Justice for Caylee.
 
  • #122
I would think DePaul would be concerned about education and not providing PR for a Florida resident. They are a University so don't they have to be careful how their money is spent. Where does most of the money come from to support a University? Contributions?
 
  • #123
I agree that Al wanted someone close to her. I think it was mutual. IMO

But really, How long can someone stay in that position? what is normal? If discovery is done being exchanged, what really is there to talk about other than questionable motions which have nothing to do with premeditated murder.

How long does someone stay in any job/positon. I would venture to say someone could stay employed in that position or any position for a very very long time unless that someone quits/resigns or is fired..or retires etc..

NTS, I don't follow your question about "What is normal" when pertaining to length of employment.

I would not say Discovery is done being exchanged..we have not seen nor heard that the Defense Team has handed any discovery over to the SA nor the Clerk of the County Courts.
 
  • #124
How long does someone stay in any job/positon. I would venture to say someone could stay employed in that position or any position for a very very long time unless that someone quits/resigns or is fired..or retires etc..

NTS, I don't follow your question about "What is normal" when pertaining to length of employment.

I would not say Discovery is done being exchanged..we have not seen nor heard that the Defense Team has handed any discovery over to the SA nor the Clerk of the County Courts.

I agree Intermezzo -but here is where we may have made our big mistake. We've assumed the defense would have discovery, witnesses or evidence, but since the spokespersons job has concluded according to some posters, maybe they don't intend to present any discovery at all.
 
  • #125
To me there is a difference between doing pro dono work, i.e., students volnteering their own time/resources for credits and -- the organization doing pro bono work.

There is an investment and cost associated with using DePaul resources to defend KC and that's where it gets grey and I become concerned. There are many poor local individuals who are far more worthy of pro bono work and they are good practical case studies for the students to learn from.

It is not so much about helping the local community but both defending a high-profile killer in another State as well as using this all to promote a book. Notoriety.

I guess DePaul can feel that this markets and promotes them as well but it seems to cross the line of ethics and equity and fairness. IMHO.

What price Justice? Justice for Caylee.

All valid and very real concerns. We don't know if Liz Brown is a law student or on staff at DePaul, although she's not listed in the staff directory for the law clinic, so it's possible that she may be a 3rd or 4th year law student. As for if it crosses the line of ethics, equity, and fairness...who would be the one to make that call? The director of the law clinic would be my guess, or whoever she answers to.
 
  • #126
"Certainly...she cannot testify" : Brad Conway speaking about Casey to Geraldo.

In this clip, Brad is stating as a fact, not a theory, that the defense has a very good source that Mr. Kronk was in the wooded area on different (additional) days than he said he was. This is the kind of stuff Todd claimed in court, that turns out to be totally unsubstantiated ...it was six months ago they made those claims. Their deadline to produce their witness or proof was two weeks ago...and we are still waiting. THEY DON'T HAVE IT. IF THEY HAD IT THEY WOULD PRODUCE IT. The judge is going to lose patience. This why the defense needs guidance. The defense, and Brad need to speak with one voice, have their facts straight and their one and only comment should be "We have no comment. We are trying this case in the courtroom. Thank you and good day." They should implore upon mom and pop to refrain from commenting, ever , until the trial is resolved. If Lee can remain private...they should take their cues from him, imo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oGQ1-otlD0
Many times when one of the defense members or Brad is on TV, when the host makes comments that are not correct, based on Florida's sunshine laws, for example...they do not correct the host. This makes any comments on the broadcast suspect to the viewer who knows better. Here Geraldo states that the state took the "Unprecedented step to release a recorded conversation between Casey and her parents". What?!!!!

Brad and Geraldo are in agreement that this jailhouse meeting was a "Set up by LE", since Mr. Baez "Gave strict instructions that no more visits were to take place while he was out of town." Wouldn't the easiest way to effectuate his wishes be to call Brad and say..... look this is not in Casey's best interest, tell mom and pop no more visits for now? Clearly, they do not communicate in this manner. Sometimes Brad and Jose disagree in open court for God's sake. That is very ill advised. At least in public , the parents and lawyers should all appear united. They don't need a PR expert to tell them that.... or do they?

In the hearing regarding Dominic, the defense was arguing to the judge about Nejame and a conflict of interest with him representing TES now when he had formerly represented mom and pop. BRAD SHOOK HIS HEAD NO TO THAT. The judge sees all of this... and he can draw inferences just like the rest of us do. Then Mr. Nejame informed the judge that not only is that wholly untrue, he has signed waivers of conflict of interest from both George and Cindy!!!! That is just one example. Clearly they all need to get on the same page before they go out in public and to court appearances. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7LsKP77ycw

To say they need some guidance would be putting it politely.



So many lawyers have publicly opined on this subject, Mr. Sheaffer, our own Mr. Hornsby, many on national talk shows......articles have been written over how much the defense and Casey's family have bumbled public relations and how it harms her case in ways that would be tough to measure.
Like Mr. Nejame, Marti is very learned and capable. The switch is not because they found someone better. It could be financial, or that she threw her hands up and said I give up...or both.

I believe she resigned ;because, she had lost confidence that should could get through to these people. They sabotage themselves and it reflects on her. Long before and long after this case...she has to work in that town and her credibility is her livelihood.
Let's not forget how she became involved in this case. IIRC she was publicly opining at the nightmare going on the Todd Black fiasco and how very counterproductive it was to have someone in PR that does not enjoy a legitimate reputation. I trust she thought she could guide them to safer ground. The thing is ...one can not guide someone until they take off their blinders. It was a bottomless pit.
So, she quit. Good for her.


In the words of Mr. Nejame upon his resignation from this case , "Why hire an adviser ....if you are not going to take their advice?"

Listen to this piece of work, Mr. Black...and ask yourself under whose wise judgment was this man was brought on to a case where a girl is on trial for her life. Clearly...it was a misguided decision. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVATAKaV4HQ Even a google search could have revealed that this man is a criminal. You just can't make this stuff up!!!!!

According to Mr. Nejame the defense could be nearing the time they declare Casey indigent.
WDBO Local NewsIs Casey Anthony's team running out of money?

By Bob Hazen @ February 17, 2010 7:09 AM

The announcement by the spokeswoman for Casey Anthony's defense that she has resigned is raising questions about whether the accused child killer's team is running low on cash.

Marti Mackenzie, a well-known public relations executive, offered no explanation for why she was leaving the case. But high-profile Orlando attorney Mark Nejame says it does make him wonder.
"That would be one of the first places you would look (if money is running out)," Nejame told WDBO. "That's just a luxury and maybe a determination has been made that too much has been spent already."
Anthony's case has dragged on for almost two years, and her attorneys have refused to explain how they're being compensated. Her team includes lawyers and experts from New York, Chicago, and, until recently, California.
Her death penalty-qualified attorney, Andrea Lyon, a Depaul University law professor, was expected to employ students to help in the grunt work on the case. And the new media contact for the team is Liz Brown, identified as being part of Depaul's legal clinic.
Anthony's family was already in serious debt when the case began, and she had no obvious means of supporting herself. Nejame says he believes Anthony's attorney, Jose Baez, could have asked a judge to declare her indigent.

"They can always seek to have somebody declared indigent for cost purposes, and then have the county pick up the tab," Nejame said.

more at link www.wdbo.com

Why does Conway need to coordinate anything with the defense?
 
  • #127
Why does Conway need to coordinate anything with the defense?

I don't know. Just a guess. Because you can't write a book unless you know what is going on? In CA's deposition she did say BC brokered the 48 Hour show for them. JMO
 
  • #128
  • #129
To me there is a difference between doing pro dono work, i.e., students volnteering their own time/resources for credits and -- the organization doing pro bono work.

There is an investment and cost associated with using DePaul resources to defend KC and that's where it gets grey and I become concerned. There are many poor local individuals who are far more worthy of pro bono work and they are good practical case studies for the students to learn from.

It is not so much about helping the local community but both defending a high-profile killer in another State as well as using this all to promote a book. Notoriety.

I guess DePaul can feel that this markets and promotes them as well but it seems to cross the line of ethics and equity and fairness. IMHO.

What price Justice? Justice for Caylee.

This is just utterly disgusting on the part of DePaul. Why in the WORLD would they send people that far out of state when there are people who need assistance in the nearby community. I hope they lose money on this.
 
  • #130
Could he dress up enough to be a "10"... lol

(Shaking fist) Damn you watcher9!! Beat me too it!!!
mad.gif
:crazy:

Law students at DePaul do pro bono work:

http://www.law.depaul.edu/students/pro_bono/

Alan Dershowitz used students on the Klaus Von Bulow case. It's a hell of a thing to have on your resume.
 
  • #131
Why does Conway need to coordinate anything with the defense?

In my opinion, if the goal of his clients , mom and pop, is to stand by their daughter, 100%, then anything that he or they say publicly should be known to the defense. When they are out there saying things that are the exact opposite of what the defense is...that does not serve their daughter. When they are on national tv telling easily disprovable lies...that does not serve their daughter. When their notoriety has reached the level of being dubbed the scamanthonys that does not serve their daughter. It is very common for a defense lawyer to ask the family to refrain from commenting publicly to lessen just this very nightmare. When one lawyer is claiming in open court that Mr. and Mrs. Anthony believe it is a conflict of interest for Mr. Nejame to now represent TES, and then the lawyer for mom and pop says no...not true, that certainly does not serve their daughter well. My goodness...I could list a hundred reasons why they should be on the same page.....IF THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME GOAL. Otherwise, how it looks to the public and the judge is that somebody is lying, and either choice is a disaster for Casey.

( It is just my opinion.) I liken it to politics, behind closed doors the President and his trusted advisers likely have robust debates. Once the policy is decided on, by God, everyone has to put their personal thoughts on the matter to the side. They are all to go out there and sell the President's point of view, with enthusiasm! Pretend you are at a company / client party. One of your co workers you cannot stand is there too. Do you let on to the clients about this? Of course not. For the sake of the company, you put on your game face and suck it up, IF YOU ALL ARE WORKING TOWARD THE SAME GOAL.


PS. I have often thought that deep down mom and pop hate Casey for taking their Caylee from them, and therefore they do sabotage her, even if they do not realize why.

http://www.wftv.com/video/22594183/index.html
__________________
 
  • #132
(Shaking fist) Damn you watcher9!! Beat me too it!!!
mad.gif
:crazy:



Alan Dershowitz used students on the Klaus Von Bulow case. It's a hell of a thing to have on your resume.

Oh Boy! I remember that case....and the retrial in 1985 or so. :banghead:
 
  • #133
In my opinion, if the goal of his clients , mom and pop, is to stand by their daughter, 100%, then anything that he or they say publicly should be known to the defense. When they are out there saying things that are the exact opposite of what the defense is...that does not serve their daughter. When they are on national tv telling easily disprovable lies...that does not serve their daughter. When their notoriety has reached the level of being dubbed the scamanthonys that does not serve their daughter. It is very common for a defense lawyer to ask the family to refrain from commenting publicly to lessen just this very nightmare. When one lawyer is claiming in open court that Mr. and Mrs. Anthony believe it is a conflict of interest for Mr. Nejame to now represent TES, and then the lawyer for mom and pop says no...not true, that certainly does not serve their daughter well. My goodness...I could list a hundred reasons why they should be on the same page.....IF THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME GOAL. Otherwise, how it looks to the public and the judge is that somebody is lying, and either choice is a disaster for Casey.

( It is just my opinion.) I liken it to politics, behind closed doors the President and his trusted advisers likely have robust debates. Once the policy is decided on, by God, everyone has to put their personal thoughts on the matter to the side. They are all to go out there and sell the President's point of view, with enthusiasm! Pretend you are at a company / client party. One of your co workers you cannot stand is there too. Do you let on to the clients about this? Of course not. For the sake of the company, you put on your game face and suck it up, IF YOU ALL ARE WORKING TOWARD THE SAME GOAL.


PS. I have often thought that deep down mom and pop hate Casey for taking their Caylee from them, and therefore they do sabotage her, even if they do not realize why.

GREAT POST TWA

:applause::applause::applause:
 
  • #134
IIRC, the Badens are guest speaking this Thurs. & Fri. at a seminar affiliated with DePaul University. Maybe we'll get lucky and someone will ask them.:waitasec:

2010 Forensic Seminar
WHEN Thursday, February 18 – Friday, February 19, 2010

EVENT SUB-TITLE Forensic Seminar for Capital Defense Attorneys
SPEAKERS Dr. Michael Baden, Linda Kenney-Baden, Carol Brook, Robert Berk, David Klucas, Andrea Lyon, Michael O'Kelly, Mark Pomerance, Dr. Leo Shea, Allen Sincox, Deja Vishny

(Sorry, if Slightly OT)

OT-Dr. Baden is also appearing on Friday at the hearsay hearing for Drew Peterson in Joliet, IL as a final witness for the prosecution. Busy, busy man. :crazy:
 
  • #135
This is just utterly disgusting on the part of DePaul. Why in the WORLD would they send people that far out of state when there are people who need assistance in the nearby community. I hope they lose money on this.

Hey Horace... I get what you're saying and agree that local activism keeps folks, well, maybe a little more honest about their motivations (and certainly costs less!). This conversation got me thinking about Barry Scheck's Innocence Project, which also uses student interns. I've posted a link and their mission statement below. Hope this is not egregiously off-topic--so to bring it back around, I will state that AL is a very different animal than Barry Scheck. And I don't think he would touch this case with a ten-foot pole wrapped in an iron-clad attorney-client contract!

I do suspect AL fancies herself a Scheck-esque figure in the world of criminal law. Below from Innocence Project's website, bolded line in mission statement bolded by me:


http://www.innocenceproject.org/

"The Innocence Project was founded in 1992 by Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University to assist prisoners who could be proven innocent through DNA testing. To date, 251 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing, including 17 who served time on death row. These people served an average of 13 years in prison before exoneration and release.

The Innocence Project’s full-time staff attorneys and Cardozo clinic students provide direct representation or critical assistance in most of these cases. The Innocence Project’s groundbreaking use of DNA technology to free innocent people has provided irrefutable proof that wrongful convictions are not isolated or rare events but instead arise from systemic defects. Now an independent nonprofit organization closely affiliated with Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, the Innocence Project’s mission is nothing less than to free the staggering numbers of innocent people who remain incarcerated and to bring substantive reform to the system responsible for their unjust imprisonment."
 
  • #136
I would think DePaul would be concerned about education and not providing PR for a Florida resident. They are a University so don't they have to be careful how their money is spent. Where does most of the money come from to support a University? Contributions?

TUITION......lol
 
  • #137
I have worked with several attys who were also law professors...I can honestly say they never had their classes provide free legal services to defendants.....but I did have to type up their exams.....and sometimes help grade them.....oh where is the justice?
 
  • #138
  • #139
Hey Horace... I get what you're saying and agree that local activism keeps folks, well, maybe a little more honest about their motivations (and certainly costs less!). This conversation got me thinking about Barry Scheck's Innocence Project, which also uses student interns. I've posted a link and their mission statement below. Hope this is not egregiously off-topic--so to bring it back around, I will state that AL is a very different animal than Barry Scheck. And I don't think he would touch this case with a ten-foot pole wrapped in an iron-clad attorney-client contract!

I do suspect AL fancies herself a Scheck-esque figure in the world of criminal law. Below from Innocence Project's website, bolded line in mission statement bolded by me:


http://www.innocenceproject.org/

"The Innocence Project was founded in 1992 by Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University to assist prisoners who could be proven innocent through DNA testing. To date, 251 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing, including 17 who served time on death row. These people served an average of 13 years in prison before exoneration and release.

The Innocence Project’s full-time staff attorneys and Cardozo clinic students provide direct representation or critical assistance in most of these cases. The Innocence Project’s groundbreaking use of DNA technology to free innocent people has provided irrefutable proof that wrongful convictions are not isolated or rare events but instead arise from systemic defects. Now an independent nonprofit organization closely affiliated with Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, the Innocence Project’s mission is nothing less than to free the staggering numbers of innocent people who remain incarcerated and to bring substantive reform to the system responsible for their unjust imprisonment."

Respectfully BBM, ynotdivein. You brought up a wonderful comparison that made me examine my thoughts. Thank you. It has made me wonder why I respect what Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld do while I feel contempt for A Lyons' undertakings. On the surface they seem much alike. But even though I'm not a real fan of capitol punishment, I still have more respect for the Innocence Project than the Angel of Death Row. (Does Ms Lyons have a name for her project, too, or just a name for herself?)

It could be that I've taken the wrong impression away from Ms Lyons' lectures. (Thank you, SOTS, for your research and informative thread on her lectures.) But I'm left with the view of A. Lyons as a very clinical, ruthless and contrived lawyer who devises a drama, as if on stage, to manipulate facts, legal motions, finances and juries to best suit her end. I am suspicious that her motives are less for justice and more for self-aggrandizement.

While we have yet to learn what Ms Lyons' payment for her services are, IMHO, I am confident she has made certain she will be fully compensated whether by cash, book deals or recognition. I understand that the Innocence Project is nonprofit but that certainly doesn't preclude the staff from drawing an income.

So why would I be proud to have my college children work on one project but not the other? Could it be because of how the cases to represent are weighed? Could it be as simple as the choice of cases? I have the notion that the IP looks for innocent people while AL would represent anyone who is facing the DP, innocent or not. And I don't respect the fact that she will try to win at all costs. Cost to others, that is.

I only pray that all of her student interns have volunteered their efforts of their own free will and have not been felt pressured into participation for fear of it influencing their grades.
 
  • #140
It could be that I've taken the wrong impression away from Ms Lyons' lectures. (Thank you, SOTS, for your research and informative thread on her lectures.) But I'm left with the view of A. Lyons as a very clinical, ruthless and contrived lawyer who devises a drama, as if on stage, to manipulate facts, legal motions, finances and juries to best suit her end. I am suspicious that her motives are less for justice and more for self-aggrandizement.

Respectfully snipped and bolded by me.

That sums it up IMO.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
2,214
Total visitors
2,311

Forum statistics

Threads
632,934
Messages
18,633,838
Members
243,351
Latest member
AlianaDuke
Back
Top