Found Deceased WY - Gabby Petito, Grand Teton National Park #87

[arielilane]

Lawyers for the parents of Gabby Petito say they want to hear from the attorney for the parents of her boyfriend Brian Laundrie, who confessed to murdering her in August 2021.

Joseph Petito and Nichole Schmidt, Gabby Petito’s parents, sued Christopher Laundrie and Roberta Laundrie in March 2022, alleging that Brian Laundrie had told his parents that he killed his girlfriend while they were on a trip in Wyoming and that the Laundries not only didn’t share this information with Petito and Schmidt, they tried to make arrangements for their son to leave the country.

Brian Petito died by suicide after returning home to Florida.

More at link...


Brian Laundrie's lawyer may be forced to answer questions about the murder of Gabby Petito

Oct 27th, 2023, 1:23 pm

 

[Sundog]

dbm

 

[Sundog]

Motion to Compel Bertolino's testimony filed late yesterday afternoon.

Page 3: BL confessed therefore he waived the privilege which belongs to him, not SB so SB must be compelled to testify

<snipped for focus>

IANAL, but my experience with attorney-client privilege in relation to privileged communication is that following a client's death, the privilege is transferred to the personal representative of the deceased's estate. The privilege belonged to BL but following his death, the privilege was transferred to his estate and the personal representative of his estate. That would be his parents if he didn't leave a will stating otherwise. Perhaps the parents can transfer the privilege they now hold for BL back to the attorney, but an attorney would have to weigh in on this.

JMO.

 

[Jurisprudence]

<snipped for focus>

IANAL, but my experience with attorney-client privilege in relation to privileged communication is that following a client's death, the privilege is transferred to the personal representative of the deceased's estate. The privilege belonged to BL but following his death, the privilege was transferred to his estate and the personal representative of his estate. That would be his parents if he didn't leave a will stating otherwise. Perhaps the parents can transfer the privilege they now hold for BL back to the attorney, but an attorney would have to weigh in on this.

JMO.

I think if you look at their papers you'll see that their argument is that there was no privilege that survived death. He waived it by his confession. It's a very interesting argument. jmo

 

[Sundog]

I think if you look at their papers you'll see that their argument is that there was no privilege that survived death. He waived it by his confession. It's a very interesting argument. jmo

Yes, it is interesting, but will it stand up in the courts, not just this civil case, but beyond upon appeal. I have my doubts about that. I think the transfer of BL's privilege goes to his estate upon his death, regardless of his confession and that his conversations with his attorney are still privileged but are transferred to his estate as are all of his assets. It will be interesting to see how the various courts rule on this if the motion isn't dismissed/ruled against by the civil case judge.

 

[justtrish]

I have a question about attorney client privilege. If Brian confessed to his lawyer BEFORE her body was found, is the lawyer obligated to say anything? It's one thing if they found a body and he confessed and then the lawyer is just ensuring a fair trial, but man if he did confess to his lawyer before she was found, is the lawyer just required to keep quiet and let those parents suffer and LE continue to search vast areas trying to locate her? If her body is never then found that lawyer just says nothing ever?

 

[Jurisprudence]

Yes, it is interesting, but will it stand up in the courts, not just this civil case, but beyond upon appeal. I have my doubts about that. I think the transfer of BL's privilege goes to his estate upon his death, regardless of his confession and that his conversations with his attorney are still privileged but are transferred to his estate as are all of his assets. It will be interesting to see how the various courts rule on this if the motion isn't dismissed/ruled against by the civil case judge.

Do you think SB didn't know GP was deceased (or where she was) prior to the time he made that statement to the media? I am inclined to agree with JP & NS that he did in fact know. SB's own conduct caused me to believe this. His tactics and his conduct deeply troubled me (opinion only), so I struggled to believe anything he said.

I questioned very early on if there ever even existed a valid privilege considering BL brought his family into it. I still question "who" he was really retained by and more importantly when he was actually retained (to put an actual date to any privilege that might have attached). I hoped we would get a verifiable answer, but we didn't. We only got his word. Once media started asking this there was a marked shift to "I represent the family", under a perpetual on-going retainer and then he (according to his own statements), called for ethics advice to back him up and cover himself. There were a lot of wrongs done here unfortunately. I wish the state of Florida had done more to press. Instead, they seemed to take his word and back off. I think he should be compelled to testify and I hope the judge requires it. Let him take the 5th. In a civil case a jury can draw a negative inference from a party taking the 5th.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I have a question about attorney client privilege. If Brian confessed to his lawyer BEFORE her body was found, is the lawyer obligated to say anything? It's one thing if they found a body and he confessed and then the lawyer is just ensuring a fair trial, but man if he did confess to his lawyer before she was found, is the lawyer just required to keep quiet and let those parents suffer and LE continue to search vast areas trying to locate her? If her body is never then found that lawyer just says nothing ever?

He can't say anything if there is no risk to another person so he shouldn't have said anything at all. Him saying what he said is what gave Gabby's parents a cause of action against him. You raise a good point in a complicated area. The attached is NY where he's barred even though scenario doesn't apply to him.
jmo

"The most well-known instance in which an attorney may reveal such information is to “prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm” to the client or third parties. If the death or bodily harm has already occurred,... the attorney is not required (nor may be compelled) to breach confidentiality. This happened in the infamous “Buried Bodies Case,” in which Robert Garrow Sr. (the client) told Frank Armani and Francis Belge (his attorneys) where he had buried the bodies of his murder victims. Under threat of disbarment and criminal charges (not to mention harassment and death threats), Armani and Belge stood their ground and did not disclose. In fact, the Committee on Professional Ethics found that the attorneys would have violated their confidentiality duties if they disclosed the location of the bodies to authorities.

There was tremendous public outcry because disclosure would have brought peace to the families, but that disclosure would not have prevented deaths or harm. Thus, the exceptions under Rule 1.6(b) did not apply, and Armani and Belge were bound by confidentiality. This case is a testament to the importance of confidentiality within the legal community, though we cannot ignore the professional fallout and personal toll maintaining a high ethical code can take. Armani and Belge were ultimately absolved of any wrongdoing."
attorney-professionalism-forum-does-attorney-client-privilege-survive-a-clients-death

 

[justtrish]

He can't say anything if there is no risk to another person so he shouldn't have said anything at all. Him saying what he said is what gave Gabby's parents a cause of action against him. You raise a good point in a complicated area. The attached is NY where he's barred even though scenario doesn't apply to him.
jmo

"The most well-known instance in which an attorney may reveal such information is to “prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm” to the client or third parties. If the death or bodily harm has already occurred,... the attorney is not required (nor may be compelled) to breach confidentiality. This happened in the infamous “Buried Bodies Case,” in which Robert Garrow Sr. (the client) told Frank Armani and Francis Belge (his attorneys) where he had buried the bodies of his murder victims. Under threat of disbarment and criminal charges (not to mention harassment and death threats), Armani and Belge stood their ground and did not disclose. In fact, the Committee on Professional Ethics found that the attorneys would have violated their confidentiality duties if they disclosed the location of the bodies to authorities.

There was tremendous public outcry because disclosure would have brought peace to the families, but that disclosure would not have prevented deaths or harm. Thus, the exceptions under Rule 1.6(b) did not apply, and Armani and Belge were bound by confidentiality. This case is a testament to the importance of confidentiality within the legal community, though we cannot ignore the professional fallout and personal toll maintaining a high ethical code can take. Armani and Belge were ultimately absolved of any wrongdoing."
attorney-professionalism-forum-does-attorney-client-privilege-survive-a-clients-death

Wow this just feels icky (couldn't find a better word).

I understand it, but I don't like it. If someone did confess AND say where bodies were buried, they are just evil. Now that lawyer has to live with knowing this information. It's like it just expands the suffering by now including others that have to keep this secret and legally they can be in trouble if they don't. It's just twisted and awful.

In this case with Brian, there was more harm done because Brian took his own life. Perhaps if someone said something sooner that wouldn't have happened. I don't know who knew what and when, but from the outside it sure looks like his parents and his lawyers knew something.

 

[MyBelle]

I think if you look at their papers you'll see that their argument is that there was no privilege that survived death. He waived it by his confession. It's a very interesting argument. jmo

It really is interesting, but I also doubt the attorney has as much information as Gabby's parents believe.

Saying she was "gone" is pretty vague. I also don't believe their attorney wanted to know the specific location of her body.

JMO

 

[GRT]

Yes, it is interesting, but will it stand up in the courts, not just this civil case, but beyond upon appeal. I have my doubts about that. I think the transfer of BL's privilege goes to his estate upon his death, regardless of his confession and that his conversations with his attorney are still privileged but are transferred to his estate as are all of his assets. It will be interesting to see how the various courts rule on this if the motion isn't dismissed/ruled against by the civil case judge.

That makes sense to me, but I can't help but think Brian didn't confess to anyone until he wrote his suicide confession. If he had previously confessed--why would he have to do it again?

I just doubt he did, which means his parents and his attorney might very well have suspected he killed Gabby, but they didn't have any actual way of knowing for sure.

All JMOO, of course, but how many times does a person have to confess?

 

[Megnut]

That makes sense to me, but I can't help but think Brian didn't confess to anyone until he wrote his suicide confession. If he had previously confessed--why would he have to do it again?

I just doubt he did, which means his parents and his attorney might very well have suspected he killed Gabby, but they didn't have any actual way of knowing for sure.

All JMOO, of course, but how many times does a person have to confess?

(I suspect he may have told a tale whereby G died herself, and feared he'd be blamed. Hence the scramble for protection by the parents and attorney. Natch, they'd believe his version, panic on high. IMO even his "confession" isn't the whole truth. He murdered her. Slowly. And Brutally. All the rest, attempts to make himself look not so bad. Remorse? Sure. I imagine lots of murderers who murder their significant others wish they could undead them, after. Doesn't undo the crime. I wish he'd left G at the hotel, alive. Either time.)

JMO

 

[Wallendo]

I suspect this latest round of legal arguments will postpone the trial another year or two.

This is already a case trying to create a new legal precedence and now brings in issues related to attorney-client privilege. The appeals related to compelling Bertolino's testimony may take years. Bertolino is the "deep pockets" in this case. He is also not a Florida resident and it may be much easier to collect from him.

 

[housewife]

That makes sense to me, but I can't help but think Brian didn't confess to anyone until he wrote his suicide confession. If he had previously confessed--why would he have to do it again?

IMHO
Brian confessed to his parents to get their help in avoiding legal repercussions. He wanted protection.
Brian confessed in the suicide note because he wanted to broadcast his version of what happened. He wanted notoriety.

It's all self-serving.

 

[LinasK]

That makes sense to me, but I can't help but think Brian didn't confess to anyone until he wrote his suicide confession. If he had previously confessed--why would he have to do it again?

I just doubt he did, which means his parents and his attorney might very well have suspected he killed Gabby, but they didn't have any actual way of knowing for sure.

All JMOO, of course, but how many times does a person have to confess?

It's not a matter of have to. It's their need/want to confess multiple times- changing their story, etc...

 

[Laura456]

It's not a matter of have to. It's their need/want to confess multiple times- changing their story, etc...

I mean if one means to no longer exist, why lie? His legacy is going to be an ugly one either way.

 

[MyBelle]

IMHO
Brian confessed to his parents to get their help in avoiding legal repercussions. He wanted protection.
Brian confessed in the suicide note because he wanted to broadcast his version of what happened. He wanted notoriety.

It's all self-serving.

I think it will be impossible to prove Brian confessed the exact location of the body to his parents.

I'm also not sure he wanted notoriety. I think he committed suicide because he was remorseful and wanted his family to know it.

JMO

 

[housewife]

I think it will be impossible to prove Brian confessed the exact location of the body to his parents.

I'm also not sure he wanted notoriety. I think he committed suicide because he was remorseful and wanted his family to know it.

JMO

With the limited information we currently have, I agree it will be impossible to prove.
That's why the Petito's are asking for any correspondence (texts, IMs) Brian had made. They need the info, not money.

Domestic Violence is fascinating to learn about, I would recommend reading or listening to Dr. Laura Richards discuss this case in detail. Dr. Richards explores Brian's suicide note, in which he tries to create a narrative about how he bravely carried Gabby to the safety of a warm fire. He writes that he ended Gabby's life out of mercy. We know he's lying because Gabby's injuries do not match his story. He knows he's lying, but why?

To make himself look better.

 

[Nikynoo]

I think if you look at their papers you'll see that their argument is that there was no privilege that survived death. He waived it by his confession. It's a very interesting argument. jmo

but surely, any advice that BL received is privileged and remains priviledged? A cnfession shouldn't knock that out. I doubt that he admitted to the murder to his lawyer and his lawyer advised him to go on holiday and run away. I admit, its a good argument though.

 

[Sundog]

but surely, any advice that BL received is privileged and remains priviledged? A cnfession shouldn't knock that out. I doubt that he admitted to the murder to his lawyer and his lawyer advised him to go on holiday and run away. I admit, its a good argument though.

IANAL, but I posted upthread that it appears that after death, the priviledge goes to the heir of the deceased's estate, it is one of his assets. So that would be BL's parents. They would now "own" the privilege, if I am understanding it correctly. If that is the case, then I assume that BL's parents can give that privilege to his attorney.

Perhaps an estate lawyer can weigh in on this.