2010.08.16 Brad Conway Resigns

[nums24]

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/target_8/Beebe-to-family-Didnt-kill-Henslee

True or not I have to admit this exact scenario ran though my mind a couple of times too especially after seeing the of the pictures they were both in.

Also puzzling to me were the close tabs her husband kept on her along with her having no car, cell or internet. I could see maybe one but all three in this day and time just seems strange, like she was put in isolation.

Time and evidence hopefully will tell the truth.

Thanks for the update! That's such a mess too, no way do I believe the perp. I need evidence first.

But I don't think BC wants to take a case in the middle of winter in MI :wink:

 

[Wysteria]

I think someone's fixin' to lose him a bar license and continuing all the way down to his library card.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BBM with much respect.
Just some wonderings regarding the documents I have read on the thread involving Brad, Biaz, TES etc... and the tampering investigation. If anyone could help me out here I'd appreciated it...please and thank ya.

I'm no expert, but that does seem to be the case, Numbers. Does something like this also lead to criminal charges?

Does anyone know how this alleged situation could affect JB defending ICA?
Would LE sit on something like this until the trial is concluded?:waitasec: Would LE be allowed to wait in the first place?
Maybe LE is going to wait until after the trial because I'm fairly certain that we will see more indications of Biaz's alleged "mistruths", thus making LE's case stronger. (if that is; they are permitted to wait in the first place.)

This is some serious stuff. I just don't know how serious.
Thanks much in advance if anyone knows. If not, maybe I could ask on the lawyer thread.

In the meantime I'll try and do some searching for case law regarding matters like this. I'm thinking that you could get disbarred but it's the legal part/charges I'm not gettin'...like perjury and whatnot.

If JB is looking to get out of this case now and regrets ever getting involved, it looks like to me this could be a very painful, costly and embarrasing manner in which to do so. Sounds crazy but look at what we have seen so far. Good Lord.

*pweez excluse speling and gramerr erorrs im inna hrruy*

 

[Wysteria]

Will we ever find out? Should this post be in the Lawyers' thread? Is everyone else as kerflunkeled as I am?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*respectfully edited and bolded by me*

Yes! See above.
kerflunkeled LOL.
Glad I'm not the only one and in good company too!

 

[kaRN]

Oh I bet he knows PLENTY. I wouldn't trust that so-and-so for a second. He was the Anthony consigliere, the "fixer", although IMO Cindy didn't tell him everything, just picked and chose what she wanted him to know and what she wanted him to DO for her. I doubt we'll ever find out half of what he knows about them.

He gave it up about Baez, when he had to, to save his sorry skin when pushed against the wall. Big whoop.

He's no hero. Just a coward with a law license trying to save his butt. I know it sounds harsh but I can't help remembering all the complete and total lies he spewed over the course of his representation of those horrible people. And he did it for FREE.

He should've just done the right thing by his PAYING client, the whistleblower, but nooo, he was too busy kissing Cindy's rear 24/7. FOR FREE.

Great post jennyb!!

 

[kaRN]

If it (duct tape) was placed prior to death, there would have been NO tape residue on the bone correct?

Correct.
I bet he can't claim there was no tape residue on the hair mat though. I'm answering you months after the fact Tulessa so it's fun to see this again and wonder why the good Dr hasn't mentioned the skull mud here.

 

[Numbers]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BBM with much respect.
Just some wonderings regarding the documents I have read on the thread involving Brad, Biaz, TES etc... and the tampering investigation. If anyone could help me out here I'd appreciated it...please and thank ya.

I'm no expert, but that does seem to be the case, Numbers. Does something like this also lead to criminal charges?

Does anyone know how this alleged situation could affect JB defending ICA?
Would LE sit on something like this until the trial is concluded?:waitasec: Would LE be allowed to wait in the first place?
Maybe LE is going to wait until after the trial because I'm fairly certain that we will see more indications of Biaz's alleged "mistruths", thus making LE's case stronger. (if that is; they are permitted to wait in the first place.)

This is some serious stuff. I just don't know how serious.
Thanks much in advance if anyone knows. If not, maybe I could ask on the lawyer thread.

In the meantime I'll try and do some searching for case law regarding matters like this. I'm thinking that you could get disbarred but it's the legal part/charges I'm not gettin'...like perjury and whatnot.

If JB is looking to get out of this case now and regrets ever getting involved, it looks like to me this could be a very painful, costly and embarrasing manner in which to do so. Sounds crazy but look at what we have seen so far. Good Lord.

*pweez excluse speling and gramerr erorrs im inna hrruy*

Alas, I am not a lawyer, so I can't offer you definitive answers.

But even I can recognize this represents the perfect example of SNAFU.

Emphasis on the FU.

 

[Just Jayla]

Or maybe Geraldo, he's also an attorney:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldo_Rivera

Is Padilla still a member of the bar?

 

[Numbers]

Is Padilla still a member of the bar?

".. not licensed in California."

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Padilla"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Padilla[/ame]

I thought I remembered something about he never passed the bar, but it was because he decided to do something else, not that he failed it.

That memory is too deep to access at this moment.

 

[Kentjbkent]

".. not licensed in California."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Padilla

I thought I remembered something about he never passed the bar, but it was because he decided to do something else, not that he failed it.

That memory is too deep to access at this moment.

As I recall it after doing mucho background research on Mr. Padilla back in the day, he attended some law school and had a degree but never attempted the bar.

Instead, he chose to open a "minority Law University" but did not stick with this venture long.

Oh, and before you get visions of some big campus, this university was housed in one of a couple of units he purchased in a strip mall (that also held his bail bond and bounty hunting businesses).

The IRS, of course, seized these assets in attempt to coup the $1.5 MIL Padilla owed them in August of 2008.

At least that is what I am recalling without taking the effort to go back over my notes. I retired Padilla a LONG time ago! :rocker:

 

[Intermezzo]

I'm trying to get as excited about these revelations, because we can clearly see what is so very wrong about this both legally and ethically.

But a huge part of me is sighing and thinking - oh geez - somehow somewhere JB is going to be able to slime his way out of this and all will go on as before.

It's not as if he hasn't pulled similar stunts in the past and had them glossed over.:banghead:

Sigh....

Maybe I just need to go for a walk and get some sunshine on my face?

bbm
I agree with you
If anything Baez has and will make sure he has covered his butt and someone else will take the fall...for something IMO Baez instigates.

After reading Brad's transcript...I believe what Dominic Casey accused Baez of, "not telling the authorities if they found Caylee", rings true.

IMO, Baez plays a game of he said she said very well

 

[Intermezzo]

Makes you wonder what other little gems BC knows about but has not revealed...

Oh I am certain Mark Nejame and Brad Conway have many hidden gems they can not reveal due to client/attorney privilege.

 

[Intermezzo]

BC did originally act as an extension of ICA's Defense team, especially where they wanted to distance themselves from something or have it come from another source. It was all orchestrated IIRC.

Obviously the Defense even crossed BC's ethical boundaries and went too far, into an area he did not want to be associated. With CA in collusion with JB and BC left out of the loop he wasn't left much choice than to move on or risk his credibility further.

bbm
I agree..

 

[Gnatcatcher]

Maybe this is better asked in the ask a lawyer thread but I"ll throw it in here first, and move it if suggested.

Ok, so... C&G signed a waiver of conflict of interest, which said that they didn't mind if MN became TM's attorney. Right?

And then apparently, while BC is still their attorney, they went behind BC's back, along with JB and tried to get that waiver of conflict of interest recinded.

Am I getting that right?

My questions are:

1) What exactly does the waiver of conflict of interest, the original, mean?
2) What were they trying to accomplish by recinding it?
3) Why would they leave BC out of the loop when recinding it?
4) What legal implications does this have for Baez, other than being unethical (or is that enough?)
5) Does the recinding actually take affect? If so, what does THAT mean now?

THANK YOU ANYONE who can help my little pea brain try and get this stuff!

 

[LambChop]

Maybe this is better asked in the ask a lawyer thread but I"ll throw it in here first, and move it if suggested.

Ok, so... C&G signed a waiver of conflict of interest, which said that they didn't mind if MN became TM's attorney. Right?

And then apparently, while BC is still their attorney, they went behind BC's back, along with JB and tried to get that waiver of conflict of interest recinded.

Am I getting that right?

My questions are:

1) What exactly does the waiver of conflict of interest, the original, mean?
2) What were they trying to accomplish by recinding it?
3) Why would they leave BC out of the loop when recinding it?
4) What legal implications does this have for Baez, other than being unethical (or is that enough?)
5) Does the recinding actually take affect? If so, what does THAT mean now?

THANK YOU ANYONE who can help my little pea brain try and get this stuff!

The impression was from BC's statements, or non-statements, that the A's did not write the letter. That's just the impression we get so either the A's were not truthful with BC and someone did write the letter for JB (which I'm sure will be JB's excuse) or they did not write the letter. Either way it was unethical for JB to go behind BC's back sending the letter to MN. The A's were his clients not JB's. I think this is a big problem for JB. jmo

 

[The World According]

Maybe this is better asked in the ask a lawyer thread but I"ll throw it in here first, and move it if suggested.

Ok, so... C&G signed a waiver of conflict of interest, which said that they didn't mind if MN became TM's attorney. Right?

And then apparently, while BC is still their attorney, they went behind BC's back, along with JB and tried to get that waiver of conflict of interest recinded.

Am I getting that right?

My questions are:

1) What exactly does the waiver of conflict of interest, the original, mean?
2) What were they trying to accomplish by recinding it?
3) Why would they leave BC out of the loop when recinding it?
4) What legal implications does this have for Baez, other than being unethical (or is that enough?)
5) Does the recinding actually take affect? If so, what does THAT mean now?

THANK YOU ANYONE who can help my little pea brain try and get this stuff!

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/440D7AAA027BD6C585256BBC004BD9EF

 

[AZlawyer]

Maybe this is better asked in the ask a lawyer thread but I"ll throw it in here first, and move it if suggested.

Ok, so... C&G signed a waiver of conflict of interest, which said that they didn't mind if MN became TM's attorney. Right?

And then apparently, while BC is still their attorney, they went behind BC's back, along with JB and tried to get that waiver of conflict of interest recinded.

Am I getting that right?

My questions are:

1) What exactly does the waiver of conflict of interest, the original, mean?
2) What were they trying to accomplish by recinding it?
3) Why would they leave BC out of the loop when recinding it?
4) What legal implications does this have for Baez, other than being unethical (or is that enough?)
5) Does the recinding actually take affect? If so, what does THAT mean now?

THANK YOU ANYONE who can help my little pea brain try and get this stuff!

(1) Assuming there was really a conflict of interest (and I'm not sure there was), then the original waiver of conflict of interest allowed MN to represent TES after having represented the Anthonys.

(2) Assuming the As actually wrote the letter purporting to rescind the waiver, and assuming it was THEM trying to accomplish something thereby (as opposed to them simply doing JB's bidding), the purpose would have been to force MN to withdraw from representing TES.

(3) Assuming all of the above lol, I suppose the reason to leave BC out of the loop would have been to avoid having him talk them out of it!

(4) It would be an ethics problem, yes. Which can certainly be a big deal for a lawyer.

(5) Assuming, again, that the As actually wrote the rescinding letter, IMO it doesn't have any effect. I don't think you can "unwaive" a conflict. But plenty of attorneys would just resign at that point from representing the other party anyway.

 

[ThinkTank]

Oh I bet he knows PLENTY. I wouldn't trust that so-and-so for a second. He was the Anthony consigliere, the "fixer", although IMO Cindy didn't tell him everything, just picked and chose what she wanted him to know and what she wanted him to DO for her. I doubt we'll ever find out half of what he knows about them.

He gave it up about Baez, when he had to, to save his sorry skin when pushed against the wall. Big whoop.

He's no hero. Just a coward with a law license trying to save his butt. I know it sounds harsh but I can't help remembering all the complete and total lies he spewed over the course of his representation of those horrible people. And he did it for FREE.

He should've just done the right thing by his PAYING client, the whistleblower, but nooo, he was too busy kissing Cindy's rear 24/7. FOR FREE.

for free. but a promise of a huge BOOK DEAL in the future! and all the media interviews for Brad!
I agree completely with what you posted!!! True!!!

 

[LambChop]

Exactly! Conway acts so appalled that Baez would lie in open court, with Conway sitting right there .... but even if Conway was shocked and stunned at that moment ... why didn't Conway file a Bar Complaint or file something (anything), with the Court to let the Judge know that Baez did something waaaaay wrong? As an officer of the Court, Conway had an obligation to report it - IMO. It was wrong for Conway to go on TV and say how bad it was ... but to take the proper action to report it through proper channels.

But the real question here is would it have done any good for BC to complain. We can see where JS's complaint, along with DC's went when presented to the Bar. Nothing was done, nothing. Maybe a little finger, tsk, tsk waving but that was it. So could it be that BC felt he did not have a strong enough complaint to complain. Not worth all the bad press. MN did not file a complaint either and he had issues with JB. So it may be a matter of picking your battles. This one may not have been worth fighting for considering it is the Casey Anthony case and we all just want it to go to trial as scheduled.

You have to wonder what a lot of these attorneys are thinking about JB's actions. We know RH's opinion and I'm guessing they are all thinking what is this guy up to and it can't be good???? jmo

 

[Novice Seeker]

Perhaps "all the things from her room" was code for "get me her damn diary!"

Everyone knew Brad was holding it for "safe keeping"

ITA. Another code comment to join all those others.

But why would BC be in possession of that diary? Safe keeping from whom or what? Would think if there was anything useful in this diary the A's wouldn't have hit the media circuit about it. If BC was holding on to it because it holds something highly sensitive that could affect this case couldn't it be argued that he was tampering, withholding evidence or obstruction of justice?

From BC's deposition he tells LE what he would hypothetically do if aware of false information but what he is referring to isn't hypothetical. He's been aware of numerous things relating to tampering, motions that Baez submitted to the court which were complete lies.

Then, BC admits that he in fact to review the TES documents at the request of JB. Although BC did not find any documents with LB's name attached BC did go through the records.

Since the latest document dump I still haven't gone through all of them so I apologize if my thoughts are rambled. I'm feeling :rocker::banghead::doh:


Novice Seeker

 

[sumbunny]

ITA. Another code comment to join all those others.

But why would BC be in possession of that diary? Safe keeping from whom or what? Would think if there was anything useful in this diary the A's wouldn't have hit the media circuit about it. If BC was holding on to it because it holds something highly sensitive that could affect this case couldn't it be argued that he was tampering, withholding evidence or obstruction of justice?

From BC's deposition he tells LE what he would hypothetically do if aware of false information but what he is referring to isn't hypothetical. He's been aware of numerous things relating to tampering, motions that Baez submitted to the court which were complete lies.

Then, BC admits that he in fact to review the TES documents at the request of JB. Although BC did not find any documents with LB's name attached BC did go through the records.

Brad made it perfectly clear in MSM that he in fact held the mysterious Journal. That in itself, made me wonder...this diary has more value then I think! Why is it such a guarded item, that requires safe keeping?

Since the latest document dump I still haven't gone through all of them so I apologize if my thoughts are rambled. I'm feeling :rocker::banghead::doh:


Novice Seeker

How I see it.. Baez had been already "thwarting" Brad and going directly the the A's for items (IE-attempt to reverse MN's waiver to work with TES)
Perhaps Brad thought, in the best interest of his clients, it would be better to keep the diary himself. (perhaps JB already asked cindy for the diary, and BC said .."Hey, give it to me..it will stop him from asking you all the time."

Perhaps Cindy has in fact told Brad (Hey, I did write 03 on the top of that journal) Who knows? Brad certainly can't tell us (attorney client deal-e-o)

It's a magnificent mess. (as is my jumbled post) LOL sorry French schooling plays havoc with English grammar