Does JB Believe the Story he is Telling? *MERGED*

New Posts

Broderick said:
I couldn't be a defense attorney, no way, no how. Money, fame, power ect could never equate to losing my soul. The way I understand it, it is not a defense attorney's responsibility to believe or disbelieve a client. He can't manufacture the defense as far as I know, he can only execute the story and defend the story the client gives him based on the evidence. I couldn't sleep at night knowing what I know being in a position to defend this one lady in particular. He may very well know her story is bunk, but he has a job to do and in the interim, fame and fortune are far more important to him than his soul.
Click to expand...

I think there are some good ones out there - that wouldn't stoop to this level.

Aren't there? I mean, if you were accused of murder you would need one.
 
Chablis said:
I think Jose Baez knows that there is something really wrong with his client, and she was not just "born that way"

jmo
Click to expand...

Then he should have encouraged her to go with "mentally challenged" (for lack of a better term.) When they hired T. Lenamon, this is the path he tried to take but Jose said no, and fired him. It was an accident/mental/ppd thing as I recall.
 
IMHO it doesn't matter what Baez thinks about his clients story or her guilt or innocence.

His job is to defend her as vigorously as he can and to make sure her rights as a defendent are upheld during the trial.

He may very well be aware that she is not telling the truth but he has to defend her by what her story is about what happened. It is my understanding he can't just make things up on his own to defend her but rather must go by what she has told him.

I think he's just approaching this as a defense attn. I can't say whether or not he believes her story or not but IMHO I seriously doubt after he had the chance to look at all the forensics that he concluded that she is innocent.

Doesn't mean I agree with the defense strategy, it just means he's a defense attn. and he's trying to do his job with the help of a defense team. The story which originated from KC is what is going to hold this defense strategy back. I am reluctant to give my opinion on the defense strategy because I really don't want my first time out but the outline given of what "happened" as given by KC is absurd in logic. It's just not logical, and doesn't mesh. Bottom line is that no matter how much I, personally, tend to dislike all defense attn's. they are an intergral part of our justice system and from what I can see Baez is just doing his job.

all JMHO.
 
Nope, not for one cotton pickin' minute does he believe her story.

IMO he's also playing at lawyering in this case. It's all about fame and fortune for him and it doesn't matter about who falls by the wayside.

ICA and JB bought into each others lies and dreams. The end ain't going to be pretty.
 
I don't think he believes it or gives a crap what the truth is . Even if Casey told him the TRUE STORY *snorts* and said she murdered Caylee ..I really don't think it would matter one bit . He wants to be some sort of glory boy . UGH
 
I am mad at myself ...
I wanted to give JB the benefit of the doubt .All I have seen is him smirking and stumbling and bumbling ...he ACTS like he doesn't believe this story .
 
I think JB believes some of hat KC told him, maybe that she was molested by George and Lee. Didn't she write that in a letter to an inmate? I doubt if she believes that George was involved in aiding her if Caylee was drowned. I think George would have called the police right away, being an x-policeman himself. Its hard to believe that she told this story to JB. I kind of feel sorry for JB in a way. I think he went into this initially thinking he had more to work with and now thinks he doesn't have much of a chance....maybe he thinks his only chance is if he gets a mistrial or possibly hopes to get her found guilty of manslaughter instead of murder.
 
Nope. JB wants to be famous. He will walk the very fine line of professional ethics in his role; he's slimey enough to do it and he just wants the notariety.

Take for instance one of my law professors who is a working attorney was speaking at some type of function or somewhere and said "we don't go to court to find the truth" and he was annoyed that a prosecutor stood up and said, "well WE DO seek the truth".
There is definitely a distinct difference between a defense attorney and say...everyone else! I see it in my public defender professors, they love their jobs and are sincere, but the truth is a gray area for them. Those who tend to be on the DA see things in much more black and white.

Jose is very comfortable in the gray area, not searching for the truth, in fact not wanting the truth at all, but doing his job, which he sees as exonerating his client, period the end.
 
ziggy said:
Nope. JB wants to be famous. He will walk the very fine line of professional ethics in his role; he's slimey enough to do it and he just wants the notariety.

Take for instance one of my law professors who is a working attorney was speaking at some type of function or somewhere and said "we don't go to court to find the truth" and he was annoyed that a prosecutor stood up and said, "well WE DO seek the truth".
There is definitely a distinct difference between a defense attorney and say...everyone else! I see it in my public defender professors, they love their jobs and are sincere, but the truth is a gray area for them. Those who tend to be on the DA see things in much more black and white.

Jose is very comfortable in the gray area, not searching for the truth, in fact not wanting the truth at all, but doing his job, which he sees as exonerating his client, period the end.
Click to expand...

So, you think even if he loses the case it does not matter, because he will be famous from this trial?
 
allycat1208 said:
So, you think even if he loses the case it does not matter, because he will be famous from this trial?
Click to expand...

Yes. He's already got the likes of Geraldo singing his praises. Mark Geragos did not win a few of his high profile cases and he's still a famous attorney and I've seen him since Scott Peterson went to death row commenting on TV.

I think he's conducting a more clever convolution of the facts to plant reasonable doubt than many thought he was capable of. Sometimes jurors see through it, but sometimes they don't.
 
ziggy said:
Yes. He's already got the likes of Geraldo singing his praises. Mark Geragos did not win a few of his high profile cases and he's still a famous attorney and I've seen him since Scott Peterson went to death row commenting on TV.

I think he's conducting a more clever convolution of the facts to plant reasonable doubt than many thought he was capable of. Sometimes jurors see through it, but sometimes they don't.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but I just think that if you are an attorney, you must want to believe you're client and try to win the case or just get the best possible sentence.
 
Eh, I know he doesn't believe her story, but he's trying to keep up in the fabrication business-- he's just not that good. I get the feeling, and often, that Baez forgets which version of the truth they're operating on. mo
 
allycat1208 said:
I see your point, but I just think that if you are an attorney, you must want to believe you're client and try to win the case or just get the best possible sentence.
Click to expand...

Allycat here is a great blog by a defense attn that covers this question.

http://criminalcasequestions.blogspot.com/2010/02/do-lawyers-need-to-believe-their.html

Ethically it isn't required that a defense attn believe his client.

http://www.southerncaliforniadefenseblog.com/2008/10/criminal_defense_attorney_righ.html

I understand how you feel. It's used to chap my hide to think that defense attn's could stand up there and relate the tall tales that the defendants spun and I still do get very aggravated at it to this day but I have to remind myself that without the defense attn our justice system would not fuction.

A bit off topic: I have seen others express distaste for the fact that the SA team and the DT will converse at times and even appear to joke around. It took me years to figure out that they (the SA and the DT) are peers. They usually have working relationships. On topic: This isn't an all out free for all fight this is our justice system in motion and KC may think she has control but actually the "dance of justice" has begun and each side has their part and she isn't really in as much control as she thinks she is...JMHO.
 
allycat1208 said:
I think JB believes some of hat KC told him, maybe that she was molested by George and Lee. Didn't she write that in a letter to an inmate? I doubt if she believes that George was involved in aiding her if Caylee was drowned. I think George would have called the police right away, being an x-policeman himself. Its hard to believe that she told this story to JB. I kind of feel sorry for JB in a way. I think he went into this initially thinking he had more to work with and now thinks he doesn't have much of a chance....maybe he thinks his only chance is if he gets a mistrial or possibly hopes to get her found guilty of manslaughter instead of murder.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how JB believes one sentence of what ICA is feeding him. She has told him different versions, not just one story. He first believed Zanny kidnapped Caylee. This is what has me so puzzled. How can he continue to defend her when she has fed him two or three different stories now?
 
I don't believe that JB believes that story. He has been distancing himself from ica for quite some time and his visits to her have been short and few. To me, and this is MOO only, he has no sympathy and was responsible for many of the details of this ridiculous story.
 
I don't think he believes it at all. Neither does anyone else on the defense team. Nor does anyone who USED TO BE on the defense team. :snooty:
 
allycat1208 said:
I see your point, but I just think that if you are an attorney, you must want to believe you're client and try to win the case or just get the best possible sentence.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sure he wants to "win", but attorneys will pat themselves on the back for anything "well played" too so it's a win for him either way. In the legal community there will be plenty who don't like JB but they will all say he was just doing his job. That's just my observation after 2 years in law school. To a point it's true, but it can be infuriating to those who are never in that position. I DO think some attorneys teeter on the edge of ethics, but he has no obligation whatsoever to prove anything, and that's not his fault, it's how the system works. I personally think defense attorneys should be reigned in by the Bar on this type of defense, but it's too difficult to prove that he doesn't honestly believe this is what Casey told him and he believes her.

That's why the State just has to be better. They have to anticipate every cheap lawyer trick in the book. And if the evidence is on their side and they present it so the jury can understand, then they will prevail...except Jose only needs to confuse ONE juror into reasonable doubt and he has a hung jury. I do believe the state would retry her and hopefully it would end like Phil Spector's second trial.
 
No, he doesn't believe it or he wouldn't be working so hard (and ineffectively) at trying to make the witness testimony and the evidence fit his theory. Very scary that after all this time, this was the best they could come up with. He is way overselling it because this one's a lemon. moo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 104 more.
Total: 4,443 (members: 105, guests: 4,338)

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
4,338
Total visitors
4,443
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,545
Messages
17,970,752
Members
228,805
Latest member
Val in PA
Back
Top