2010.10.20 - PI Lyons Accused of Witness Tampering

[whiteangora]

My advice for anyone else should he come knocking on your door is to advise him that YOU will be recording the conversation. Then, DO IT. If you don't have a recorder handy, set another time to talk to him when you do have one. If he balks at being recorded, don't talk. But whatever you do, ADVISE HIM THAT HE IS BEING RECORDED.

This is interesting and I am not surprised in the least but it is going to be hard to prove. Granted there are 2 volunteers saying that he pressured them to change their stories, but still they have to prove it.

The biggest plus (best evidence if they can prove it), is that he misrepresented (lied about) one of the searcher's testimony to the other one. ("...engaged in misleading conduct toward another person").

This is such good advice, also make sure you RECORD the part where you are telling him he is being recorded so that his response is on the tape. We know how these guys all try to twist up the truth.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

Isn't GSJ the psychic Gayle (forget her last name.) I was thinking of the PI who schnookered Marinade Dave into talking about his 'relationship' with JSS. IIRC, MD said the PI was smooth as butter and pretty slick (not verbatim.)

ETA: Just googled and yes, seems this Jeremy Lyons is one and the same PI who created the ruckus with MD and JSS stepping down. Oy vey.

Gale St.John
Listen to this video about 2:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZXVIh7BE1E&feature=player_embedded#

She plays one of his messages too!

 

[watergirl]

NOT EVEN CLOSE TO MODERATELY! LMAO.

I can see the NG headline now,
Bombshell tonight,
Another Lyin' Lyon
with Sue Moss saying,
"Lyin' Lyon's
leaves KC cryin'"

bbm

"cuz she can smell
her bacon fryin"

:toast:

 

[nums24]

Death penalty lawyers booted from murder trial


http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZoZHiq3ZZtEJ:findarticles.com/p/news-articles/yakima-herald-republic/mi_8059/is_20061205/death-penalty-lawyers-booted-murder/ai_n48046760/+%22defense+investigator%22+witness+tampering&cd=150&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I'm not a lawyer, but I found this:

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/8C9B4524008595E485256BBC0052DD7B

Comment

Lawyers generally employ assistants in their practice, including secretaries, investigators, law student interns, and paraprofessionals such as paralegals and legal assistants. Such assistants, whether employees or independent contractors, act for the lawyer in rendition of the lawyer’s professional services. A lawyer must give such assistants appropriate instruction and supervision concerning the ethical aspects of their employment, particularly regarding the obligation not to disclose information relating to representation of the client. The measures employed in supervising nonlawyers should take account of the level of their legal training and the fact that they are not subject to professional discipline. If an activity requires the independent judgment and participation of the lawyer, it cannot be properly delegated to a nonlawyer employee.

Here is the FL Witness Tampering Statute, this could apply to LB too: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...4.22&URL=0900-0999/0914/Sections/0914.22.html

Snipped:

914.22 Tampering with or harassing a witness, victim, or informant; penalties.
—
(1)A person who knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, or offers pecuniary benefit or gain to another person, with intent to cause or induce any person to:

(a)Withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official investigation or official proceeding;

(b)Alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the integrity or availability of the object for use in an official investigation or official proceeding;

(c)Evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official investigation or an official proceeding;

(d)Be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process;

(e)Hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of information relating to the commission or possible commission of an offense or a violation of a condition of probation, parole, or release pending a judicial proceeding; or

(f)Testify untruthfully in an official investigation or an official proceeding,

commits the crime of tampering with a witness, victim, or informant.

Thank you for finding all that.....and great news. Pull your head in Baez, and your little friend too.

 

[GennyMac]

You gotta wonder if JB and CM have begun to flinch when loud noises go off - the article also mentions LB backing out of a depo with the Prosecution, and the possibility of her having tampered with the documents showing she was at Suburban Drive. The Defense has been trotting her out from very early on - and now that too may blow up in their faces.

http://www.wftv.com/goinggreen/25455422/detail.html

So no surprised ........... so happy some of the truth has begun to surface :dance:

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I cannot tell you how happy I am that this has come to light. From personal experiences that have been shared in this forum it is easy for me to believe that JL intimidates many people. . . even to the extent that some posters have considered deleting all their posts referencing their personal accounts of the searches that they have shared here.

Because of that, it seems obvious to me that witness tampering was in full force ~ with some to a more obvious degree than others. But it was certainly felt by a heck of a lot more searchers than only Brett Churchill and Brett Reilly. God bless them for coming forward with their complaints!

I don't know if HHJP's ruling should have been a little "tighter" considering who the defense team is or if our entire legal system needs the tightening. But, wow, this sure didn't work out real well as far as getting to the truth goes, did it?

 

[cyberborg]

It sure feels like Caylee and her angel team are guiding the hand of Justice and shining a powerful light on the truth. The truth always finds a way but it feels like it is getting a helping hand in this case.

Strike three JB. How is this working for you CM? Too many of those honest ethical folks?

The darkness is being peeled back by forces of goodness and honesty ... that's so refreshing.

 

[nums24]

I cannot tell you how happy I am that this has come to light. From personal experiences that have been shared in this forum it is easy for me to believe that JL intimidates many people. . . even to the extent that some posters have considered deleting all their posts referencing their personal accounts of the searches that they have shared here.

Because of that, it seems obvious to me that witness tampering was in full force ~ with some to a more obvious degree than others. But it was certainly felt by a heck of a lot more searchers than only Brett Churchill and Brett Reilly. God bless them for coming forward with their complaints!

I don't know if HHJP's ruling should have been a little "tighter" considering who the defense team is or if our entire legal system needs the tightening. But, wow, this sure didn't work out real well as far as getting to the truth goes, did it?

Churchill was deposed by the defense June 2010 and Underhill has also been on the witness list for some time now. The truth will prevail for Caylee!

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I cannot tell you how happy I am that this has come to light. From personal experiences that have been shared in this forum it is easy for me to believe that JL intimidates many people. . . even to the extent that some posters have considered deleting all their posts referencing their personal accounts of the searches that they have shared here.

Because of that, it seems obvious to me that witness tampering was in full force ~ with some to a more obvious degree than others. But it was certainly felt by a heck of a lot more searchers than only Brett Churchill and Brett Reilly. God bless them for coming forward with their complaints!

I don't know if HHJP's ruling should have been a little "tighter" considering who the defense team is or if our entire legal system needs the tightening. But, wow, this sure didn't work out real well as far as getting to the truth goes, did it?

I only wish they hadn't told the defense and just informed the SA and LE. Who knows what nonsense they'll try to spin out of whatever was said.

Sounds like JL is a liar and a bully. Lovely. Any thoughts on what will become of this sack?

 

[nums24]

I thought her brother was an internet PI Could this dude be Andrea's brother? She writes and gushes about him, iirc, what a lifesaver he has been on her cases.


On her website, she has a link to Internet Sleuth, that is his, her brother's company, iirc


www.andrealyon.com - Cached

iternetsleuth.net - Internet Sleuth internet sleuth.net
... By: Barton Web Design and Hosting Contact: Visit: http://www.bartonhosting.com Domain name: internetsleuth.net Registrant Contact: Internet Sleuth Jonathan Lyon ...
whois.domaintools.com/internetsleuth.net

His name is listed as Jonathan, not Jeremy, so they may be two different men, afterall.

WFTV has it wrong too, it's Jeremiah. He would be too old to be her son, her graduated 8th grade in 1966, he's around 58ish:

http://www.steliznyc.org/alumemail.asp#Class of 1968

 

[fla*mom]

Here are the photos of the back of J Lyons.
Fla*mom - could you please tell us if the man in the blue shirt, sitting in the audience, in front of Jim L., at this May 11, 2010 Hearing is J Lyons?
Did he have a goatee when he visited you?

He did not have a goatee when he came to my house. I don't think that is him, his face seemed rounder.

did I send you a pic of the guy he looks a lot like? I wish I could make the picture bigger I would be able to tell for sure.

 

[mysteriew]

My advice for anyone else should he come knocking on your door is to advise him that YOU will be recording the conversation. Then, DO IT. If you don't have a recorder handy, set another time to talk to him when you do have one. If he balks at being recorded, don't talk. But whatever you do, ADVISE HIM THAT HE IS BEING RECORDED.

This is interesting and I am not surprised in the least but it is going to be hard to prove. Granted there are 2 volunteers saying that he pressured them to change their stories, but still they have to prove it.

The biggest plus (best evidence if they can prove it), is that he misrepresented (lied about) one of the searcher's testimony to the other one. ("...engaged in misleading conduct toward another person").

LOL I am gonna sound like a smart *advertiser censored** here, but really I'm not. It seems only polite to open up and talk to someone when they bring up a topic that you are familiar with. But this guy is a PI. Not a cop, not a court. Not looking for furtherance of justice. Just a PI. No one is required to talk to a PI. So the best advice would be probably to politely decline to talk to him. If he got pushy, then refer him to your police statement. And if he continues to push, call the cops and make a complaint.

I don't believe that you have to talk to any defense representative, including a defense attorney unless you have been brought into court under a supeonea (sp).

Now LE and the state's attorney I believe you have to talk to unless you will incriminate yourself in something. And if you feel you need to do so, you have the right to have an attorney with you.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

LOL I am gonna sound like a smart *advertiser censored** here, but really I'm not. It seems only polite to open up and talk to someone when they bring up a topic that you are familiar with. But this guy is a PI. Not a cop, not a court. Not looking for furtherance of justice. Just a PI. No one is required to talk to a PI. So the best advice would be probably to politely decline to talk to him. If he got pushy, then refer him to your police statement. And if he continues to push, call the cops and make a complaint.

I don't believe that you have to talk to any defense representative, including a defense attorney unless you have been brought into court under a supeonea (sp).

Now LE and the state's attorney I believe you have to talk to unless you will incriminate yourself in something. And if you feel you need to do so, you have the right to have an attorney with you.

But he has court permission to talk to you. If you refuse then can't you be subpoenaed? And that may be expensive.

 

[RR0004]

My advice for anyone else should he come knocking on your door is to advise him that YOU will be recording the conversation. Then, DO IT. If you don't have a recorder handy, set another time to talk to him when you do have one. If he balks at being recorded, don't talk. But whatever you do, ADVISE HIM THAT HE IS BEING RECORDED.

This is interesting and I am not surprised in the least but it is going to be hard to prove. Granted there are 2 volunteers saying that he pressured them to change their stories, but still they have to prove it.

The biggest plus (best evidence if they can prove it), is that he misrepresented (lied about) one of the searcher's testimony to the other one. ("...engaged in misleading conduct toward another person").

Wish JJ had done exactly that.

 

[mysteriew]

But he has court permission to talk to you. If you refuse then can't you be subpoenaed? And that may be expensive.

He has the courts permission. Not a court order. So he can't make you. And a subponea is a subponea. Says you have to come to court to tell your story. Then an offical recording of your story is made. No fudgy's, misrepresentation or misquotes. You have the right to an attorney, but it is up to you if you require one. The SA office may be able to answer any questions you have about the subponea process.

Drawbacks to calling you in for a subponea? Defense has limited funds and it costs them to call you in on a subponea. Especially if they don't know if your story would be useful or not. Also it is time consuming. And they have quite a bit to do just to keep up with what is already going on.

 

[Virtual Truth]

LOL I am gonna sound like a smart *advertiser censored** here, but really I'm not. It seems only polite to open up and talk to someone when they bring up a topic that you are familiar with. But this guy is a PI. Not a cop, not a court. Not looking for furtherance of justice. Just a PI. No one is required to talk to a PI. So the best advice would be probably to politely decline to talk to him. If he got pushy, then refer him to your police statement. And if he continues to push, call the cops and make a complaint.

I don't believe that you have to talk to any defense representative, including a defense attorney unless you have been brought into court under a supeonea (sp).

Now LE and the state's attorney I believe you have to talk to unless you will incriminate yourself in something. And if you feel you need to do so, you have the right to have an attorney with you.

Great advice!

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

He has the courts permission. Not a court order. So he can't make you. And a subponea is a subponea. Says you have to come to court to tell your story. Then an offical recording of your story is made. No fudgy's, misrepresentation or misquotes. You have the right to an attorney, but it is up to you if you require one. The SA office may be able to answer any questions you have about the subponea process.

Drawbacks to calling you in for a subponea? Defense has limited funds and it costs them to call you in on a subponea. Especially if they don't know if your story would be useful or not. Also it is time consuming. And they have quite a bit to do just to keep up with what is already going on.

Then am I understanding this right? Everyone they called on the phone could have not only refused to answer them but they could have just plain hung up on them? And waited for a subpoena? How rich! Would have loved to have seen the state of FL taxpayers (me) pay for this one. . . and paid on the other end, too, when I had to travel all the way to Orlando (8 hours plus overnight accommodations) to pay for the privilege of having volunteered. . . to then make my appearance in court.

It was a difficult decision and I can understand why most just answered the call honestly and then suffered the consequences. MOO, as always.

 

[butterfly1978]

I suspect that just like all the other sleazy things that Baez and company has done and gotten away with, that this will be no diffrent. He has had how many bar complaints filed against him, had to be educated on the law by the judge been caught red handed in how many lies, and yet he is still here. I don't think anything at all will be done about this and when trial comes, there will either be a mistrial or she will be found guilty and have major appeals for ineffective counsel... Anybody wanna bet?

 

[Cher352]

I hope the HHJP makes the Baez law firm repay any money that they have paid for this type of investigative work!

I also hope that anyone else who may have had any problems like this with anyone that works for the defense team report it to the SA's office.