Astronaut nappy woman should get new lawyers.

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by dogbone, Jun 30, 2007.

  1. macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #1
    "It jeopardises our ability to get a fair trial when the client is the butt of jokes." link

    If the defense ran with the nappy line they could have used that as some sort of impaired reasoning defense, but no, instead they want to make the case that she's perfectly sane and not open to ridicule. But how will that help.

    Better to be out of jail and mocked than in jail and respected.
     
  2. macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #2
    Lisa Nowak and her case are out of this world. Despite contrary claims being asserted by her defense team on the much reported diaper wearing aspect, what are the chances of her prevailing in court? Well, it all Depends.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #3
    I would suggest that the more loopy the defense can make her out to be, the better chance she has of a lighter sentence. For the defense to try the old 'she won't get a fair trial' tack in this instance, won't help. I can see where they are going but each defense needs to be tailored. They are trying the generic approach.
     
  4. Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #4
    Absorption is the key! ;)
     
  5. macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #5
    I agree ... and there is a good chance that generic will equal prison. I'm sure the attorneys will be visiting her regularly as they pursue the appeals process.
     
  6. macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #6
    I thought this thread was going to talk about Don Imus -- man was I way off.

    OR was I. I think the defense lawyer should use Don Imus as an example to show that if you use the word "nappy" you'll get treated unfairly.:)
     
  7. thread starter macrumors 68020

    dogbone

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Location:
    S33.687308617200465 E150.31341791152954
    #7
    Maybe if we take the p155 out of their number one client, er... ridicule her, we can assist in the defense. I can see it now, 'your honor, it has come to our attention that 4 members of the jury have been seen with macbooks'...can you see where I'm going with this.
     
  8. macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #8
    I can see how the word nappy in the thread title would cause you to draw the conclusion you did. :) Different trial ... but if it were applicable, one side brings in Imus, then the ubiquitous Al Sharpton gets his opportunity. Ms. Nowak is already up to her neck in legal trouble.
     
  9. macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #9
    I think I saw that episode of Boston Legal as well. It was a great one.:)

    It seems to me, don't know much about law, that defense lawyers look for any reason possible to get a mistrial. Didn't the article say the prosecution wasn't even submitting the nappy into evidence? Or is there even one to submit?
     
  10. macrumors 68000

    Deepdale

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    Location:
    New York
    #10
    You know things are looking bleak when Alan Shore is your best hope.
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    #11
    nappy headed astronaut???

    I didn't have my BBC hat on when first reading this so I thought this was going to be a "nappy headed" joke. ahah instead the nappy was on her bum! priceless.
     

Share This Page