Young lawyers aspiring to the profession of trial lawyer are taught the "rule of primacy and recency" which holds that you should call your two best witnesses first and last, the theory being the jury will remember those two witnesses because of the order they were called.
🥱 If you like 1970's trial tactics then go right ahead and be predictable.
In a certain business records case winding its way through week three in the Big Apple, the prosecution appears to be closing with the vixen who lured a married man with her batting eyelashes and curvy figure into her (actually his) bed. How she actually got through dinner without throwing up as he ate with her in his silk pajamas, is not something we want to imagine in our mind's eye.
But after the Storm passes, what is left? Choppy waters? A rainbow? Because there is one more shoe to fall in the personage of the defendant's former lawyer- a bag man who tried to calm the Storm of the unseemly assignation with cold, hard, and potentially illegal cash. The bag man comes with a bag of issues, including a lying to Congress rap (and really, who hasn't done that? Lying to Congress is as American as cheating on your taxes or being a Republican nominee for the Supreme Court and assuring the Senate of your respect for precedent), being a turncoat- someone who said he would take a bullet for the defendant, before actually becoming the bullet that may take him down.
So it appears the prosecution may end with a Stormy Bag - a one two punch of sex and slime.
The great pastime for us trial lawyers is Monday-Morning Quarterbacking our colleagues decisions in trial.
Thoughts on this strategy?
BTW- the defense strategy of using a female lawyer to cross Stormy is also so 1970s - a time when a female trial lawyer was a rarity. We say bring your best guns to bear, not just a gun wearing a blouse or skirt.
Not sure if you can get past the firewall but here is a NYTimes video discussing the defendant's unhappiness with his current lead lawyer.
87 comments:
Comment in a post below claims the State is bringing Jay Novick back. Check out this great work of his with none other than Steve Talpins:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1254346.html#footnote_2
Rump, the lady lawyer is the only real defense attorney he's got.
She is a good one!
https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2003/08/21/prosecutor-s-use-of-racial-epithet-voids-conviction/?outputType=amp
Susan Necheles is a brilliant NY criminal defense attorney who would run circles around Rumpole in any NY court. She may be female but she was chosen to cross Daniels because of her skills as a lawyer not because of her genitalia.
Nothing against Audrey but why would you bring back one of the original trial prosecutors to handle the case when the misconduct allegations are directed to what happened at the original trial and the conduct of the original prosecutors, which included Audrey and Judge Miller and the court found misconduct at original trial It makes absolutely zero sense. Kathy should have turned this case over to another jurisdiction that objective eyes could evaluate the whole situation. No comment on Jay.
Jay is ethical and a great person who is being dragged through the mud because this opinion incorrectly attributed his argument to him when another attorney argued it
Stormy Daniels just destroyed the defense during cross. They are stupid stupid lawyers for not researching who she is today, not who she was. Fools. You can’t slut-shame an adult without losing face.
Rump, you seriously think this crap is a legitimate trial?
They’ve lost all sense of perspective, ethical compass, and common sense. Untouchable lame duck.
7:47: there is another opinion where court says he read and highlighted confidential expert documents mistaken sent to him that the court says he only returned after a motion to disqualify him was filed. Another case reversed because he trashed the defense attorney in closing. Rumor back is he left SA under wonky circumstances.
You slut shame any woman. They are all the same.
That the Third and whomever thinks that quoting A DEFENDANTS CONFESSION is racist is why people hate lawyers. I know nothing about that case/trial but the article cited above. We all know that frequently African Americans call each other the n-word. Also, if it was a white defendant, use of the n-word is evidence of motive. How FFS does that make the ASA racist?!? Y’all are digging deep to attack the SAO. Pathetic.
I don’t know anything about NY. However Miami has some of the most talented attorneys I’ve seen.
Jay Fiedler took the Dolphins to the Playoffs
You’re as ethical as your colleagues my friend. Never forget that.
I’m intrigued whose decision it is to bring all these dinosaurs back from the prehistoric age? Is it Kathy or Talpins? I’ve never seen an office improve itself if you keep bringing back your “friends”. It’s like AT&T friends and family package.
Nope it’s third world political persecution.
It’s 2024 her genitalia is subjective to personal opinion.
Who is the “Stormy Daniels” of the SAO?
Is Michael Spivack now Kathy’s next go to… he is a disaster.
Georgi C. left years ago after a huge fight with Judge Miller mid trial . Anyone know why ?
Really Spivack
I’m sure each blames the other. Whoever aasked the question and whoever later argued it doesn’t matter they both sat at counsel table together and made a decision to do it. Plus Jay had other issues with the Third DCA and the may have with yhe SAO. I don’t think he left the SAO on good terms. That said it doesnt matter. Both Jay and Audry prosecuted the original case with Bronwyn Miller as head after her and Cholakis fell out over her handling of the case. That was a huge scandal at the time that I’m sure some recall well. That broke Cholakis’ spirit since it was his case for years. To bring back those original trial prosecutors just looks bad for Kathy. Neither Jay, Bronwyn or Audrey should have a say in how this case or these hearings is being now handled because they arguable have an interest in protecting what they did and how they did it. Someone should suggest that Kathy give it to another office. That saves her rep and gives the case a new set of eyes.
I think his lead lawyer trying the case as respectably as he can, without throwing ridiculous bombs his client wants, is the best way they could pull off the win. The jury has to like/respect somebody on the D side, and it anoint gonna be the client.
It wasn’t from the DEFENDANT’S CONFESSION. Read the opinion and reread the article you are misreading and not righting understanding or summarizing. .
This was not from the def confession and had nothing to do with the crime charged. People hate lawyers when they spin crap especially caselaw and facts. From the opinion: “The first arises from the following question asked, WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE by the prosecutor, in the attempted impeachment of one of the state's own witnesses:
[MR. TALPINS]
Q. Did Defendant Thornton talk to you about an incident, where something he did by club V.I.P. or near club V.I.P.?
A. No.
Q. Did Mr. Thornton tell you that he had to quote unquote, "Burn a nigger near the V.I.P.?" [e.s.]
It is difficult to imagine a more serious violation of the rules of evidence and due process, indeed of the rule of law itself, than this statement. Since it developed (a) that the only possible source for this comment was an alleged but previously UNREVEALED statement to the prosecutor himself by the defendant and (b) that it was not related to the crime with which Thornton was charged, the question was in simultaneous violation of several important principles of law.”
It was previously undisclosed statement that the ASA asked to impeach its own state witness. So even though witness denied saying that to prosecutor, court found it so offensive to reverse murder conviction. Not the defendant confession but an undisclosed statement the ASA was obviously communicating to the jury that it came from their witness. Everyone makes mistakes but….
Because that’s how you control what else will likely be uncovered.
This has to be the dumbest response and your not helping these prosecutors by misrepresenting what occurred. You will simply insense people. If it was a mistake it was a mistake but to say it didn’t happen or lie about what the article says is stupid. This is why people hate lawyers idiot. Try on truth next time.
We used to go to Dolphin games with Cholakis and his stories were crazy re smith. I guess it’s come full circle. Sit back and watch the show.
8:30 I hope you are not a lawyer. If you are, i feel bad for your clients or victims because if you can’t understand an article, you certainly can’t understand an opinion.
The streets are talking-Jose Arojo resigned from the Ethics Commission and is returning to work for Kathy Rundle and the SAO. The problem is he and MVZ are best friends - can you say cover up the cover up - he has always been known as the SA’s yes man. But he should be more reasonable than the others with pleas and cases.
Personal identification
Nepotism at the SAO
Kathy is digging around her 1990’s Rolodex of past ASA’s to bring back. Just to inform you current division ASA’s she gives them a six figure salary. Be jealous be real jealous.
I have no idea who Spivack is.
Cholakis talked about that for years. He still maintained relationship with cops and defense and would go to weekly games together. Great guy RIP.
Hey muppet don’t speak on or minimize what you can’t even comprehend. Not what happened but nice way to deflect. SMH
Yep and Kathy also appears to repays political favors by hiring friends and family. Esther is key on Kathy’s campaigns and hubby Tom Boman gets hired at 150k as recruiting director.
To the person who said: “That the Third and whomever thinks that quoting A DEFENDANTS CONFESSION is racist is why people hate lawyers... Y’all are digging deep to attack the SAO. Pathetic.” If you are going to attempt to defend the SAO’s actions in this or any other case, please do it honestly and responsibly otherwise you are part of making the bad worse. This alleged statement of a witness was withheld in violation of Brady and asked of the state witness for first time on direct who denied they ever made it to ASA Talpins (says the opinion). So to say that you are smarter than the appellate court that reversed the murder case and that others are “pathetic” is unhelpful (actually stupid) when you are wrong. It does not help Steven, Jay or the SAO. It does not help young prosecutors and young defense attorneys who read this blog. It does not help the trial judges regain confidence in the SAO. It helps no one and fuels an already out of control fire. Very foolish.
Thanks for your comment Audrey but do you really think that matters and how do you defend the other negative published opinions?
Thanks for sending the video. Mr. Trump has left behind a trail of disbarred and suspended lawyers.
The point is not that it is racist. It was not previously disclosed, not part of the def confession and denied by the states witness who it was being attributed to being told to. That’s the problem
Kathy does not have a “go to” she has chiefs that lie to her and run their own agenda.
Kathy has a public corruption unit. However, there isn’t an internal corruption unit. The amount of corruption inside the Graham Building is disgusting.
Welcome to the SAO it’s a friends and family run office. Nepotism doesn’t exist.
Rump, you seriously think this crap is a legitimate trial? They didn't prosecute John Edwards for this did they?
@106 - whataboutism, the favorite defense of the guilty. But for your information, Edwards WAS tried. From Wikipedia:
On May 24, 2011, ABC News and the New York Times reported that the U.S Department of Justice's Public Integrity Section had conducted a two-year investigation into whether Edwards had used more than $1 million in political donations to hide his affair and planned to pursue criminal charges for alleged violations of campaign finance laws.[121][122][123]
On June 3, 2011, Edwards was indicted by a federal grand jury in North Carolina on six felony charges, including four counts of collecting illegal campaign contributions, one count of conspiracy, and one count of making false statements.[124]
After postponing the start of the trial while Edwards was treated for a heart condition in February 2012, Judge Catherine Eagles of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina scheduled jury selection to begin on April 12, 2012.[125] Edwards's trial began on April 23, 2012, as he faced up to 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million fine.[126]
In a related development, on March 13, 2012, the Federal Election Commission ruled that Edwards's campaign must repay $2.1 million in matching federal funds. Edwards's lawyers claimed the money was used, and that the campaign did not receive all the funds to which it was entitled, but the Commission rejected the arguments.[127]
Twelve jurors and four alternates were seated, and opening arguments began April 23, 2012.[128] Closing arguments took place May 17, and the case went to the jury the next day.[129]
On May 31, 2012, Edwards was found not guilty on Count 3, illegal use of campaign funding (contributions from Rachel "Bunny" Mellon), while mistrials were declared on all other counts against him.[2] On June 13, 2012, the Justice Department announced that it dropped the charges and would not attempt to retry Edwards.[3]
Is Talpins jealous?
It does help.
John Edwards was a democrat
Assuming it’s true that Arrojo is back, how is that financially feasible for him and for the SAO? I’m sure he made between $200k and $300k with the county and he’s definitely not coming back to that. Not even Kathy makes that much. And Kathy is constantly complaining that she doesn’t have enough to pay her ASAs. So what gives? Something stinks here.
Today on X - David Oscar Markus - posted a link to one of his many TV interviews regarding the POTUS DJT trial. When asked what would be his first question to Michael Cohen on cross - Markus said he would ask Cohen "Are you an honest person?". That question is a very clever question to ask a person with Michael Cohen's track record. Here is the link the a clip from that interview :
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/12/politics/video/michael-cohen-testimony-donald-trump-criminal-trial-markus-cohen-digvid
Good evening. Stephen Talpins here. For those of you interested in the truth, 830 am had it right.
CJ Schwartz's opinion about my conduct is just plain wrong. The subject statement WAS a confession and we disclosed it TIMELY to the defense. In fact, I sought and obtained Judge Platzer's permission to introduce it into evidence TWO DAYS BEFORE asking the witness about it. Unfortunately, neither the AAG handling the appeal nor the court caught that fact because they court reporter put our discussion about in in the co-defendant's transcript only. So frustrating.
The Florida Bar cleared me for obvious reasons. I didn't even get a letter of advice because I did everything right.
Have a good night.
Stephen K. Talpins
PS----before anyone asks, YES, I DO have the transcript and would be happy to show it to anyone who is interested.
Herald tweeted the return of Jose Arrojo to SAO last week. Old news.
The feds prosecuted John Edwards. Hung jury
Gotta admit it’s super funny to watch these whiny ASAs running around the courthouse unsure of how to practice law appropriately and professionally since many of their bully and slight of hand tactics are being called out by many of the judges. They don’t know what to do except complain about us big bad defense attorneys not playing nice with them. Try this- learn how to be a real litigator, stop hiding the ball, stop your whining, turn shit over, do your job, be honest and everything will be just fine and here’s your binky.
Consider yourself lucky. Story is he was pushed out of federal public defender office. Kathy brought him back so he could retire at SAO. They have hidden him in ECU believing that’s the place he could cause the least damage. Not so. Judge Jean made that clear over last few months. Whose next… SMH
Everyone has known for weeks Arrojo was coming back. Kathy doesn’t want her last term as marred as it presently is….
So why not get a corrected transcript or file a motion to rehear. Convenient explanation. Don’t buy it but good try.
Who are you taking about?
If this are true why not file a motion for rehearing to correct the facts and move to correct the transcript with the reporting firm as people do every single day in the justice building. I’m sure you can understand if folks don’t take you seriously with this response. Interesting that 8:30 knew facts not in the opinion or transcript. Also interesting how you are basically saying the Third were a bunch of idiots who couldn’t get the facts correct.
That the Florida Bar cleared you means nothing. Had they taken the prior allegations for mvz seriously perhaps that monster might have died.
I don’t think Arrojo is going to change what is already “marred”. You can’t erase the past my friend.
In defense of the tactic, Rumpole, I don't think the idea is entirely that the jurors will just remember more of witnesses in those positions. Instead, they are emphasized by those positions so they make more of an impression, listened to or considered more carefully maybe.
How do we know this is the real Stephen K. Talpins?
What’s next, Kathy is going to resurrect deceased former ASA’s to fill In positions.
Have you noticed this little male ASA’s that are around 5ft to 5ft 6 inches suffer from napoleon syndrome. They run around with an angry attitude.
I believe you Steve.
Excellent pizza party for everyone.
The Rolodex
There’s money.
Who are you talking about?
Good morning Kermit the Frog here.
Good morning. Kermit the Frog here What are you talking about? This is GREAT news everyone loves Jose. Heck yeah.
Arrojo is the absolute best.
There is more money than you think. But it’s saved for the 4th floor.
We are going to LOVE Jose so much! It’s incredible that is Fantastic news. Just love there is so much love oh my god I can’t express how much love for Jose.
Breaking news!
Judge Milton Hirsch just found the US and Floria Constitutions, unconstitutional.
The order is 365 pages long and quotes Shakespear about 84 times.
The 3rd DCA has a new fast track rule for uncle Milty, his order will be reversed before noon on Friday.
If they are bringing back Jose Arrojo, let’s bring back David Ranck. Now that’s a “two for one”
Obviously you are talking about Talpins barfy email. His nose is so far up her ass… is he that out of touch w reality? Clearly he is -
Kathy’s email was tone deaf and gross. No money to pay her prosecutors but money to bring him back at 220 a year. WTF
How did FACDL meeting go with Kathy? Is anyone going to share the deets?
Can someone share the email being referenced?
Why is so much relevant information not being shared on this blog - emails, firsthand accounts of meetings, etc.? This blog should not only be about reactionary criticism when scandals break. It should also provide non-public information that is relevant to the criminal justice system when that information becomes known to bloggers and commentators. And not just cryptic references or dangling carrots about things that most don’t know. This isn’t a judicial tabloid. While I understand that this is a privately run forum subject to the time constraints and predilections of its owner and authorized bloggers - which includes much needed non-legal and lighthearted material - I thought that it was also about contributing to government and system transparency and accountability. Otherwise, might as well remove the word “justice” from its name.
Yea and share the emails the judges have been whispering about. Cant just pick and choose. Justice Justice Justice!
Post a Comment