Lots of people confess and then recant. I see nothing unethical about his lawyers advising him to plead not guilty. I find it highly unethical for lawyers to go ahead and tell their clients to plea when their client is telling them they didn't do it. I think Allen's lawyers are doing the job they are suppose to be doing.
I've said over and over that I think Allen did it. I think he did it. I'm hoping the prosecution has a lot more evidence than has been released. I can certainly understand all the questions about this case.
I think it really depends on how it was done. it is no different imo than a client testifying It needs to be their decision and theirs only and they need to be adised of all things and of course advised but not pressured or convinced. I have my opinion and it IS only an opinion and none of us know but I base it on everything we do know, the timing and a whole lot more.
Advising is a whole lot different than pressure or promises no one can make. Advising it isn't a good idea like with a client taking the stand may be allt right and advising of the possible ptifallsk but it is still up to the client. This client seemed to have made a decision and should have been advised before, represented and it discussed. Prior. I don't think it was. Personally I think they left him hanging in the wind and at that point were giving all the reasons they couldn't travel that far.
I can undersand all the questions too and varying opinions. I also think he did it.
If I didn't work and could, I'd show what happened and on what kind of timeline and how in an instant opinion changed with each thing and a lot more because it is so clear. Imo.
I'm sorry I don't think much of the defense but I don't. I'm not sold on Gulll either don't get me wrong but as far as behaviors and intent, it is the defense that shines to me.
My opinion on some is not exactly unshared. I responded to Tesir here who said as much first as far as his confessions and what his attorneys did and likely promised. It is a very reasonable thought and conclusion for how things came about and what happened.
And I don't know, if Allen confessed to wife and mom and wanted to confess and deal and then when attorneys asked WTH are you doing, if he then confessed to them and said he did it and he wanted to just get this over with and face his guilt, and they talked him out of it, if that isn't unethical and they know he did do it, well then, that's a subject in and of itself... Especially when they then name and blame others who they claim really did it. No?
Finally, their claims they think him innocent I don't believe for a minute. He was confessing and I find it hard to believe he then did not do so to his attorneys as well at that point.
Of course we can't know and may never know but I think it's a far weighted way to lean and what seems pretty clear here. And it may well be known one day when years from now Allen comes back and says so when he claims ineffective counsel or some such. Or when we hear his actual confessions to his wife, mom or they complain in later years about what his attorneys "counseled" or did. Hard to say.
I'm not trying to argue, it is what I see and it is what things show the far most likely. I can think of hardly another case where what we are to take as accidents and comedies of errors happened with the defense and such after their client confessed.
No one has to agree but I'e seen a dead man torn apart, a judge tried to be taken down and called names and diagnosed, and I do think these defense attorneys are well, I will not use the clown name because honestly I think it is intentional anyhow. It's my opinion. And perhaps they've been great before or whatever, I wouldn't know but so was the judge right? And I'ev seen so many sites and CVs of experts, attorneys, etc. that would make one think they are the biggest super lawyer or expert in the world but to those that have really experienced them or know more, nah not so much.
And maybe I'm wrong. All in the case are fair game though aren't they and that's what they sign up for isn't it? It isn't right that can only go one way like towards judges, prosecutors and more and all cases are NOT corrupt or wrongful charging but that can be said, but I'd think I could also then have an opinion of the defense from what I've SEEN no?
Like I've said, it isn't personal to me. I dind't know a single thing about a one of them before this case. Not RA, not the prosecution, not the judge and not the defense. So I am kind of left without understanding when it seems to be taken personally? And only on behalf of the defense and not all other sides or the judge being torn apart as well?
It is definitely a case that ignites passion and I think some intentionally flame that or like to get some in the public that will buy anything to do so (like the O thing) and inflamed even. I'd like to stay in it but don't much because I guess only some things can be said and then one has to listen to to her things that are just repeated and repeated and only one view is allowed or what?
I think he is guilty too and we agree on that. I fail to understand why if I say what I see with he defense though that it upsets you so much. They dish it and throw it out and wanted to stay in it and they took are allowed to be critiqued and have swipes taken at them especially when it is what one sees (and that's how I feels) and not simply some agenda which I believe they have and is out there.
Jmo.
Back to he original point, it really depends on what they did and what Allen wanted and what is his choice or their pressure or influence and so on.
And personally I think he knows exactly what he is doing too. And is smarter than his attys. at least in the evil ways of smart.
I think hearing his confessions would go a long way to solidifying or changing some opinions.
None of us know and we certainly have not heard all as many like to think. The confessions alone are a huge one we have not heard nor even seen nor read.
Of course we can't know, can we but I have various thoughts and questions as to his wife hanging up. I mean it of course could be the obvious reason, she did not want to face or hear he did this and knew it would be recorded. It could be that he was giving way too much detail showing it was the truth and getting into the telling. And I can think of a few other things as well. But don't know of course.
Anyhow, I only formed this view of these attorneys over what they did and happened with them or around them and so on and what can be inferred as well, like with the confessions. It can likely be changed depending on what I see in the future.
ANd every bit of it is based on what we've seen.
I can stay out of here and mostly do. Maybe all those with opposing opinions that can tear down others in the case should as well but I don't expect that.
The girls names are hardly ever even mentioned. That's always the intent too isn't it of even any ehical defense attys. All becomes about the defendant and muddying the waters, creating distractions, leaking, blaming others and more.
RIP Abby and Libby.
They aren't going to say of course but I've mentioned before, I'd also like to know what the girls' families think of what they are seeing and of the defense and the judge and prosecution. I mean they are local and had to know of all of them before unlike I or those of us in other states.
Have a great day. It is just my opinion and I come to it from what I've seen happen and the defense's own actions. And it sure isn't personal. I'm not asking they be strung up. Just saying what I see or seems likely. No different than anyone else.
en.wikipedia.org
www.crimewatchers.net
