Nick Reinerthe former lawyer, Alan Jacksonbroke down what happens when a person pleads insanity.
“There’s very little in the law that’s indefensible and there’s a reason for that because I never approach a case as if I’m just defending an individual,” Jackson said while appearing on the Tuesday, Jan. 13, episode. Kelly Ripa‘s SiriusXM Podcast “Let’s talk off camera,” just six days after the attorney withdrew from Reiner’s legal team.
“Every time I approach a case on the defense side, I go into the case and my whole team, they’re all trained to go into the case knowing very well that we’re defending something bigger than the individual,” he continued. “We defend the constitution, we defend an idea, we defend the idea, the foundation on which this country was built in terms of the justice system.
He added: “We don’t live in a system where you’re ready, shoot, aim. You think somebody did something, so you throw them in jail and somewhere along the way you can put them on trial. That’s not how our system works.”
Nick Reiner’s attorney, Alan Jackson, surprisingly dropped his representation at the trial for the murders of his parents Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, and lawyers are thinking about why it might have happened. During Nick’s court appearance on Wednesday, January 7, Jackson revealed that he had withdrawn from the case. Because of (…)
Jackson was initially hired as Nick’s lawyer in the case of his parents’ murder. Rob Reiner i Michele Singer Reiner. Nick was arrested after the couple were found dead in their home in Brentwood, California, from apparent stab wounds. Rob was 78 while Michele was 70.
Earlier this month, Jackson announced during Nick’s hearing that he did to resign of the case A public defender has been selected as a substitute. Jackson has stated on several occasions that he is ethically prohibited from disclosing the reason for his exit from the case.
“I’m legally and ethically prohibited from explaining all the reasons why, I know it’s a question on everyone’s mind,” he told reporters outside court. “We expect the public defender to step in, they’ve already been appointed, and he’s very carefully protecting Nick Reiner’s interests as he moves through the system.”
On Tuesday, the attorney explained that he takes a person’s civil liberties “very seriously.” He also addressed the issue of advocating for someone who has struggled with mental health issues or an illness. (Nick, who had publicly struggled with mental health issues and substance abuse, was removed from suicide watch on Jan. 5 after his arrest.)
“It doesn’t matter who the person is, if the government doesn’t do it right. And in certain circumstances, there are mental health issues. I’m not talking about Nick’s case, just in general,” he shared. “As you said, kind of the call of the questions was what are some of the defenses that are available to citizens, any citizen. One thing we don’t do is we don’t punish sick people for being sick.”
Jackson explained that as individuals living in a civilized society, it is crucial that someone “only punishes criminal conduct where there is an element of intent.”
“If you have a mental illness, so you can’t form an intention, you don’t understand the character and quality of your conduct and so on, then a system is built to accommodate and address that and that’s the not guilty by reason of insanity,” he said. “In that circumstance, a lot of people have talked about it, Kelly, what does that mean? ‘Oh, does that mean you go to a psychiatrist for 10 minutes and then you’re released?’ No, that doesn’t mean anything. The system is set up to deal with that.”
According to Jackson, this means that a person goes to “a state mental hospital” and remains there until “the disease or such disease is resolved.”
Ripa then asked if that’s the same logic a lawyer would use if his client wanted to plead not guilty by reason of insanity. Jackson explained the process specifically in California.
Nick Reiner’s former attorney, Alan Jackson, doesn’t believe his unique client should be convicted of first-degree murder. “I’m legally and ethically prohibited from explaining all the reasons why, I know it’s a question on everybody’s mind,” Jackson told reporters on Wednesday, Jan. 7, after leaving the case. “We hope that the public defender (…)
“The procedure is this, you enter the plea, you still go through a guilt phase, which is just a standard trial as to whether or not the defendant is responsible and liable, legally responsible for the death of another person or the conduct in question,” he said. “Only if the jury comes back unanimously as guilty, then you go to a penalty phase that penalty phase may include an NGI, meaning the jury decides, a separate part of a bifurcated proceeding, the same jury decides whether or not you were sane or good at the time of the conduct you’re convicted of.”
Kelly shared that she “didn’t realize that” a person has to “go through a whole trial,” and Jackson clarified that it’s “two whole trials.”
Jackson too he reiterated why can’t give more information about why he decided to leave the case.
“Everybody has the same looming question, and I’m bound by legal rules and ethical obligations — there are certain things I just can’t divulge, Kelly,” he said Tuesday. “In terms of why there was a change of counsel, why we moved away and the public defender’s office stepped in and I’ll reiterate what I said at the press conference, which is that my team, myself and my team, remain completely and absolutely committed to Nick’s best interests. We will always be committed to his best interests. I want nothing but the best for him and I can get him to be the best he can be and I can get him to he is the best possible will in the hands of the Public Defense”.