Lion News: Lion News: 'Kyle "The Fixer" Thompson Is A Perjurer' Says Pope Co.'s Attorney Neil "The Tamper" Nelson?

Lawless Glenwood City Councilman Kyle Richard Thompson is a perjurer according to lawless Pope County Attorney (& Glenwood Assistant City Attorney - lest we forget or your were too stupid to figure it out, right?) Neil "The Tamperer" Nelson?

That is the testimony of Jermey Geyer, isn't it?

Lion News: 'Kyle "The Fixer" Thompson Is A Perjurer' Says Pope Co.'s Attorney "Tamper" Nelson?

Thompson was represented by attorney Kevin W. DeVore. Pope County Attorney Neil Nelson was the

attorney for the state.

“Given the evidence that was presented at trial I was surprised by the result,” Nelson said after the trial.

“Nonetheless, I always respect the decision of the jury.” Kyle Thompson acquitted on all counts after three-day jury trial. Pope County Tribune. Monday, October 29, 2012, Page 3A.

Don't worry Kyle you will be rescued by the "Tamper" won't you?

The "Tamperer" will prosecute you, won't he? How can the Assistant Glenwood City Attorney prosecute his own City Councilman? It is really easy if you live in lawless Pope County, isn't it?

How come Starbuck's City Councilor Michael Moen's criminal case was sent to the Swift County Attorney? Oh, wait! There was a conflict of interest, wasn't there?

Remember: ignore the part in the police report where the Glenwood City Attorney Bruce Obenland says he can't represent Kyle "The Fixer" Thompson because of a "conflict of interest," okay?

If the City Attorney can't represent Kyle, then how can Neil "The Tamperer" Nelson when he is the Assistant City Attorney? The answer can be found in two simple words, can't it? "Criminal Act" would be the two correct words, wouldn't they?

Conflict of interest. (1843) 1. A real or seeming incompatibility between one's private interests and one's public or fiduciary duties. 2. A real or seeming incompatibility between the interests of two of a lawyer's clients, such that the lawyer is disqualified from representing both clients if the dual representation adversly affects either client or if the clients do not consent. See Model Rules of Prof'l Conduct 1.7(a). Cases: Attorney and Client 20, 113. Black's Law Dictionary, 9^th Edition, page 341.

Note: This police report came from Jeremy Geyer - not the lawless Glenwood Police Department!

Lion News: Glenwood City Council's Kyle "The Fixer" Thompson Records Request?

Should have been a "slam-dunk" for the prosecution to convict Kyle, right?

Lion News: Glenwood's Councilman Kyle "The Fixer" Thompson Is Acquitted [ Not Guilty ]?

Thompson was represented by attorney Kevin W. DeVore. Pope County Attorney Neil Nelson was the

attorney for the state.

“Given the evidence that was presented at trial I was surprised by the result,” Nelson said after the trial.

“Nonetheless, I always respect the decision of the jury.” Kyle Thompson acquitted on all counts after three-day jury trial. Pope County Tribune. Monday, October 29, 2012, Page 3A.

All sorts of damning evidence was stacked up against Kyle, wasn't it?

How could have Neil not won this case? Neil, you didn't want to win, did you? You "threw the fight," didn't you?

Kyle, did you blackmail lawless Pope County Attorney/Assistant Glenwood City Attorney Neil "The Tamperer" Nelson into getting you off the charges? Neil rigged it so you would win, didn't he?

Lion News: Kyle Thompson [New City Councilman] On Stafsholt's Assault On Nemmers P1

Lion News: Kyle Thompson [New City Councilman] On Stafsholt's Assault On Nemmers P2

How could you explain your "winning" strategy in just 10 minutes Neil? The "win" you planned for was for Kyle Thompson, wasn't it?

4.5 DIFFICULT PROBLEMS ON DIRECT EXAMINATION

I. Getting More Details from the Witness

Often a witness will give you an answer, thinking it is complete, what the reality is is that you need more details. Many attorneys freeze with the incomplete answer, not realizing how easy it is to get information from the witness. At your disposal, you need to have the correct phrases that draw out needed details from the witness.

D. Shane Read, Winning At Trial. (National Institute for Trial Advocacy: 2007) page 164.

Since leading questions are generally prohibited, there is a tendency to believe that the witness controls the flow of information and not the attorney. The opposite is true. If the witness is not forthcoming with details, keep asking the question in as many different ways as possible (which helps avoid the “asked and answered” objection) to get the information you need. If you have prepared the witness for trial, the witness will usually quickly understand what additional information you are seeking. The following are useful phrases to remember.

1. Please Explain

2. Give the jury an example of what you mean

3. Tell us some other details you remember

4. Give us some specifics of what you mean

D. Shane Read, Winning At Trial. (National Institute for Trial Advocacy: 2007) page 165.

3. Not Controlling the Witness

Often, attorneys feel that since they cannot “lead a witness,” all questions must be open-ended. However, “what happened next?" Is the enemy of a successful direct examination. The problem is that often the witness doesn't know how to answer such a broad question. Moreover, the broad question suggests a broad and rambling answer. Beginning attorneys ask this question because it relives them of the burden of having to ask a specific question. However, such questions give control to the witness suce the witness is free to answer any way he chooses. When an attorney cedes control to the witness, he is no longer conveying his themes of the case through the witness.

The other problem is that once the beginning attorney realizes that the “what happened next?” question has failed, resorts to asking leading questions to elicit the information he needs.³⁵

__________

35. Generally, the beginning attorney will ask leading questions that begin with a form of the verb “to be” (e.g. “Was the traffic light red?”).

D. Shane Read, Winning At Trial. (National Institute for Trial Advocacy: 2007) page 177.

5. Not Creating Themes for The Witness

Resist the urge to simply have the witnesses tell their story. Given this kind of freedom, witnesses can easily get sidetracked from the themes of the case. Before their testimony, explain the themes or topics you want them to discuss and have the witness stick to them during the trial.

D. Shane Read, Winning At Trial. (National Institute for Trial Advocacy: 2007) page 179.

Checklist of Mistakes to Avoid In Direct

1. Not simplifying testimony for the jury

2. Not addressing important weakness completely

3. Not controlling the witness

4. Not listening to answers

5. Not creating themes for the witness

D. Shane Read, Winning At Trial. (National Institute for Trial Advocacy: 2007) page 179.