Nowak's lawyer says diaper report 'is a preposterous lie' -- Or...

This lawyer sounds as crazy as his client. He sounds like a loon. And if she kept used and unused diapers in her car for months, she is nuts or a pack rat from hell.

And really the cops don't need the diapers for premeditation. She drove 900 miles, used fake names and paid in cash to stalk a woman who had replaced her in her ex-lover's life. She had a long-time to change her mind.

Something else I always keep in mind. This guy WASN'T THERE. The cops who wrote the reports were. He is getting his info from Nowak, who has reasons to lie. There is no way he can be 100% sure she didn't wear diapers.

Milt wrote:

Ok, let's assume no diapers were involved........Shall we now toss the case out of court? Is that the best you can do Mr. Attorney?
Honestly, this whole diaper thing never made any sense to me. It was said she wore them so as not to have to stop and go to the bathroom..........Hey, she had to stop for gas.......Why not just take a whizz then?

Don't know about you but I have to stop when I travel about every 4 hours. My car has to stop about every 6 hours. My gas tank it much bigger than my bladder.

I can see Nowak's appeal now "Your Honor, I was represented poorly by a bad attorney." The attorney is as much a part of this circus as the reporters.

The reason why this otherwise sad little love triangle is attracting so much attention is because the people involved are astronauts, not because one supposedly wore a diaper to minimize the need to stop enroute.

They all belong in a looneybin, attorney included. Of course, we don't have looneybins anymore, thanks to the Civil Liberties people, so we have to put up with garbage like this attorney's histrionics in our expensive courts.

We should charge the attorney and the astro-nuts a fee for every minute this self-important attorney delays what is actually a case of attempted kidnapping and murder, not a case of who wore a diaper. Do we have to look this stupid to the world?

Well she can't pull the Downtown Disney defense or "race" so the lawyer has to find something. Of course it has to be something other than she's potentially a looney tune.

I see the rich astro nut getting probation . Maybe the Armed forces will fry her up .

It's all just a horrible joke and discredits the space program. I guess this was one NASA couldn't even try to sweep under the carpet.

This is turning into a joke. Nowak is a Navy officer who attacked an Air Force officer. Let JAG have this case and be done with it. Send her on a nice vacation to Kansas for a few years and then kick her can out of the armed forces.

The "attorney" didn't dispute anything
but the wearing of diapers.Finally a truthful attorney ! Just fried his client.

too bad the wheels of justice can't spin enough for this one. perhaps securing a fresh diaper onto it to harness the load of crap spewing out of the mouth of this lawyer. f*cking lawyers...nothing new here. a bunch of licensed thieves. no wonder you can't get a fair shake with the criminal justice system.

This has to be the same attorney that Nelson had. He wants to dispute something that is not even part of the case. He is worried about her being made fun of because of the diaper. Dude, it was the whole bizzare episode and her being an astronaut that lead to the ridicule, the diaper was a bonus. I hope you have something better than that for trial. At least put up a defense, not doing so seems to be a bad idea for Nelson...

Diapers Diapers

Crazy stuff wrote:

This is turning into a joke. Nowak is a Navy officer who attacked an Air Force officer. Let JAG have this case and be done with it. Send her on a nice vacation to Kansas for a few years and then kick her can out of the armed forces.

You think JAG won't go after her if she gets out of this somehow? My money is she'll be answering to JAG before it's over.

None of you get it! Nowak's lawyer caught the cops in this lie because the transcript, as in, tape recorder, shows her telling them about the hurricane while they wrote something else entirely in their charging affadavit. If they made this up, what else did they make up? What evidence did they really find and what did they plant? Crazy Stuff is right - the cops were there. They were the ONLY ones there for hours on end. There was no one to contradict anything they say or do. Cops are notoriously mean to mentally ill people, which Nowak probably was at the time, because they know they can get away with anything. A male arrested with Nowak's behavior would have been beaten to a pulp and tazered, and then charged with resisting arrest. In her case, they trump up the most serious felony charges possible and play jokes on her at the same time. This is a good lesson for every freedom loving citizen: never say more than ten words to a police officer without a lawyer present. They do whatever they can get away with to get themselves medals, pay raises and promotions.

Learn the Facts wrote:

<quoted text>
You think JAG won't go after her if she gets out of this somehow? My money is she'll be answering to JAG before it's over.

JAG is just waiting.

Learn the Facts wrote:

<quoted text>
You think JAG won't go after her if she gets out of this somehow? My money is she'll be answering to JAG before it's over.

Didn't doubt that, I was just saying that they should have taken it over now. JAG probably would kick this attorney and his antics to the curb.

common sense wrote:

None of you get it! Nowak's lawyer caught the cops in this lie because the transcript, as in, tape recorder, shows her telling them about the hurricane while they wrote something else entirely in their charging affadavit. If they made this up, what else did they make up? What evidence did they really find and what did they plant? Crazy Stuff is right - the cops were there. They were the ONLY ones there for hours on end. There was no one to contradict anything they say or do. Cops are notoriously mean to mentally ill people, which Nowak probably was at the time, because they know they can get away with anything. A male arrested with Nowak's behavior would have been beaten to a pulp and tazered, and then charged with resisting arrest. In her case, they trump up the most serious felony charges possible and play jokes on her at the same time. This is a good lesson for every freedom loving citizen: never say more than ten words to a police officer without a lawyer present. They do whatever they can get away with to get themselves medals, pay raises and promotions.

I don't see that it matters what a cop wrote in a charging paper. Those aren't read to the jury, the tape will be played (if it isn't kicked) and the jury will make up its own mind based on the evidence presented at trial, not to the media.

And why are we accusing the cops of planting evidence? There is zero evidence of that.

common sense wrote:

None of you get it! Nowak's lawyer caught the cops in this lie because the transcript, as in, tape recorder, shows her telling them about the hurricane while they wrote something else entirely in their charging affadavit. If they made this up, what else did they make up? What evidence did they really find and what did they plant? Crazy Stuff is right - the cops were there. They were the ONLY ones there for hours on end. There was no one to contradict anything they say or do. Cops are notoriously mean to mentally ill people, which Nowak probably was at the time, because they know they can get away with anything. A male arrested with Nowak's behavior would have been beaten to a pulp and tazered, and then charged with resisting arrest. In her case, they trump up the most serious felony charges possible and play jokes on her at the same time. This is a good lesson for every freedom loving citizen: never say more than ten words to a police officer without a lawyer present. They do whatever they can get away with to get themselves medals, pay raises and promotions.

See that you are still in that padded room.

Is it just me, or does the lawyer look like he's simulating, ah, something?

I find it amazing that the defense layer isn't contesting the charges or her intend in the case but whether or not she was wearing diapers. That's his "biggest worry." Not whether his client actually was trying to kill the other woman or anything like that, but that she was wearing a diaper.

I believe the quote here is "Me thinks he doth protest to much."

Lykkebak wants everyone to focus on the issue of the diapers and the total Inconceivability of a person actually wearing diapers, adult or otherwise, to make a long trip when she wanted to avoid stopping to use the rest rooms. Why is this even a point? She had the used diapers in her car; she had additional fresh diapers also in her car. Nowak's own testimony to police states that she wore them and used them specifically to avoid stopping. Lykkebak is making a huge fuss over the diapers not being entered in as evidence when they were never even central to the kidnapping case to begin with. The only thing they can be used for (aside from humor) is that it points solidly to premediation - it shows her planning this, not a spur of the moment decision made in madness.

I believe he's just making this central to force pick on the jury, or to get the case moved somewhere far away.