Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Kriger brings new style to Bashara case

You can immediately detect the new style for Bob Bashara's new defense attorney, Mark Kriger. Kriger in his first appearance as Bashara's lawyer declined to comment today following his client's arraignment in Wayne County Circuit Court, adding he doesn't comment on a pending case.
That's certainly a different tact than taken by Bashara's prior attorney, David Griem, who talked to the press as much as journalists were willing to listen while his client was investigated for his wife's murder and than charged with plotting to kill Joe Gentz, a potential witness against him for Jane Bashara's murder last January at her Grosse Pointe Park home.
Griem's antics rub some legal observers the wrong way.  But Griem would argue that he was forced into mounting a verbal counter-attack to combat all the harmful information in media reports about his client over the weeks and months following his wife's murder, via police leaks.
Kriger's style provides a glimpse into why Bashara no longer wanted Griem as his attorney. I have no inside knowledge, but I think Bashara probably believed that Griem did a good job taking him through the early stages of his defense but now he needs a lawyer who works more out of the limelight.
Kriger is an extremely experience attorney with a great reputation. He and his partner represented Carl Marlinga, who was acquitted of campaign-related charges a half-dozen years ago in a federal trial.
Kriger today also didn't do something that Griem predicted he would do -- ask for a new preliminary examination at 36th District Court in Detroit.
I agreed with Griem that Bashara's new attorney would seek a new prelim because the district court judge refused to allow Griem to withdraw from the case for the probable cause hearing.
Although Kriger could still ask the new judge to remand the case back to district for a second prelim, I don't think he will now. Another prelim would allow Wayne County prosecutors to publicize their case against Bashara a second time and probably wouldn't give Kriger anything new. Kriger may have attacked the prosecution's witness a different way, but I don't think a second chance at him would be worth the negative publicity that could further taint potential jurors.


Blogger Darkman said...

I quite enjoyed reading several articles (including this one) in your blog here.


August 23, 2012 at 12:35 AM 
Blogger Jameson Cook said...


December 13, 2012 at 9:01 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home