The death of Rob Reiner and his wife shocked Hollywood and his countless fans. What shocked many just as much was the arrest of their son, Nick Reiner, for the crime. There were already so many questions regarding what could have possibly happened. The number of questions has only increased after Nick Reiner’s attorney stepped away from defending him.
Nick Reiner was originally set to be defended by Alan Jackson, a well-known defense attorney who has defended Kevin Spacey from sexual assault allegations and was the lead attorney during Harvey Weinstein’s rape trial. Last week, Jackson removed himself from Reiner’s murder trial. In an appearance on Let’s Talk Off Camera with Kelly Ripa, Jackson was asked why he stepped away. Jackson said…
I’m legally and I’m ethically prohibited from explaining all the reasons why, I know that’s a question on everyone’s mind. We expect the public defender to step in, they’ve already been appointed and very carefully protect Nick Reiner’s interests as he moves forward through the system.
While Alan Jackson can’t speak as to why he left the case, many suggestions have been made. Some have wondered if Reiner simply couldn’t afford Jackson, who is likely quite expensive. An alleged insider claimed Reiner wasn't cooperating with Jackson and his team, to the point the lawyer felt he could not continue.
Others have suggested that the attorney may have made a judgment call based on his client’s perceived guilt. However, Jackson addressed that topic specifically, making it clear that the guilt or innocence of his client is simply not something he considers in a case he has taken. He explained…
The answer is I normally don’t make pronouncements one way or the other about the guilt or innocence of my client, because it doesn’t matter to me, I don’t really care. I care about the Constitution. I care about whether or not the government got their job right.
Jackson stated that his ultimate duty is to the Constitution and the trial by jury system. He believes he has a duty to perform as part of that system, which means the question of guilt simply isn’t relevant. Therefore it appears nobody should read anything into Jackson stepping down.
While Jackson’s involvement in the case meant that he could not talk about details of any possible defernse, there was a significant conversation between the lawyer and the host about mental illness. While Jackson was careful to make it clear that he was not talking about Nick reiner specifically, he did discuss that there are situations where mental illness could be a factor in determining guilt. Jackson said…
No matter who the person is, if the government doesn’t get it right. And in certain circumstances, there are mental health issues. I’m not talking about Nick’s case, just in general. Like you said, sort of the call of the questions was what are some defenses that are available to citizens, just any citizen. One thing we don’t do is we don’t punish the sick for being sick.
There have been questions about Nick Reiner’s mental state since he was arrested. He was initially placed on suicide watch when placed in jail. While Jackson may not have been specifically discussing Reiner here, mental illness may be a topic at trial.
Without Jackson as Nick Reiner’s attorney, the case is being taken over by the public defender’s office. Reiner’s arraignment, which was supposed to take place the day Jackson stepped down, has been delayed to late February, when the accused will enter a plea with his new lawyer, and the wheels of justice will begin to turn again.
You must confirm your public display name before commenting
Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.
