Second Day in Court:Chris Brown cops a plea and pawns his P.R. as in Public Relations, something he needs just about as much as acquittal. (Photo: Damian/Dovarganes-AFP-Getty Images.)
The legal community may be ho-hum about Chris Brown’s not guilty plea but that is not where the street is at, and the street is where Chris Brown’s career is made and or broken. He may have pleaded “not guilty” to set the stage for plea bargaining but the truth of the matter is that jail time may probably be the least of Chris Brown’s worries in the long run.
The standing truism is that good legal advice does not always equal good personal, character, P.R. and or career advice, especially on the street. In that connection, the buzz has so far not been too good for Chris. He should knowthat he is in trouble when boppers who buy his records and break to his beats begin to carp about him “not manning up and facing the legal music like a G”. Read up on the initial reactions to the plea if you doubt this.
The Street: The street of R & B and hip-hop has become as suburban as it is urban, with the money emphasis being on the former rather than the latter. The hustlers and marketers of hip-hop have long known this. This is why the coalition of crusaders, moms and the religious right have been so successful at pressuring big record companies into censoring “profanity” and perceived anti-social content. The legacy of that success has placed role modeling right up there with cleaning up content. This, according to this cyberaxis vignette, is how endorsement deals can come to bite an artist in the derierre.
From Here On Out: Chris Brown’s is toast unless he can prove that the bruises on Rihanna’s face were the work of vicious little green men who broke into their SUV on February 8, 2009. He is already in the dock for a plausible reason, and a plausible story is what is gonna save him … if it comes to that. Going to trial is something most people in this case, Rihanna included, don’t wanna do as that would most probably open a veritable can of worms. Showtime at this Apollo would force the D.A. to dig deeper and wider than the Chris camp would want. If convicted f the two felony charges of assault and making criminal threats, Chris could face a maximum of four years in prison.
Countdown to Career Mayhem: Rihanna and Chris Brown canoodling before the alleged fight that had Rihanna looking like the victim of a Mike Tyson beat-down. Occasion: Clive Davis' pre-Grammy party.
Mark Geragos may very well save Chris ass from the slammer, but he cannot save him from the career purgatory that is already in session. Chris’ advisors should have told him to go with a different defence attorney in the first place. A woman; an older, more matronly figure, who is way more simpatico than Mark Geragos, would have been a better choice. I have never trusted Mark Geragos’ instincts ever since he characterized his former client, convicted double-murderer Scott Peterson, as “stone cold innocent.”
5 responses so far ↓
A Voice of Sanity // Thursday, April 9, 2009 at 8:08 am |
I have never trusted Mark Geragos’ instincts ever since he characterized his former client, convicted double-murderer Scott Peterson, as “stone cold innocent.”
The state’s own evidence, gathered at a cost of $11 million, proved that Peterson was innocent (and not merely ‘not guilty’). The conviction was obtained by a process which even the judge admitted was driven by prejudice alone. To this day not one person can point to a factual basis for conviction.
cyberaxis // Thursday, April 9, 2009 at 8:24 pm |
If what you say has any substance, then reversing Scott Peterson’s conviction on appeal should be a walk in the park – no pun intended. It hasn’t happened ….. yet.
But the focus of my remark had more to do with Mark Geragos’ unfortunate choice of words; something he will never, ever outlive. Telling the jury that he was gonna prove that his client was “stone cold innocent” betrayed an astounding tone-deafness given a client whose mien was as icy as an Arctic air draft.
The Editor – Cyberaxis
(Remember the words of Chaim Bertman,
“In the venom, is a whisper of the antidote.”)
A Voice of Sanity // Thursday, April 9, 2009 at 11:00 pm |
It was a clumsy choice of words, and Geragos backed it up by failing, time and time again, to forcefully point out just how pathetic the prosecution case was and how much evidence there was of Peterson’s innocence, most provided by the state.
As for Peterson’s affect, he has been like that most of his life – he is a very calm man who almost never loses his temper and, unique amongst men in my experience, has never been in any sort of fight, even as a child, something I certainly cannot say. However it is a myth that he was unaffected during the trial; he was terribly shaken by the disgusting autopsy photographs the state presented to prejudice the jury and it is reported that he often threw up before court.
cyberaxis // Saturday, April 11, 2009 at 7:59 pm |
We do agree on some things on Mark Geragos, but part ways when it comes to Scott Peterson’s perceived guilt or innocence. What would have swayed me more about his care for Laci and his unborn son Conner would have been his ACTIONS during and at the time of the discovery or recovery of the bodies. The emotional reactions you mention can be faked. So can throwing up.
What are your thoughts on the O.J. Simpson verdict?
The Editor – Cyberaxis
(Remember the words of Chaim Bertman,
“In the venom, is a whisper of the antidote.”)
A Voice of Sanity // Sunday, April 12, 2009 at 12:43 am |
What would have swayed me more about his care for Laci and his unborn son Conner would have been his ACTIONS during and at the time of the discovery or recovery of the bodies.
That makes absolutely no sense at all. Laci was unrecognizable, and no one except Laci and her abductor had seen Conner. It took DNA to identify them. There have been many bodies dumped in the bay – even the police warned the searchers about that – so no one could assume anything from finding them.
As for Simpson, the LA verdict was correct in law. The Las Vegas verdict was clearly driven by racial animus and revenge as the jury foreman admitted.