Agree that’s the substantive point.
I could go either way on whether attorney Jackson is grandstanding.
I know this is late, but my great aunt was killed by her son. She was also stabbed. The understanding I have is that he was a drug addict and attacked his disabled mother over money.
I also suspect the lawyer’s comment was technically true. My first instinct was not that he was grandstanding, but more making it absolutely clear he wasn’t dropping his client because he couldn’t defend him.
It fits with the apparentl motivation behind the rest of the statement.
Or, more precisely I think, trying his best to ensure that his withdraw would not prejudice his (former) client. Absent any statement, I can imagine people (and therefore potential jurors) saying “Oh, the bug shot attorney withdrew! Well clearly this man is guilty and the big shot didn’t want a loas on his record…”
The early news reports indicated Nick has many years of private doctor care and rehabs.
Compiling those records and interviewing will be complicated by HIPAA. I’m not sure how it applies in criminal cases.
There should be a long medical record that the defense can build a case around.
I think the prosecution will fight hard to say he still knew right from wrong. Nick had enough control to go out and socialize at a party just before the murders.
Not complicated by HIPAA at all. It just needs a release by the patient. It’s only complicated if someone is trying to compel the release of information without the consent of the patient. Of course anything the defense got would have to be turned over in discovery.
I think that’s a valid observation. Jackson had an ethical obligation not to weaken or worsen the case of his former client.
Inside Nick Reiner’s life of privilege, pills and pain. Friends say Reiner bounced constantly between rehab centers and his family’s Los Angeles mansion, where he is accused of killing his parents, Rob and Michele.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/01/24/nick-reiner-profile/
Unpaywalled at:
They spent an enormous amount of money on rehabilitation facilities, and alternatively a nice lifestyle living at Rob Reiner’s guesthouse.
And he is still defended by the public defender.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable that he might have to rely on the public defender (not that there’s anything wrong with that). He may have had little money of his own, and I don’t believe he’s entitled to inherit his parents’ money. So his siblings would have to choose to pay for his defense, and I can understand that they might not want to do that.