You Can’t Be Serious

18 Mar

File this one in the “How do you sleep at night?” category. Attorney Jeffrey T. Schwartz is defending a man who brutally starved and beat his 7-year-old step-daughter to death two years ago in New York. Mr. Schwartz contends that that the dead child, Nixzmary Brown, was a “force of destruction” who terrorized her siblings. Okay, well call Super Nanny, but don’t beat and starve a child, tie her to a chair and put a litter box just out of her reach that was supposed to serve as her toilet. Mr. Schwartz is basically saying that Nixzmary deserved her fate.

I completely understand the need for a solid defense no matter how heinous the crime, but I cannot understand blaming a child for her own brutal death at the hands of her step-father and mother. Read more on this story in this New York Times article.

UPDATE: Nixzmary’s stepfather, Cesar Rodriguez, was found guilty of first-degree manslaughter today by a Brooklyn jury.


Posted by on March 18, 2008 in Uncategorized


Tags: ,

15 responses to “You Can’t Be Serious

  1. Peter Fridel

    January 20, 2008 at 10:06 pm

    We shoot the lawyers first when sanity returns to this country. Can anyone give me the address to Mr. Schwartz’s office? I would like to tell him what I think of his defense plans. Perhaps someone should treat him to the type of strict discipline practiced by his client.

  2. mike

    January 23, 2008 at 10:25 am

    I grew up with and, have personally known Mr. Schwartz for years. A finer person you would not find.
    You can’t even begin to understand how this case rips apart the very core of his being. He is a loving and caring father and, as such he would drown this scum in a teaspoon of water if he could.
    Unfortunately, even this defendant deserves competent representation. Just remember, it is still up to the “jury” to hear all of the eveidence and return a verdict. Don’t blame Mr. Schwartz for doing his job!

  3. CD

    March 12, 2008 at 2:33 am

    The New York Times focused on a few sentences Mr Schwartz said, but his defense is much more coherent and less antagonistic than they are making it out to be. The guy has consistently been named one of the top lawyers in the US for a while. You can see that in the longer articles the Times has published on the case.

  4. Lizzy

    March 13, 2008 at 9:12 am

    Hey Mike,
    did you read this in today’s paper?

    “As Ms. Dwimoh [prosecutor, Ama Dwimoh] spoke, Mr. Schwartz was seen drawing a cartoon on a legal pad showing her saying: “Blah blah blah. Photos photos photos.””

    to quote you “A finer person you would not find.”
    where the hell are you looking?

  5. ari

    March 13, 2008 at 6:42 pm

    i also know mr schwartz personally. he is a lovable, sweet human being. everybody loves him. he is so selfless with his money and affection.
    if he makes cartoons poking fun at the prosecuting atty, so what?
    and again, the atty is obligated to get his client off. if you understand that simple fact, then it is plainly intellectually dishonest to criticize him for doing so. and if his tactics offend you, but you understand they are legal, then your problem is with the system, not mr schwartz. and lastly, if the jury is stupid enough to believe that the step-father should be exonerated because the kid deserved it, then again your problem is with the system and the jury, not mr schwartz.
    to make it perfectly clear- if mr schwartz said that aliens from ufo’s were responsible, and the jury acquits, who do you have the problem with? think about it and try to stop this mindless knee-jerk, provincial attack on the attywho is doing his job.

  6. loveisdope

    March 14, 2008 at 8:39 am

    Not sure if you were calling my initial post a “mindless knee jerk reaction” or the responses to it. I appreciate opposing view points, but I don’t appreciate insults to my intelligence. My actions are anything but mindless.

    As far as Mr. Schwartz, it is quite possible he’s a great guy and that is totally not the point. I have no problem with him providing a vigorous defense for his client, but he is in no way obligated to pursue that particular defense theory. As someone else noted, his defense strategy is not resting soley on the “she deserved it” theory and even when defending child abusing scumbags, I think there should be a line drawn somewhere about what is an appropriate defense. Do I have a problem with the system? Yes, but this is actually not an example of that. Do I think Schwartz could employ less inflammatory and ridiculous defense strategies and still provide a solid defense? Absolutely.

  7. Lizzy

    March 14, 2008 at 10:10 am


    Get your head out of your ass and admit that your loveable, sweet, selfless, affectionate friend was wrong.

    He was drawing a cartoon and poking fun during the murder of a child!!! And your response is “so what”? Your implication is that this is part of his job, part of the defense. It wasn’t a tactic.
    It was immature and it was outrageous.

    “If the jury is stupid enough,… blah blah blah”. Your “affectionate” friend put forth that defense, what does that make him? stupider?

    To make it perfectly clear, You are an imbecile.

  8. loveisdope

    March 14, 2008 at 2:42 pm

    My dear readers, let’s not resort to name calling. Keep it above the belt, please.

  9. ari

    March 14, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    i apologize to loveisdope- using the term mindless was excessive.
    i have to disagree with drawing a line when it comes to defense. the only line i see is- is it legal? if so, then the defense atty has an obligation to do whatever it takes. if his defense is stupid, then he’ll lose- he doesn’t need you to tell him that. if his defense offends you- hey, it offends me , too, but that is not a reflection on him. it’s a reflection on the system. i wish there were a way to make this clearer, for this problem- people getting angry with defense atty’s- never seems to go away, even though i think it is intellectually bankrupt.
    as for lizzy- the name -calling is typical of weak arguments. mr schwartz’s doodling was his private affair. he never intended for it to be publicized. it reflected his frustration with the prosecutor who he felt was not being fair. at worst, it was poor judgement. but doodling like he did was simply comic relief- this has been a very strenuous, objectionable experience for him. if he did not let off some steam with some humor, i dont think he could’ve handled the case. he knows as well as you that he is defending and putting enormous energy into defending one of the biggest scumbags in the world.

  10. tom

    March 17, 2008 at 4:08 pm

    Mr. Schwartz is fine person ???
    Are you kidding me! He is unprincipled nasty attorney,
    who is defending the murderer of the child to make money.
    Schwartz is doing his job ??? Come on! He has a lot of choices
    to defend good innocent people, but he chose to make his
    dirty money from people’s tragedy and protect the murderer.

  11. Don

    March 18, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    In our country, we are still innocent until proven guilty. You take that away (which is what’s happening now) and we’ll soon enjoy a police state. You can’t pick and choose who deserves to be defended.

    That being said, there’s no doubt Jeffrey T. Schwartz is a self-serving, arrogant, contemptuous, bottom-of-the-bucket scumbag attorney.


    Because attorneys like Jeffrey don’t care about justice. They care about THEMSELVES. The media attention, the “over-the-top” defenses (as they so arrogantly call them). The glitz, the glamour, the fame, the big payout.

    Attorneys like Jeffrey is what’s wrong with our judicial system – NOT defense attorneys or the judicial process itself.

    Those key elements have been abominated by scum like Jeffrey, and supported by fellow attorneys, right up to the State Bar.

    Even the most heinous criminals deserve representation (as much as we would rather see them dragged out of court and shot in face out back). But when the life of a seven-year-old child is reduced to litter, you have to question the ETHICS (or lack thereof) of the defense.

    That’s how attorneys like Jeffrey are able to sleep at night. Contempt for society is the best sleeping pill on the market.

  12. Attorney SchwartzSCUM

    March 18, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    It is true that everyone is innocent until proven guilty but this A-hole, Rodriguez has already confessed to beating this little girl without mercy on a regular basis! Just read the articles!

    Thank God there is still somewhere on this earth that child murderers and rapists are not tolerated, PRISON!! And that is surely where Mr. Cesar “scum-of-the-earth” Rodriguez will get what is coming to him. It seems that there is a stronger moral code concerning child welfare inside prison than out! Too bad we can’t arrange a stay for Jeffrey T. Schwartz.

    Mr. Schwartz has got to be the biggest scum on this Earth! I wonder what methods he uses to discipline his own children that he thinks that the actions of Rodriguez are defendable (?) This has nothing to do with contempt for society. It has to do with some missing component in the brain of Jeffrey T. Schwartz that makes him as much a sociopath as the killers he defends! I guess they don’t have a “mental health section” on the Bar exam!

    And for those of you claiming to be Mr. Schwartz’s “friend” and that he is a “good” man well it only goes to show, you can never truly know anyone!

  13. Agatha

    March 19, 2008 at 12:36 am

    Believe me, I understand where you’re coming from and that probably was my first reaction, too, but I think you shouldn’t blame a man for doing his job as best as he can.

    To me, doing a thankless task- like defending the dregs of society because someone has to- is actually heroism.

    Instead of blasting him, you should be thanking him for the principles he upholds and defends.

  14. Attorney SchwartzSCUM

    March 27, 2008 at 11:46 am

    and what priciples are those?

  15. JB N

    June 11, 2011 at 8:11 am

    If there is any justice in the world some member of Schwartz’s family will meet a fate like that child. It would be so wonderful if Schwartz could suffer the same sort of pain that his clients inflict on others. Pray for a hell, because that’s where inhuman scum like Schwartz belong.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: