At the time, I assumed I would hire Jose Baez. So I had no choice but to trust his decision to push the accusations out to the media, before I even met him. I texted Mandi's mother about how I didn't like all the news stories, but I had to accept the wisdom of a paid expert with more experience than me, if that is how he chose to manage the case. So the day came for my $1000 consultation with Jose Baez, and I was told Jose is not here but he is coming. Sean Landers will meet with me instead. Sean seemed like a good and smart lawyer, but he does not charge $1000 for a consultation, his are free like every other lawyer in Orlando. After I spoke with Sean at length and he took many notes, Jose walked in and spoke brieﬂy. Jose obviously had no idea about the case. Jose started out by running off two or three stock lines about the law. Jose used his three inane lines to brag how whatever the victim says, we can attack his credibility. In fact the victim was dead and won’t be saying anything. This was about three quarters of the way through my consultation. But whereas everybody on Jose's receptionist’s tip list knew the victim was dead, Jose did not. Jose then went on to quiz me over whether the defendant had family, and what their jobs are, how much money they have or make. So I basically paid $1000 to 1) have someone promote news stories about Mandi doing terrible things which she didn't do, 2) talk to a free-consultation lawyer Sean Landers, 3) hear Jose recite a few lines that were so generic and irrelevant it was embarrassing, and 4) be quizzed about how much money the defendant's family has. After I mentioned I was giving the defendant a lot of money to spend on food from the jail commissary, Jose told me that she might "blow up" and I "might not want her any more." Jose said this was a problem for him. He said if he took the case, and I lost interest in the defendant and I didn't want to pay him, the judge might not let him withdraw from the case. Jose was too busy with the Hernandez case and stated that even after that, he had no interest in criminal cases as there was "no money in it." He said he wanted to do a civil case. I told Jose this had nothing to do with my personal interest in the defendant. It was based on my personal interest in the truth, which my interest in the defendant put me in a position to know. I was there because I knew something about the case, I knew the defendant was falsely accused, and truth and justice are of value to me. I was pursuing abstract ideals, not sex. Sex is as common as sociopathic self-absorbed Jewish attorneys with catholicized names. Though not speciﬁcally for them, I can guess, just based on Jose's cheezy BMW jacket which he wore to match his BMW. At ﬁrst it was hard to put J ose's "no money in it" in context, in a consultation I paid $1000 for. Jose made his generic comments about strategy to win a criminal case, and then he offered the caveat there was "no money in it," It came across like "during the trial we can question the victim's credibility, but there is no money in it." Was he speaking ﬁguratively, was he telling me his own strategy would be ineffective? It took me a moment to put together he was not characterizing his strategy to get a not-guilty verdict as ineffective. He was saying getting a not-guilty verdict in Mandi's case literally would not produce any money. He thought it was useful to point out that a winning verdict in a civil case produces money. I was told it would be $120,000 to hire Jose, or I could hire Sean Landers for "about half tha " $60,000. I said I already told the receptionist I was ready to pay according to the terms she relayed to me. Jose told me they would look into the case and call me. They never did. I sent several emails and made several calls to the ofﬁce, and got no response. I have since met people around town who read the news stories set up by the female working at Jose's ofﬁce, and as a direct result of the broader promotion of this misinformation, had been demanding the defendant's head in every avenue available to them. The news stories Jose's receptionist directly created were read by girls in the jail, recycled as gossip, and presented at trial as confessions from the defendant. And it delayed the trial by years in the process. To me, this seems unethical. I got swindled out of $1000. I have since done what I promised Jose I would do, I have spent over $100,000 on lawyers in Mandi's case. I did not get what was promised to me, and in fact they hurt the defendant immeasurably through their active promotion of dirt in the press.