It's pretty clear to me that Twersky was brought on so that there should be representation from "both sides".
The problem is that Twersky did not represent his side or tell his client's side of the story (because of attorney-client privilege). Instead, he made two main statements:
- "Investors" need to be careful with how and where they invest, especially when giving unsecured loans
- Don't try to do a chargeback, because that will cause you to get into trouble criminally. He went on to say that banks have a "direct line" to the NYPD etc. and that they can charge you criminally for making a false claim that you never authorized the merchant to charge the card when you actually did.
Make no mistake. Both of these statements were for the benefit of his client. As others' have said, he's framing this story not as a criminal case but as an
investment gone bad. Basically investors made a bad investment and it's really really sad.
The warning about chargebacks is not necessarily bad advice for the victims, but he could have said it for a number of reasons. One that stands out is that if indeed people can end up being criminally charged for doing this, the blame for that will be pinned on his clients. Another one is that those banks can open a criminal investigation on his client for all the chargebacks.