Wednesday, February 07, 2024

“Oh 💩!”

 Judge Engoron asked for information behind the news report that Weisselberg had lied under oath. This is how Trump’s lawyers replied:

“Indeed, we respectfully submit that the Court's request for comment on this speculative media account is unprecedented, inappropriate and troubling.”
And, also, too:
Attorney Alina Habba told the court she conferred with her "ethics counsel" and was advised not to provide further detail. 
"The New York Times article is neither admissible nor reliable," Habba contended, "and it should not be considered in Your Honor’s determination as to the merits of this case."
Now why would they do that?
Second, if Mr. Weisselberg did commit perjury, this Court does not need to await the outcome of a criminal proceeding to resolve the issue. To the contrary, if counsel learns that their client has offered false material evidence, they have an affirmative obligation to take "reasonable remedial measures including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal." Rule 3.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR § 1200.25). If there are facts known to any defense counsel establishing that Mr. Weisselberg committed perjury, such counsel is obligated to disclose those facts, even if privileged and even if it exposes Mr. Weisselberg to prosecution for perjury.?
"Nothing to see here, Judge! Nothing at all!” 

(Based solely on this NYT article Habba and Roberts and Kise* have an ethical obligation to investigate the allegations and report the possibility of perjury to the court and opposing counsel. The dead opposite of what they are doing here.)

(Oops.)

(*Helluva way to end his career, huh?)

(Oh 💩, again.
It didn’t occur to me Habba represents Weisselberg, too.)
Posted by at

1 comment:

  1. The Thought Criminal7:51 AM

    I know what a man who acts as his own lawyer is but what about a client who hires a Habba?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)