Witness tampering in the Moussauoi case.
March 15, 2006 12:13 PM Subscribe
Witness tampering, the Moussaoui case and disbarment.
I was under the impression that in the USA witness tampering by a lawyer generally warrants disbarment. Is Carla Martin going to be disbarred then? If not, why? Thanks.
I was under the impression that in the USA witness tampering by a lawyer generally warrants disbarment. Is Carla Martin going to be disbarred then? If not, why? Thanks.
The cynic in me says probably not.
Frankly, I fully expect the "liberal media" to go on a witch-hunt against the judge. Charges of overreaction to a "technicality", etc. You know the drill.
posted by Thorzdad at 12:32 PM on March 15, 2006
Frankly, I fully expect the "liberal media" to go on a witch-hunt against the judge. Charges of overreaction to a "technicality", etc. You know the drill.
posted by Thorzdad at 12:32 PM on March 15, 2006
That depends. Usually, the best course is to blame a disorder and offer to settle with a probationary status. Martin has a lot of problems though, because it looks like she lied to the judge as well.
The media won't go after the judge. What happened is not a technicality. It was really big, and the prosecution was compelled to reveal it because it was so bad.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:38 PM on March 15, 2006
The media won't go after the judge. What happened is not a technicality. It was really big, and the prosecution was compelled to reveal it because it was so bad.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:38 PM on March 15, 2006
It certainly seems like she's going to be in hot water. Even if she not disbarred, I suspect causing major damage to the case against a 9/11 hijacker will ruin her career.
"I would have to say overall it appears to me that Ms. Martin -- Judge Brinkema said, "You need a lawyer" today. Ms. Martin may be in a great deal of trouble, but I would emphasize that I don't think the Moussaoui prosecutors themselves are responsible for this particular glitch. And it looks to me like the government might appeal here."
- Andrew McBride, former U.S. prosecutor on the Lehrer Newshour
posted by justkevin at 12:45 PM on March 15, 2006
"I would have to say overall it appears to me that Ms. Martin -- Judge Brinkema said, "You need a lawyer" today. Ms. Martin may be in a great deal of trouble, but I would emphasize that I don't think the Moussaoui prosecutors themselves are responsible for this particular glitch. And it looks to me like the government might appeal here."
- Andrew McBride, former U.S. prosecutor on the Lehrer Newshour
posted by justkevin at 12:45 PM on March 15, 2006
I don't see how they can appeal. Jepoardy has attached because the jury has been seated and there are no provisions for an interlocutory appeal here.
posted by Ironmouth at 12:51 PM on March 15, 2006
posted by Ironmouth at 12:51 PM on March 15, 2006
Regarding disbarment, the local district court has its own rules, and disbarment, were it to occur, would only preclude Martin from practicing in front of the Eastern District of Virginia (although I believe the ultimate holding would be forwarded to the Virginia supreme court, who may then decide to disbar Martin from the Virginia bar). From my reading of the E.D.V.A. local rules, a valid reason to hold off on disbarment proceedings is that there is a pending proceeding against the attorney - say, criminal charges.
Legal authority below:
“Any court which has the power to admit attorneys to practice may also sanction them for unprofessional conduct.” Standing Comm. on Discipline v. Ross, 735 F.2d 1168, 1170 (9th Cir. 1984). “In the federal system there is no uniform procedure for disciplinary proceedings.” Id. The individual judicial districts are free to define the rules to be followed and the grounds for punishment. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654. Federal district courts are bound by the disciplinary rules they implement when proceeding against attorneys for violation of ethical standards. Dailey v. Vought Aircraft Co., 141 F.3d 224, 230 (5th Cir. 1998);
Which means that its up to the actual court, which, I believe in this case, is the Eastern District of Virginia. The applicable rules are available here:
FRDE RULE V
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
A. When misconduct or allegations of misconduct which, as substantiated, would warrant discipline on the part of an attorney admitted to practice before this Court shall come to the attention of a judge of this Court, whether by complaint or otherwise, and the applicable procedure is not otherwise mandated by these Rules, the judge shall refer the matter to counsel for investigation and the prosecution of a formal disciplinary proceeding or the formulation of such other recommendation as may be appropriate.
B. Should counsel conclude after investigation and review that a formal disciplinary proceeding should not be initiated against the respondent-attorney because sufficient evidence is not present, or because there is pending another proceeding against the respondent-attorney, the disposition of which in the judgment of the counsel should be awaited before further action by this Court is considered, or for any other valid reason, counsel shall file with the Court a recommendation for disposition of the matter, whether by dismissal, admonition, deferral, or otherwise setting forth the reasons therefor.
posted by buddha9090 at 1:05 PM on March 15, 2006
Legal authority below:
“Any court which has the power to admit attorneys to practice may also sanction them for unprofessional conduct.” Standing Comm. on Discipline v. Ross, 735 F.2d 1168, 1170 (9th Cir. 1984). “In the federal system there is no uniform procedure for disciplinary proceedings.” Id. The individual judicial districts are free to define the rules to be followed and the grounds for punishment. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654. Federal district courts are bound by the disciplinary rules they implement when proceeding against attorneys for violation of ethical standards. Dailey v. Vought Aircraft Co., 141 F.3d 224, 230 (5th Cir. 1998);
Which means that its up to the actual court, which, I believe in this case, is the Eastern District of Virginia. The applicable rules are available here:
FRDE RULE V
DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
A. When misconduct or allegations of misconduct which, as substantiated, would warrant discipline on the part of an attorney admitted to practice before this Court shall come to the attention of a judge of this Court, whether by complaint or otherwise, and the applicable procedure is not otherwise mandated by these Rules, the judge shall refer the matter to counsel for investigation and the prosecution of a formal disciplinary proceeding or the formulation of such other recommendation as may be appropriate.
B. Should counsel conclude after investigation and review that a formal disciplinary proceeding should not be initiated against the respondent-attorney because sufficient evidence is not present, or because there is pending another proceeding against the respondent-attorney, the disposition of which in the judgment of the counsel should be awaited before further action by this Court is considered, or for any other valid reason, counsel shall file with the Court a recommendation for disposition of the matter, whether by dismissal, admonition, deferral, or otherwise setting forth the reasons therefor.
posted by buddha9090 at 1:05 PM on March 15, 2006
I don't know a lot of lawyers, but the only one I know of who got disbarred was convicted of stealing clients' trust funds.
The judge telling Martin that she needs a lawyer is pretty telling, though.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:46 PM on March 15, 2006
The judge telling Martin that she needs a lawyer is pretty telling, though.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:46 PM on March 15, 2006
« Older Cartoons of Jesus and Santa, methed and... | Tape machine reel motor pulleys | the mind reels... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by matteo at 12:14 PM on March 15, 2006