General Discussion

pnwmom

(108,980 posts) Sun Feb 7, 2016, 12:26 AM Feb 2016

Important judicial ruling in Chris Christie bridge case:

A judge ruled that the criminal defendants, former allies of Christie's, can subpoena the documents used to prepare the report that whitewashed him.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/bridge-case-defendants-court-seeking-christie-office-docs-36738814

The two former allies of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie charged in the George Washington Bridge lane-closing case will get a second chance to force the release of documents from the law firm whose taxpayer-funded 2014 report absolved Christie of blame.

U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton on Friday said attorneys for Bill Baroni and Bridget Kelly can subpoena the Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher law firm for what they contend are thousands of pages of relevant documents, particularly communications between people in Christie's office and the bridge's operator during the September 2013 closures.

In its response to a grand jury subpoena by the U.S. attorney's office when it was assembling the indictment, the firm provided a list of documents — some thousands of pages long, defense lawyers say — that the firm said were privileged communications by Christie staffers that couldn't be released.

Baroni and Kelly were indicted last spring on wire fraud, civil rights and other charges for allegedly orchestrating the closures of access lanes to the bridge to punish a mayor for not endorsing Christie's re-election.

Their trial is scheduled for mid-May.

SNIP

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Important judicial ruling in Chris Christie bridge case: (Original Post) pnwmom Feb 2016 OP

Humm, maybe he should reverse some of his nasty statement to himself. Thinkingabout Feb 2016 #1

Good. They should have access to it. dmr Feb 2016 #2

The defendants are entitled to this information Gothmog Feb 2016 #3

The Interesting Part Of This Is.... Laxman Feb 2016 #4

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)

1. Humm, maybe he should reverse some of his nasty statement to himself.

Reply to pnwmom (Original post)

Sun Feb 7, 2016, 12:28 AM

Feb 2016

dmr

(28,347 posts)

2. Good. They should have access to it.

Reply to pnwmom (Original post)

Sun Feb 7, 2016, 04:40 AM

Feb 2016

If I remember correctly, it was a dumb down report to make Christie look good.

I'm looking forward to the trial in May.

Christie makes me sick when he brags during the debates how he is such an effective governor & how hard & trying it was being a US Attorney after 911. Argh ....

Christie is an opportunistic fast talking lazy bully.

Gothmog

(145,321 posts)

3. The defendants are entitled to this information

Reply to pnwmom (Original post)

Sun Feb 7, 2016, 11:26 AM

Feb 2016

Laxman

(2,419 posts)

4. The Interesting Part Of This Is....

Reply to pnwmom (Original post)

Sun Feb 7, 2016, 01:23 PM

Feb 2016

that Baroni and Kelly know what documents they were involved in writing already. They know what exists and what's been turned over to them in discovery and whether or not there are certain items missing. Their actions are what their actions were. Nothing in those documents can change that and nothing will exonerate them. They can only implicate others.

I also think its time to re-visit some of the issues you brought up in this excellent post-http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024326360 Ms.Brown has since been moved into a $450,000/year post that she isn't qualified for (or maybe uniquely qualified for) heading a "non profit" that promotes the fortunes (and bankrolls the travel) of Mr. Christie.

I might add that the last of the defendants from Christie's grand opus Operation Bid Rig ended the prosecution against her by paying a fine for an ELEC violation that was, in substance, the very same conduct Christie himself engaged in when he failed to report his personal loan to Ms. Brown.

Reply to this discussion