Judge in Flynn case accuses Flynn’s lawyer
From the intrepid Jonathan Turley:
It is bad enough when a judge refuses to let out your client from a plea deal but it is worse when he then suggests that his lawyer is a plagiarist to boot. That however is what former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and his counsel, Sidney Powell, faced in the 92 page order of U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan…
[The following quotes are from Sullivan’s order.]
“In a footnote, Mr. Flynn’s brief merely provides a hyperlink to the “excellent briefing by Amicus [sic] in support of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Brown v. United States.” Def.’s Br., ECF No. 109 at 16 n.22.
“The District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct apply to the proceedings in this Court. See LCrR 57.26. Rule8.4(c) provides that “[i]t is professional misconduct for a lawyer to . . . [e]ngage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.” D.C. Rules of Prof’l Conduct R.8.4(c); see In re Ayeni, 822 A.2d 420, 421 (D.C. 2003) (per curiam) (lawyer’s plagiarized brief violated Rule 8.4(c)).“[C]itation to authority is absolutely required when language is borrowed.”United States v. Bowen, 194 F. App’x 393, 402 n.3(6th Cir. 2006);accordLCrR 47(a). “The [C]ourt expects counsel to fully comply with this [C]ourt’s rules and submit work product befitting of pleadings [and briefs] in a federal court.”Kilburn v. Republic of Iran, 441 F. Supp. 2d 74, 77 n.2 (D.D.C.2006).”
[End of Sullivan quote; back to Turley.]
Wait. Powell cited and had a hyperlink to the source of that material, but it warrants a section accusing her of plagiarism and ethical violations?…
Powell says that “the plagiarism accusation makes no sense.” She maintains that she used her own prior briefings and a brief written by a friend who was in fact cited.
There appears to be some sort of intense animosity that Sullivan feels towards Powell. As Paul Mirengoff of Powerline writes:
But in the electronic age, the hyperlink is attribution. The source of Powell’s language was there for anyone to see with just one click.
Powell clearly wasn’t trying to deceive anyone into thinking that the language originated with her. Even if one believes she should have made the attribution on the face of her brief rather then through a hyperlink, Sullivan’s suggestion that she “engage[d] in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation” is ludicrous.
…Sullivan’s accusation…smacks of personal hostility.
Hard to come to any other conclusion.
J. Sullivan had also earlier in this fiasco popped off about Flynn committing “treason” and quickly withdrew the comment. He’s not right in the head, this Judge.
Couldn t accuse the client so he went after the lawyer. SDferr probably has him right . Is he in age bracket for dementia to be showing up ? Must be if appt by Bush.
Judge Sullivan’s actions demonstrate his incompetence. He condemns himself with this ruling. Not that he will suffer any consequence whatsoever for his stomping upon justice.
I am reminded of that defamation suit filed by climate scientist Michael Mann against conservative commentator Mark Steyn, which has been going on since at least 2012. Some of the judges involved along the way in that lawsuit have retired, with other judges (according to Steyn) showing themselves to be incompetent and uninformed.
As Mark Steyn has said, the process is the punishment.
The reason the federal judiciary does not care for Sullivan is because she is not a pushover for the feds. She is tough as nails, fights hard for her clients and does not give the feds the ‘respect’ the judges (without evidence) believe the feds deserve.
Mike Smith
I believe you mean Powell, not Sullivan. Sullivan is the judge.
Judges like this is one of the reasons I quit practicing law. I would have laughed in her face over it and dared her to report me to the Disciplinary Board.
It is hard to tell from a distance, but it looks like an internet link in the text is not a sufficient reference to an “Authority”. Proper form and all that, lest the peasants think the court is like 4chan.
As in, What good is it being a “judge” if you can’t crap on lawyers?