On Thursday, October 20, 2022 at 12:56:45 PM UTC-5, micky wrote:
For that matter, they keep saying that the attorney who signed an
incorrect affidavit saying that all of trump's government papers had
been turned over to the DOJ was in big trouble, but the statement said approximately "according to what I was told". If she's willing to say
who told her, how can she be in trouble?
Per the Washington Post on October 13, "[Trump attorney Christina] Bobb signed a sworn statement to the Justice Department saying that a “diligent search was conducted” and that “any and all responsive documents accompany this certification.”
Bobb’s statement included a caveat that this was “true and correct to the best of my knowledge” — a phrasing that she reportedly insisted upon because she was uncertain and that could insulate her legally. But the Justice Department is surely
interested in how Bobb arrived at this conclusion. "
What do the attorneys' Rules of Professional Conduct in Florida say here? Rule 4.3-3 "Candor Toward the Tribunal" seems to be the most relevant rule. The Rules include this comment on Rule 4.3-3:
Representations by a lawyer
"An advocate is responsible for pleadings and other documents
prepared for litigation, but is usually not required to have personal
knowledge of matters asserted therein, for litigation documents ordinarily present assertions by the client, or by someone on the client’s behalf, and not assertions by the lawyer. Compare rule 4-3.1. However, an assertion purporting to be on the lawyer’s own knowledge, as in an affidavit by the lawyer or in a statement in open court, may properly be made only when
the lawyer knows the assertion is true or believes it to be true on the basis of a reasonably diligent inquiry. There are circumstances where failure to
make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation.
... "
See
https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2022/08/2022_02-AUG-RRTFB-8-1-2022.pdf
The rules of professional conduct in any given state have the force of statute.
Attorney Bobb's problems are, big picture, two-fold. First, was her inquiry "reasonably diligent"? Second, by signing this affidavit without perhaps being "reasonably diligent," did Bobb herself obstruct justice?
I believe Bobb has said she signed the statement based on the assurance of other attorneys and nothing more. Is this "reasonably diligent"? If I were the judge, I'd have my clerk review the case law, which I expect would say that, no, the assurance of
others, with nothing more, does not represent 'reasonable diligence.'
Was this obstruction of justice? If I were on a grand jury considering whether to indict Christina Bobb, I might very well vote to indict for obstruction of justice. As a layperson, what Bobb did both cost taxpayers a lot of money and put national
security at risk, all due to her IMO resisting/fighting/rejecting/yada and so obstructing the inquiry made by the justice department.
On the other hand, I see also contentions that Bobb signed the statement as a custodian rather than an attorney. See
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/oct/10/trump-lawyer-christina-bobb-mar-a-lago-certify-documents . In which case when Bobb signed
the statement, she was not acting as Trump's attorney. Meaning the Rule of Professional Conduct might not apply. On the third hand, nothing supports Bobb having become the custodian of the classified and other records.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)