Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Attorney Caught Changing Briefs in Federal Court (True Story)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:14 PM
Original message
Attorney Caught Changing Briefs in Federal Court (True Story)
How's your faith in the judicial system?

ATTORNEY CAUGHT CHANGING BRIEFS IN FEDERAL COURT

In what is destined to become a classic case and urban legend, an attorney was caught changing briefs in federal court after he "inadvertantly" filed three pages of emails that indicated he was allegedly involved with records tampering in a federal court case in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Putting a new twist on the meaning behind self-incrimination, no one would have known that the attorney had allegedly tampered with the court records except three pages of emails that detailed what was done to the court records were attached to a brief filed with the court by the attorney involved. http://www.maximumadvocacy.com/Court_records.html

Filing the emails drew attention to the attorney's conduct otherwise it might have gone unnoticed.

The emails between the attorney’s law firm and federal court employees discuss filing backdated documents, tell how “the other ‘wrong document’ is "gone,” and informs a court employee that “attached is the correct Memorandum which needs to replace the current” document filed on March 8, 2006. The “Dawn-Johnson” emails, as they’ve become known, are dated April 4, 2006.

See the actual court files at: http://www.maximumadvocacy.com/Court_records.html

How's your faith in the judicial system now?
After reviewing this information, do you think the average person can receive a fair hearing in the judicial system?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Flubadubya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hah! You don't mean his drawers...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinfoilinfor2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. Got me too! I thought, what, did he mess his pants because he
got caught doing something illegal? Just didn't make any sense until you said "drawers"...Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. The attorney would be in LESS trouble if he HAD changed his briefs
in Federal court!

:rofl:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Doesn't look like he'll get in any trouble
XX
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. no one seems to reading past the header...
maybe you should change it to....documents?...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. ROFL!
SHAME on me for actually reading it in the intended context. That is too goddamn funny!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I thought it was funny, but ppl could get by it to the issue
Might have to re-do that headline, huh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. maybe it's just me...
time to pack it in...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. pardon?...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. I Was Saying That When I First Read The Thread, I Failed To See
the inuendo contained in the header. I don't know how it got by me, cause it was glaringly apparent. So I just said shame on me for actually not catching that humorous wording on my first run through, but laughed at it when I realized the alternative in which it could've been read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Any ideas for a better headline?
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 09:09 PM by AngelFactor
Need to fix that, it's a serious issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. maybe use your..."how's your faith in the justice system"?...
and maybe you could break it down by...naming the company that's being sued for violation of an employee's rights, ...and the attorneys representing that company, what they specialize in, what they've been caught doing, and the response....or lack thereof.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. What is this case about?
Will the attorney be investigated?

What is happening with the Fed court employees?

Did they change documents at the request of the attorney?

How often does this happen?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Quick delete
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 09:30 PM by AngelFactor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
11. It should be "shorts" instead of briefs.
Oh....what was that??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's quite illegal.
The questions you raise are why the issue is on this board.

Without outside influence, it doesn't appear anything will happen.

It doesn't appear the attorney will be investigated.

Nor will anything happen to the federal court employees. Hopefully, the court employees simply did the bidding of the attorney. In that case, at the least a little training in proper procedures would seem warranted .

The documents were switched at the direction of the attorney through his law firm's paralegal. The attorney then filed a brief with the court claiming his clients had not failed to file the document. The same brief "inadvertently" contained copies of emails detailing what was done to the records. Without the accidental filing of emails, there would be no way to prove what happened to the court documents.

According to the clerks at the court house, there is NO WAY the documents could have been switched. That story changed when they looked at the switched documents and emails on the courts electronoic filing system (PACER). Then they went in the back of the office. Another clerk came out and claimed it was a standard procedure. However, although he claimed it was in accordance with internal procedures, he refused to produce a copy of the "internal procedures." It can't be both, that there's NO WAY it could happen and it's standard "internal procedure."

Title 18, U.S. Code 1512(c), Records tampering, carries up to a twenty year prison sentence, fine, or both. Of course, the sentence might as well be fifty years since it appears the attorney won't even spend five minutes in a hearing.

Your thoughts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. Sleezeball Attorneys
who aid and abet the corruption. Your average white collar criminals depend on them heavily. They will lie, cheat and steal to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngelFactor Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. When was the last time a minority admitted a crime and walked?
X
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Right
Focus on the crimes most often committed by minorities--"street crime." Ignore the white collar thieves and fraudists. That's where the Justice System is with it.

"Profit Without Honor"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0136696643/104-2849016-4260722?v=glance&n=283155

Book Description
Annual losses from white-collar crime may be 50 times as high as those from property crime. In this book, you'll learn just how broad and serious the problem is. This systematic treatment of white-collar crime and its victims covers the problem in its broadest sense. From local con artists to inside traders, from religious charlatans to residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, you'll learn about every type of white-collar crime that damages individuals -- and society as a whole. Unlike most books on white-collar crime, this one focuses on the victims, proving once and for all that this is no victimless crime. Once you read Profit Without Honor, you'll never be able to look at white collar crime the same way again.All citizens, students, criminal justice and public policy professionals interested in white-collar crime and its victims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC