If any J seeks to remove D counsel there are set procedures for this.
IMO these were not followed.
Whether or not people think that B&R required replacing (I did want them replaced with more sober methodical attorneys), it appears the J did some unprecedented things which are not only serious from a legal and constitutional point of view, they also now change the character of this case - new D will have to be very careful as they’ve seen what happens when you get on the wrong side of the J (not uncommon which is why I kept saying B&R were taking ridiculous risks by taking her on); more importantly if a conviction is now achieved in trial this whole episode and the J’s conduct could be used as the basis for appeal.
What I’m annoyed about is that the same outcome could have been achieved by following due process. B&R needed to go - that’s not at issue. J Gull could have done a number of prescribed things to censure and punish them whilst removing them from the court but inexplicably IMO chose not to.
<modsnip - discussing moderation on the thread>
The actions of the J as well as those of the former D are shaping this case (and not in a good way IMO) and are equally worthy of scrutiny and debate.
All JMO.
This is my concern - i don't think Judge Gull followed any obvious / proper procedure (though i am no expert in In. procedure!)
Where I am struggling is the Attorneys either need to file a motion to withdraw, or there should have been a hearing/ruling to disqualify.
Instead we have Gull claiming Baldwin and Rozzi agreed to withdraw, but we've never seen any paperwork for this and they dispute it. Certainly we didn't see any ruling on disqualification or indeed any proper hearing.
I especially don't see how Gull could order the removal of Rozzi on the 19th, against paperwork he had certainly not filed yet. At least with Baldwin she actually claims he made an oral application before she removed him.
So yes it seems bad but IMO there is no way these two guys will return and they are deservedly off the case IMO. I am certainly not willing to take at face value Baldwin's claim he is the victim in all this. It is remarkable to me that following that absurd Franks memo, then somehow they disclosed the crime scene photos - how can that happen? Some friend rummaging though his office???