@Ward Thisperer
The source is the Court's Docket.
See County stamp top page 1.
*****
TLDR?
Lotta stuff going on here. I'll hand it to Rozzi for pulling a detailed organized brief together.
Westerman doesn't need to worry about sitting for the bar anytime soon.
Westerman lawyered up, took a week to make written confession (affidavit) after coming clean w/ Baldwin. He could be charged with a crime - likely ongoing investigation?
Baldwin gave no permission, is a victim of a crime, and the criminal has admitted as much.
Baldwin's discussion of case w/ former colleague breached the gag order.
What's the appropriate disciplinary action for breach of gag order? (There should be plenty of examples on Court records across gag-happy Indiana.)
Rozzi's accepts responsibility - by way of being co-counsel.
Misc:
(In one sentence, there's a typo that changes the sentence meaning in a negative way. "It is also worth nothing" - should be "noting". Top of last paragraph of section 1. That gave me pause at first.)
Other Observations:
This document (Rozzi to Gull) was filed w/ Rozzi's / Hennesseys set of motions to the Court to remain Counsel. The Court blocked the filing noting that Rozzi was no longer repping RA, withdrew, wasn't permitted to file.
Although I think these motions in Gull's Court, despite her instruction - eventually - remained once the first SCION motion was filed at the higher court. Nevertheless, this document was an attachment to those papers, along w/ MW's affidavit, that was kept as confidential (or sealed?) on the docket.
Obviously at some point today, citizens who followed the process to receive copies of these various documents did receive them in answer to their request.
I'm wondering if they are now available via the electronic Gull docket?
All JMO