| MR. ROZZI: Our client is a big part of this, the biggest part of this, and he has communicated to us that he does not want us to withdraw from this case. He wants us to continue with his representation. He understands, I think, that he's not the gatekeeper or he doesn't have the authority to really force the Court to do that. He would like to say that on the record. We asked him if that's what he wanted to do. We suggested maybe he would do it in chambers. It seems a little bit of a difficult position to put a man who's accused but not been found guilty, put him in a courtroom and have him, you know, have to speak in this circumstance with 15 minutes notice. Andy and I - I'm gonna speak for myself, I'll let him speak for himself. I'm gonna file a motion to withdraw. I don't want to do it, but I don't think that I have a choice at this point. The options I've been given without any notice by the Court really are either I withdraw or I'm gonna be publicly shamed and that's the way I see this. And I think that public shaming is not only - there's not only a professional element to that, I think there's a personal aspect to that, too. But when the media is teed up like this and, you know, we show up here today with the Court having told us that we were gonna conduct some business, that that somehow bleeds over into a forced resignation or whatever you want to - however you characterize this, that, you know, I don't feel like I have any other choice professionally. I have a life beyond this courtroom and beyond this case and I have a family, too, and I have a law practice. But I think had been - we been given some notice of what we were actually - if this would have been framed in a pleading format or some formal disciplinary claim, which there's a process for that in our business, then we could have come in here today with an opportunity to refute some of those things that you clearly had, you know, thought through and prepared before we got here. And we didn't have that opportunity and it's - the idea that I'm gonna have to go in here in an open courtroom and, essentially, defend myself against claims that I don't agree with without any notice and without any opportunity I think is unfair. But I'm also - I also have some common sense and, you know, me going in there and standing my ground because my client wants me to is just gonna make things worse for him, and so I'm gonna withdraw my appearance. I'm gonna walk out of here, I'm gonna go down to my car, I'm gonna call my staff, and have them prepare a motion, and I'm gonna withdraw my appearance, but I'm doing it because I don't think I have any other choice professionally, not because I want to, and not because my client wants me to. And I respect the Court has an opinion, but we're professionals and we can disagree - THE COURT: Of course. MR. ROZZI: - and, you know, I am extremely, you know, I'd say frustrated's probably a soft word, with the idea that we showed up today without any real opportunity to prepare for any of this, and I just think it's improper, and that's where I am and that's my position. THE COURT: Well, I think we talked about, when you asked for a disqualification, and I indicated on our phone conversation I'm inclined to do that. MR. ROZZI: It was a phone conversation that was not on the record and then some follow-up e-mails. THE COURT: True. MR. ROZZI: There's an informality to that. THE COURT: True. MR. ROZZI: And you also said that you hadn't even done any research and you hadn't, you know, had time to talk to your senior Judge and all these other things. And he hasn't filed a pleading with the Court, either. THE COURT: No, I'm doing this on my motion. MR. ROZZI: And I'm a lawyer who practices in lots of courtroomsand I've been through some disqualification actions. I've - in 20 years, I've never had a disciplinary complaint in my life that's been confirmed, if you will. But I've seen lawyers disqualified and there is a process for that and it's not this, with all due respect, where you walk into somebody's office, a judge's office, and they read a prepared statement to you and, essentially, that statement is an indictment on my professional, you know, activities, and then you're handed a.-you know, essentially, a sheet of paper with two - you know, with two options and one of them is, is "I'm gonna go out here and shame you or you can quit." I just - you can understand how upset that would make any lawyer, and I just think it's - I don't think it's the right way to handle this from a due process standpoint. So I have no choice but to, you know, withdraw my appearance, ‘cause I'm not gonna go in there and take a public shaming without having any notice of it, I just - you know, that's where I am with it. |
<modsnip: snarky>
It is unclear to me how this is relevant to anything at all. Do you think it works like Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy? I am not an attorney but my understanding is that it doesn’t quite work that way. I don’t see anything unusual or untoward about Rozzi stating an intention at one point in time to take a future action, then changing his mind later. JMO
No I think it should have been followed with him submitting the legal motion to withdraw. I don’t think a respectable attorney should state his intentions one way in chambers on record then do something entirely different than expressed. That’s snookering to me.
As far as I’m concerned, I’m no longer referring to them as xD. They withdrew under duress, threatened to be publicly shamed in a courtroom, forced to do something against their better judgement, based solely on JG’s opinion and without due process. Just because Gull is a judge, does not mean she did the right thing. B & R are the D until the law says they are not. This is not done and therefore should continue to be part of this discussion. JMO.
Right!
MW made a very lengthy interview with MS. They released a lengthier unedited version after the leaks occurred. It’s quite the listen.
IMO she is referring to NM asking for the defense to be DQ’d in the emails. This is referenced in Exhibit K 10/12/2023 Letter to Court from Attorney Rozzi p.214 of Court proceedings Vol. 1 dump. (Sourced and pic below)
drive.google.com
It’s one of a few statements I noted as peculiar:
I suppose the counter argument is that his conduct indicates that he accepted he was off the case in that moment, choosing not to go into the court room to be disqualified, arranging how to return the discovery, planning his stealthy exit etc
Moving a high profile defendant for safety doesn't happen without beforehand thought and planning. I see nothing wrong setting into motion staging plans, when you know it's in the best interests of an inmate to transfer him to a safer environment asap. If something had happen to RA in county custody when an expedited move could have prevented it because there was no planning put in place before a motion was filed to move him for safety, LE would have been crucified. A real danged if they do, danged if they don't. AJMO
