A federal decide in Virginia on Monday ordered prosecutors to show over grand jury supplies within the prison case in opposition to James Comey after discovering the federal government’s dealing with of the case raises “real problems with misconduct” that might end result within the prices in opposition to the previous FBI director being dismissed.
Justice of the Peace Choose William Fitzpatrick stated in his ruling that the kind of reduction Comey’s legal professionals are searching for is “hardly ever granted,” however that “the report factors to a disturbing sample of profound investigative missteps, missteps that led an FBI agent and a prosecutor to doubtlessly undermine the integrity of the grand jury continuing.” The ruling directs the federal government to show over the fabric to Comey’s group by the top of the day.
Among the many missteps the decide stated he discovered whereas reviewing the grand jury proceedings within the case had been statements made to the panel by appearing U.S. Legal professional Lindsey Halligan, a former private lawyer to President Donald Trump who had no prior prosecutorial expertise.
Fitzpatrick stated the courtroom “recognized two statements by the prosecutor to the grand jurors that on their face seem like basic misstatements of the regulation that might compromise the integrity of the grand jury course of,” he wrote.
The decide additional questioned Halligan’s declare that the federal government had already shared all of the grand jury info accessible, pointing to what gave the impression to be gaps within the transcript.
A special federal decide — Cameron Currie of the District of South Carolina — raised an identical concern final week throughout a listening to on whether or not to disqualify Halligan from the case due to questions concerning the legality of her appointment. Halligan then submitted a sworn declaration asserting that every one the data was turned over.
Whereas Currie has but to rule on the difficulty, Fitzpatrick was skeptical of Halligan’s account, discovering the timing she cited in her declaration didn’t add up.
“If the prosecutor is mistaken concerning the time she acquired notification of the grand jury’s vote on the unique indictment, and this process did happen, then the transcript and audio recording supplied to the Courtroom are incomplete,” Fitzpatrick wrote.
“If this process didn’t happen, then the Courtroom is in uncharted authorized territory in that the indictment returned in open courtroom was not the identical charging doc offered to and deliberated upon by the grand jury,” he added.
The decide additionally pointed to the federal government’s dealing with of doubtless privileged attorney-client info within the case.
“The character and circumstances surrounding the federal government’s potential violations of the Fourth Modification and courtroom orders set up an affordable foundation to query whether or not the federal government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the regulation,” Fitzpatrick wrote.
Halligan’s workplace declined to remark. The Justice Division additionally didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.
Trump named Halligan appearing U.S. Legal professional for the Jap District of Virginia in late September, after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, resigned whereas underneath stress from the administration to cost Comey and one other perceived Trump adversary, New York Legal professional Common Letitia James.
Halligan offered the case to the grand jury on her personal simply days after being appointed – and regardless of profession prosecutors in her workplace sending her a memo documenting why they believed he shouldn’t be charged, a senior regulation enforcement official beforehand advised NBC Information.
Fitzpatrick grilled the federal government on its conduct at a listening to earlier this month, the place he stated prosecutors had appeared to have taken an “indict first, examine later” method to the case.
The decide famous in his ruling that it is extremely uncommon for a defendant to realize entry to grand jury supplies, however discovered the Comey case is “a uncommon instance of a prison defendant who can truly make a ‘particularized and factually primarily based’ exhibiting that grounds exist to help the proposition that irregularities might have occurred within the grand jury proceedings and will justify the dismissal of a number of counts of the indictment.”
Comey was indicted on two counts, making a false assertion and obstruction of a congressional continuing — each prices stemming from testimony he gave earlier than the Senate in 2020. He pleaded not responsible.
