Alex Jones lawyer takes the Fifth during Sandy Hook hearing
Source: AP
WATERBURY, Conn. (AP) A lawyer for c onspiracy theorist Alex Jones invoked his right against self-incrimination Thursday during a civil court hearing in Connecticut over the possible improper disclosure of confidential medical records of relatives of some of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims.
New Haven-based attorney Norman Pattis refused to answer questions citing his Fifth Amendment rights during a hearing on whether he should be disciplined for giving the confidential records to unauthorized persons other lawyers for Jones in Texas. He has denied any wrongdoing. A judge did not decide Thursday if any discipline is warranted.
The hearing was connected to a Connecticut lawsuit filed by Sandy Hook families against Jones for calling the 2012 shooting that killed 20 children and six educators in Newtown a hoax. State Judge Barabara Bellis in Waterbury found Jones liable for damages in November 2021 and a jury trial over how much he should pay is scheduled to begin next month.
Bellis, who oversaw Thursday's hearing, said it was unusual for a lawyer to invoke the Fifth Amendment during a disciplinary hearing.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/alex-jones-lawyer-takes-fifth-000340868.html
empedocles
(15,751 posts)WATERBURY, Conn. (AP) A lawyer for c onspiracy theorist Alex Jones invoked his right against self-incrimination Thursday during a civil court hearing in Connecticut over the possible improper disclosure of confidential medical records of relatives of some of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims.
New Haven-based attorney Norman Pattis refused to answer questions citing his Fifth Amendment rights during a hearing on whether he should be disciplined for giving the confidential records to unauthorized persons other lawyers for Jones in Texas. He has denied any wrongdoing. A judge did not decide Thursday if any discipline is warranted.
The hearing was connected to a Connecticut lawsuit filed by Sandy Hook families against Jones for calling the 2012 shooting that killed 20 children and six educators in Newtown a hoax. State Judge Barabara Bellis in Waterbury found Jones liable for damages in November 2021 and a jury trial over how much he should pay is scheduled to begin next month.
Bellis, who oversaw Thursday's hearing, said it was unusual for a lawyer to invoke the Fifth Amendment during a disciplinary hearing.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/alex-jones-lawyer-takes-fifth-000340868.html
Ray Bruns
(4,117 posts)Beachnutt
(7,348 posts)Google this:
"Waterbury Secrets" see what comes up.
orleans
(34,079 posts)but i did it and saw the first author of the article
conspiracy theorist wayne madsen
thanks but no thanks
NCjack
(10,279 posts)GB_RN
(2,391 posts)😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
Botany
(70,598 posts)I hope they get the mother fucker's law license
bringthePaine
(1,733 posts)LudwigPastorius
(9,190 posts)that's a pretty good indication that they are a crooked piece of shit.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,635 posts)Disbarment proceedings are civil proceedings and so taking the 5th can be considered
https://www.litigationandtrial.com/2013/04/articles/attorney/pleading-the-fifth-adverse-inferences/#:~:text=Thus%2C%20under%20federal%20law%2C%20a%20bar%20association%20can,who%20asserts%20a%20privilege%20and%20refuses%20to%20testify.
The Fifth Amendment says that No person. . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. As the Supreme Court has long held, The privilege afforded not only extends to answers that would in themselves support a conviction under a federal criminal statute but likewise embraces those which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute the claimant for a federal crime. Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486-487 (1951). There are rare circumstances in which a judge can deny the privilege and then compel the testimony, but thats highly unusual. Once you assert it, your refusal to testify cannot be used against you in criminal proceedings......
One interesting point of particular relevance to Prenda Law: As Ken notes in his post summarizing the available sanctions, when a judge notices misconduct in their court, one tool they have available is the ability to refer matters to the attorneys state bar association. Can the silence be used against them in a disciplinary proceeding? Well, theres a case on that in the First Circuit, involving an attorney who fraudulently concealed property during a bankruptcy, then asserted her right against self-incrimination: While refusal to waive the Fifth Amendment might increase the risk that she would be disbarred, disbarment would not result automatically and without more. Hence, she was not threatened with a penalty within the meaning of [Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967)] for invoking her Fifth Amendment privilege.
Thus, under federal law, a bar association can use the assertion of the Fifth Amendment against an attorney in a disciplinary action, so long as disbarment isnt automatic, but some state laws preclude their state courts from drawing negative inferences against a party who asserts a privilege and refuses to testify. As two corporate defense lawyers at Gibson Dunn noted back in 2010, several states have statutes or rules of evidence that forbid courts from drawing adverse inferences after a party asserts a testimonial privilege. See, e.g., Alaska R. Evid. 512(c); Ark. R. Evid. 512; Cal. Evid. Code § 913(a); Del. R. Evid. 512; Haw. Rev. Stat. § 626-1, R. 513; Idaho R. Evid. 512; Ky. R. Evid. 511; N.D. R. Evid. 512; Nev. Rev. Stat. § 27-513; Nev. Rev. Stat 49.405; N.J. R. Evid. 532; N.M. R. Evid. 11-513; Okla. Stat. Ann. §2513; Or. Rev. Stat. § 40.290; Vt. R. Evid. 512. In those states, the court has to tell the jury to not use the silence against
There is a disbarrment proceeding pending against this asshole