Comments on: Federal Magistrate Calls for Court Order to Preserve White House Emails Over Administration’s Objections http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/ Res ipsa loquitur ("The thing itself speaks") Sat, 11 Feb 2012 05:48:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: deeply worried http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9218 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 00:30:00 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9218 Patty C,

This judge Facciola is nationally known for his work in the relatively new field of “ediscovery”. I imagine there is an uncommon amount of interest in how he will deal with the government’s claim.

A somewhat similar case he decided in 2007 was Peskoff v Faber. He took a sceptical position toward a claim of hard-to-produce evidence.

http://www.ediscoverylaw.com/2007/03/articles/case-summaries/holding-that-accessible-data-must-be-produced-at-the-cost-of-the-producing-party-court-orders-defendant-to-conduct-further-email-search/

DW

]]> By: Patty C http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9212 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:50:05 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9212 Does anyone actually believe that all these numerous documents, files, emails, and videotapes alleged to be unavailable are actually missing and were NEVER backed-up – someplace? Or, if there comes a day when it becomes drastically important to produce such, for some other purpose, that they wouldn’t magically appear?

]]> By: deeply worried http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9204 Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:17:13 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9204 http://atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3622/81/

interesting discussion on some of the issues above.

Noted also is that Magistrate Judge Facciola was the judge in the McPeek v Ashcroft e-discovery case.

]]> By: Susan http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9039 Sun, 23 Mar 2008 01:12:05 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9039 DW, while that news is highly suspicious, at least to me, I’m afraid it is hardly surprising. I have to admit I gave up expecting this administration to behave in an honorable or ethical fashion after they publicly dodged the whole waterboarding question. All we can do is count the days until a new — and I hope far more enlightened — administration takes the place of this one.

]]> By: deeply worried http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9037 Sun, 23 Mar 2008 00:36:35 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-9037 Not so interesting I am sorry to have to relate, Susan.

The White House has responded and their claim is that the relevant hard drives have been destroyed and they don’t say what information was transferred to new drives.

I suppose the Magistrate can request production of the “destroyed” drives…but I doubt he will do so.

This brings things to a close, unless the folks at CREW can come up with something.

]]> By: Susan http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8982 Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:21:04 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8982 DW, I thought the White House considered itself ABOVE such things as show-cause orders. Then again, it also considers itself to be above the LAW as well, judging how it has behaved in the last few years. But you’re correct, it should be interesting news very soon. I’m looking forward to this one.

]]> By: deeply worried http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8978 Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:09:20 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8978 Still no word as to the Executive’s response that I could find.

This will be interesting news very soon.

]]> By: deeply worried http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8966 Sat, 22 Mar 2008 02:02:36 +0000 http://jonathanturley.org/2007/10/19/federal-magistrate-calls-for-court-order-to-preserve-white-house-emails-over-administrations-objections/#comment-8966 Just so this doesn’t disappear down the memory hole:

Tuesday, this week judge Facciola issued a show-cause order to the WH with an expiration date of today. I haven’t ascertained whether there was any response.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20080318/forensic_copy_order.pdf

]]>