Thomas Tramaglini, 42, was arrested for a particularly vile alleged crime: being a serial pooper on a high school football field. That alone would make him a standout as an alleged felon. Yet, the real surprise for police was to learn of his day job: Superintendent of Schools in Holmdel, New Jersey. He was named superintendent of Kenilworth schools in August 2015. Tramaglini also worked as a lecturer at Rutgers Graduate School of Education. Continue reading “School Superintendent Accused For Being Serial Pooper On High School Football Field”
Category: Criminal law
Rocco Mantella, 34, is accused for being a menace to swans after being allegedly seen in public parks practicing his karate on the birds. He has been banned from two Florida parks and charged with cruelty to animals for what witnesses say is a pattern of kicking swans as well as a sleeping duck. Continue reading “Fowl Crime: Florida Man Accused Of Using Karate On Swans In Public Park”
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the leaking of the questions outlined by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for an interview with President Donald Trump. The leak occurred shortly before the resignation of Trump counsel and his replacement with Emmet Flood. The change removed the lawyer who was most eager to cooperate with Mueller to bring an end to the investigation. If the leak was designed to poison the well for an interview, the statements of Trump’s counsel certainly indicated a harder line toward Mueller. Giuliani has stated that Mueller would be given no more than a couple hours on narrow topics — a public statement that could push Mueller toward fulfilling his earlier threat to subpoena Trump. If Trump fights Mueller on the subpoena, he is likely to lose. He could then find himself pulled into a grand jury room without the benefit of counsel (though he could always reverse himself and agreed on a sit down with the Special Counsel).
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Danger To Trump Rests In The Sleeper Questions Of The Special Counsel”
President Nixon’s White House counsel John Dean claimed that if the Trump administration leaked questions from special counsel Robert Mueller it could qualify as obstruction of justice. Once again, I disagree with such sweeping interpretations of the crime of obstruction of justice. Leaking such questions or topics would not be a crime under any case that I am aware of in defining the crime of obstruction.
Continue reading “John Dean Calls Leaking The Questions A Possible Basis For Obstruction Of Justice”
President Donald Trump lashed out at the leaking of the questions that Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants to ask him in an interview as “so disgraceful.” In the meantime, various news organizations (including Fox News) pointed fingers at former counsel John Dowd. Since the New York Times said that the leak did not come from “current counsel,” Dowd instantly became the leading suspect. Dowd however has denied the allegations and maintained “I was not the source.” Continue reading “Trump Denounces Leaked Questions As “Disgraceful” and Dowd Denies Being The Source”
Dr. Harold Bornstein has caused a firestorm of controversy after describing a “raid’ of his office by Trump’s longtime personal bodyguard, a top lawyer at the Trump Organization, and an unidentified third man. Bornstein said that he felt “raped, frightened and sad” from the encounter. Bornstein’s description however not only conflicts with the description of the Trump aides but stains credulity. It is common for newly elected presidents to have such records collected. Moreover, Bornstein in my view showed appalling judgment in disclosing a medication used by his former client. In the meantime, Bornstein has struck back by disclosing that he did not write his controversial letter during the campaign declaring Trump’s health as “astonishingly excellent” and his “physical strength and stamina are extraordinary.” He now says that Trump dictated the letter to him. Continue reading “Former Trump Doctor Assails “Raid” By Trump Lawyer and Aide”
Former FBI Director James Comey continues to market his book – and himself – as a lesson in “ethical leadership.” However, the historical record is proving increasingly at odds with Comey’s account and image. After months of spins and swerves by defenders, a consensus is emerging that Comey is indeed a leaker. The most damaging evidence, however, comes not from Comey’s critics but Comey himself. Indeed, Comey v. Comey could be the most telling conflict in this still unfolding scandal. However, at issue, is not simply whether Comey will be viewed as a leaker or a liar, but a perjurer.
Police have been looking for a rather unique felon. A woman was caught on security cameras at the Krohn Conservatory in Cincinnati stealing a rare blue morpho butterfly. According to The Cincinnati Enquirer, they have now arrested Jamie Revis, 36. Without deciding guilt, I must confess that, if I was to guess at a butterfly thief in a line up, I just might pick Revis.
Blue morpho butterflies only live for 115 days. They are native to Central and South American rainforests. It also means that the removal of the butterfly likely resulted in its death due to the change in environment.
The surveillance tape shows the suspect going into the exhibit and being confronted by a woman at the facility:
For the purposes of a theft charge, it would be interesting to see how they put a price on the butterfly. There is likely no market for the rare butterfly but there is a market for butterflies for collectors. In any case, it should be easy to satisfy a felony charge based on value.
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the finding by The House Intelligence Committee with regard to the allegation that Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper may have leaked information on the Steele dossier. The record is still surprisingly muddled on what Clapper is saying about his media contacts during this period. At best, it appears that he may have confirmed elements of the dossier after leaving office on January 20, 2017, but his comments have been (as described by the Committee) “inconsistent.” At worse, he could be accused (again) of perjury.
Here is the column:
In criminal law, defense attorneys occasionally refer to a poor sap in a corporation as the “designated defendant” — the guy who by design will take the fall for the company after signing reports or submitting false statements. For Michael Cohen, his possible indictment is not by design but his own hand — a notoriously poor lawyer with reckless inclinations. However, according to federal judge S. James Otero of United States District Court in Los Angeles, Cohen appears to be the designated defendant for the Southern District of New York’s U.S. Attorney’s Office. In staying the proceedings in California started by counsel for former porn star Stormy Daniels, Otero has referred to the indictment of Cohen as “likely.” It is a view shared by many in the criminal law field, but it must be chilling when it comes from a federal judge.
I ran a column yesterday discussing one of findings of the House Intelligence Committee dealing with James Clapper. The report was largely well-supported and was even critical of Trump’s calling for Wikileaks and the Russians to release hacked material. However, one element of the Democratic rebuttal also struck me as equally credible. The Democrats objected, among various shortcomings in the Committee investigation, that a critical call was never pursued by the majority. The timing of the call strikes me as raising a legitimate question and, absent countervailing facts from the majority, would seem to constitute a glaring omission. It is not clear why the majority did not try to determine the identity of the “blocked caller” before the infamous meeting of Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, and Russians in Trump Tower.
I (and many others) have cautioned the President for over a year that his tweets and public comments are underlying his case (and litigation like the immigration challenges) in federal court. Now the Justice Department has used the President’s latest comments in a call-in to “Fox and Friends” as eviscerating efforts to claim privilege over documents on his behalf in the review of the material seized from his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. While opposing counsel like Democratic state attorneys general have used Trump’s comments against his Administration and the Justice Department has struggled to defend against such use, this is the first time that his own Justice Department is using the President’s comments effectively against his interests. In the meantime, it was revealed yesterday that the FBI seized 16 different cellphones from Michael Cohen.Below is my column on the question of whether President Donald Trump should pardon his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. Cohen has notified a judge in California that he will refuse to answer questions in a case brought by counsel for Stormy Daniels by invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. President Trump, who has ridiculed people who invoke their Fifth Amendment rights, called into Fox and Friends to
Here is the column: Continue reading “SHOULD TRUMP PARDON COHEN?”
We have been discussing the investigation by the Inspector General of the Justice Department into the leaking of FBI memos by former Director James Comey. I have previously explained why there are serious questions concerning Comey’s conduct. Now there is an interesting development after Fox News confirmed that the law professor used by Comey for his leak was in fact a “special government employee” (SGE) for Comey’s FBI. That status of Columbia Professor Daniel Richman raised new concerns
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the reported investigation of former FBI Director James Comey for his removal and leaking of memos related to the Russian investigation. The release of the memos already contradicts critical aspects of Comey’s explanation for his leaking of the information. What is troubling is that many have worked mightily to avoid the clearly unprofessional aspects of Comey’s conduct. Comey could well be accurate in his account of Trump and justified in his concerns over Trump’s conduct but that does not excuse the actions that he has exhibited in both the leaking of the memos and the timing of his book. Comey’s best-selling book, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, could prove tragically ironic if Comey showed a higher loyalty to himself in responding to his own firing rather than the investigation that he once headed. In the very least, there remains a serious question of Comey’s priorities in these matters.
Here is the column: