Things That Make You Go "Hmmm."

Let's see....wake up South Florida!

John Pacenti is a fantastic reporter, and I've certainly had my fun with Big Lew, but I sort of agree with Joe DeMaria regarding the Lew Freeman emails that appear on the front page of today's DBR.

They're entertaining as you would expect -- and naturally involve food and bowel movements -- but where's the newsworthiness?

They seem private to me and I feel somewhat uneasy reading them.  That doesn't mean they shouldn't be published if there's some larger point to them, but I guess I'm not seeing it at the moment.

Or maybe I'm missing something -- what do you all think?

Other exciting news -- the guy in charge of handling US renditions to Egypt is now Mubarak's new VP -- that definitely makes me go "hmmm."  And even Dr. Zhivago says it is time for regime change.

Hmmm.

But this is my favorite "hmmm" moment of the morning (from today's DBR but not online):

Robert C. Josefsberg, a partner with Podhurst Orseck in Miami, has been named to the steering committee in the Chinese Drywall multidistrict litigation in New Orleans, replacing outgoing partner Victor Diaz.

Double hmmm.

Bob Josefsberg and the Lizard King!

The NYT gives the legendary Hairy One (I'm talking Josefsberg, not Morrison) the love in this look back at those crazy times in Miami when possibly brandishing a schlong onstage could get you arrested and drop you front and center into the heated culture wars of the 60s (you know, the ones Glenn Garvin continues to fight).

Great interview, here's an excerpt:

Q.

How were you connected to this case, and what were your impressions of Jim Morrison at the time?

A.

I was co-counsel and local counsel. I think I’m the only one from the trial who’s left alive. The defense co-counsel has passed away. Three different prosecutors have passed away, the judge passed away. And Jim passed away. Jim and I were pretty close in age, and we kind of hit off. He was a very nice person. I’ve seen the movie about him and the Doors. Oliver Stone, with all due respect, is a revisionist. In the movie Jim was portrayed as a selfish druggie, and he wasn’t. He was a very nice person, a nice, decent human being with a very good sense of humor. We spent a lot of time with notepads, passing notes back and forth to each other, and he was very perceptive, very bright. He understood everything going on around him. And for the three weeks I was with him, he was sober.

Q.

I realize your perspective is colored somewhat because you defended him, but then how did he go and get himself arrested?

A.

Well, the charges brought against him were that it was 1969, it was a different world. There were all sorts of political and social pressures, as was shown by the immediately following “Rally for Decency,” with Anita Bryant and Pat Boone. People were terribly offended by what he did. And I think it got blown out of proportion, as most things do. It gathered its own steam and fed off itself, and it became an atrocious thing. Not that I’m saying dropping your pants in public is acceptable. It’s not. It’s also not the worst thing in the world that ever happened. I’m not justifying his behavior – I think there was an overreaction.

Bob's being politic.  Jim got arrested in deep "South" Miami for the same reasons Keith Richards got busted in deep "South" Arkansas and, for that matter, the same reasons Easy Rider ends the way it does -- that's just how things were back then.

"Pop Quiz, Hot Shot!"

I don't know about you, but I often begin my oral arguments with those immortal words from Speed.

It kinda throws the judge for a loop and signals to opposing counsel that you're ready to blow something up -- in other words, a nice icebreaker.

So how was your weekend? (Did you see this story about the recent trend to begin sentences with so?)

I know I know, Dennis Hopper RIP.

Sure he had a late, memorable run as a baddie (Blue Velvet, Speed, Waterworld), but I'll remember him for distinctive parts in films like Apocalypse Now, Hoosiers, True Romance and of course directing the lovely Jennifer Connelly in The Hot Spot.

I see my friend and sometime Miami lawyer Marc Randazza gets quoted in today's NYT on the proliferation of online SLAPP suits:

In the past, Mr. Randazza said, if you criticized a business while standing around in a bar, it went “no further than the sound of your voice.”

Now, however, “there’s a potentially permanent record of it as soon as you hit ‘publish’ on the computer,” he said. “It goes global within minutes.”

Indeed.

Remember that the next time you want to fragg someone anonymously, here or anywhere else.

What a surprise -- Toyota doesn't want to turn over documents, I don't quite understand this story about Bob Josefberg's daughter, and to quote Supertramp, it's raining again.

Stay dry, folks!

Insert Favorite Nautical Disaster Imagery Here.

Wow, I mean this is like the Good Ship Lollipop after sustaining a direct hit from a Japanese Tsurugi in Leyte Gulf (hey, I wanted to stretch a little):

"It is a sad day when one who held our trust for so many years is shown to have engaged in rampant fraud and betrayed the trust of so many,'' U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman said at a news conference.

"This is a classic case of how greed and corruption can corrupt a person at the top of his game,'' said John Gillies, the FBI's special agent in charge, who called Freeman "the wolf protecting the hen house.''

Wolf protecting the hen house....interesting but Lew could have done better.

All kidding aside, this one's a shocker and it is indeed a sad day for anyone who has worked with Lew and his many fine employees.

UPDATE: Here's the information filed against Lew (including allegations against "Co-Conspirators A and B"):

LewFreemanInformation

Another Judicial Reception!! (Yawn)

Well I don't know about you, but I'm getting ready for tonight's big Judicial Reception, which means I have prepared the following to do list:

1. Immediately down two large dry Gin Gibsons;

2. Track down and punch Brett Barfield.

3. Find the one judge willing to speak to me (Sam Slom?) and unleash new self-aggrandizing anecdote that reveals my wit, trial skills, wealth, humor, A-type dominance and general good taste.

4. Listen to similar self-aggrandizing anecdotes and think to myself how it's all total bullcrap.

5. Count other people's money.

6. Pretend to remember that guy's name.

7. Kiss Melanie Damian (professionally, of course!).

8. Sneak into photo op of Judge Moreno and Bob Josefsberg.

9. Kiss Melanie Damian (did I already write that?).

Proposed Clause Referencing Bob Josefsberg Removed From Non-Prosecution Agreement.

I'll leave it to the defense lawyers to comment on the overall approach taken here but this proposed language on settling several related civil suits sure seems unusual:

On its first draft in September 2007, it required that Epstein pay an attorney - tapped by the U.S. Attorney's Office and approved by Epstein - to represent some of the victims in civil suits they had filed against Epstein. That attorney is prominent Miami lawyer Bob Josefsberg.

Former prosecutor Johnson said he has never seen a provision like that before.

But an addendum to the agreement signed the following month struck Epstein's duty to pay Josefsberg if he and the victims did not accept a settlement and instead pursued litigation.

The agreement, signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Maria Villafana, does not expressly state whether any victims were contacted or consulted before the deal was made.

Attorney Brad Edwards of Fort Lauderdale, who represents three of the young women, believes that none of the between 30 and 40 woman identified as victims in the federal investigation were told of the deal. Edwards said his clients were still receiving letters in the mail months afterwards saying the U.S. Attorney's Office assuring them Epstein would be prosecuted.

"Never consulting the victims is probably the most outrageous aspect of it..." Edwards said. "It taught them that someone with money can buy his way out of anything. It's outrageous and embarrassing for United States Attorney's Office and the State Attorneys Office."

Epstein now faces many civil lawsuits filed by the women, who are represented by a variety attorneys. In many, the facts alleged are the same: that Epstein had a predilection for teenage girls, identified poor, vulnerable ones and lured them to his home via other young women. The teens describe ascending a staircase lined with nude photographs of young girls and to the spa room where Epstein would appear in a small towel.

Former Circuit Judge Bill Berger, who represents one of the victims, and The Palm Beach Post sought the unsealing of the agreement. Berger refers to it as a "sweetheart deal."

Why would there be a proposed provision requiring payment only to one attorney who represents only some of the victims? Has anyone ever heard of this before?

BTW, Epstein you are one sick dude.

"I'd Rather Not Answer That" = YES.

The inestimable Julie Kay breaks news as usual regarding the shameful effort by prosecutors in Alex Acosta's office to trap uber-lawyer David O. Markus, which resulted in an explosive $600k sanctions order by Judge Gold:

The three prosecutors themselves are appealing. Josefsberg and Pearson filed a notice of appeal for Hoffman, and Martinez and colleagues Maureen Lefebvre and Susan Tarbe filed a motion on behalf of Cronin.

Martinez said he will argue that Cronin and the others were wrongly denied the opportunity to speak at the hearing when they were sanctioned.

“They were excluded and didn’t have the opportunity to put on their case,” he said. “Just as [defense attorney David O.] Markus wants due process rights, we feel Mr. Cronin is entitled to his due process rights. It is appropriate for him to be heard by the judge.”

Gilbert has not yet filed a notice of appeal. Becerra, who moved to Greenberg from the U.S. attorney’s office, has taken the case pro bono, according to her secretary. Becerra is out of the office on parental leave.

When asked whether Martinez, a former Miami U.S. attorney, was representing him pro bono, Cronin said, “I’d rather not answer that.”

Oh man, that's rich -- was Sean so flustered by Julie's question that all he could do was say "I'd rather not answer" -- thereby answering by not answering? Was he not prepared to handle that inquiry? What's the big deal about going pro bono in the first place? (Note -- corrected, thx).

BTW, I love that these prosecutors are now pleading for due process -- which of course they deserve -- when it was apparent from the sanctions order that due process was not exactly at the top of their trial to-do list.

Also, didn't Cronin testify (lamely) for several hours before Judge Gold anyways? As the Judge repeatedly told him, "tell the truth, Mr. Cronin."

Plus, even my buddy Paul Calli gets quoted!

And, in a surprise move, so does Kendall Coffey.

Walter and Donald, sing this one out please.....