"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.....

Note to Sandy Bohrer -- Tom Petty Was Right.

The waiting is the hardest part:

After an exhaustive genealogical search, Judge Cohen has been unable to conclude that she, too, is distantly related to Bob Martinez. Not only that, her efforts to get the parties to settle informally have been a bust. Then the defense had the nerve to rest. And she's got a tough reelection battle looming, with a vote on August 26. What to do, what to do:

Cohen said she'll wait to make a decision on a key remaining count until the Florida Supreme Court finishes work on a case involving the use of public money without a vote. The justices are on break until the end of August.

The announcement enraged the defense, which had won every key ruling until now but fears a delay could doom the team's long-sought dream stadium.

"My client's finances are hanging by a thread, we may not be able to hold on to August," bellowed Sandy Bohrer outside the courtroom.

I'm kidding, of course. Here's what he really said:

When Marlins attorney Sandy Bohrer told the judge she had an obligation to rule and city of Miami attorney Henry Hunnefeld said there was no guarantee the Supreme Court would rule anytime soon with three members set to retire by year's end, Cohen said she resented the pressure.

''This is about me doing what is intellectually honest. They're going to make this opinion before these justices leave. I have an obligation to wait,'' she said.

Sandy, if you think waiting a month for a ruling is an unaccountable outrage, don't try practicing in federal court.

But let's try to understand exactly what poor Judge Cohen is thinking here:

In an Escambia County case, the Supreme Court initially overturned almost 30 years of precedent by ruling that property-tax money used to pay off bonds needs to go to a public vote. Later, they agreed to rehear a motion and have yet to issue a final order. Cohen said she fears the justices may change their minds, and that she's trying to avoid having her decision overturned.

''The law is unclear; there's a lot at stake,'' said the judge. ``I think they're going to recede from it -- but they haven't done it yet.''

Ok folks, that case does seem kinda relevant. What's the harm in waiting a month so as to be guided by directly applicable precedent? Plus, Judge Cohen and Justice Quince are about to be pen pals:

Cohen said she will send a letter asking Supreme Court Justice Peggy Quince when the court will rule.

Aww! And there's more:

For about 90 minutes before she announced her decision Tuesday, Cohen had the court watch video of the Supreme Court wrangling over their ruling. ''What I hear is in fact the court may have gotten itself into a quagmire here,'' she said.

God I love Miami.

''I Just Don't See It.''

That's Judge Echarte, shooting down a request by Bob Martinez for discovery into the financial health of the Marlins:

The Florida Marlins and Miami-Dade County won a slight victory in court Friday when Circuit Court Judge Pedro Echarte Jr. shot down several attempts to get Marlins President David Samson to disclose the ball club's financial picture.

The two sides are readying for a July 1 court date, with auto dealer Norman Braman contending the $609 million stadium and parking garage plan -- to be built with almost $500 million of public money -- doesn't benefit the public.

On Friday, Braman attorney Bob Martinez tried to get Echarte to compel Samson to answer dozens of questions the Marlins executive had waved off when he was deposed earlier this month.

Echarte shot that down, ruling that almost all of Martinez's questions dealing with club finances weren't relevant to the trial.

When Martinez tried to get Samson to hand over projections of attendance, the judge questioned whether such figures are paramount to the public purpose of a stadium. ''I just don't see it,'' Echarte said.

Both sides will be back in court most of this week setting witness questioning and attempting to narrow the proceedings so the trial doesn't run too long. Echarte said he has vacation plans for most of July.

Am I missing something here? The "public purpose" of funneling hundreds of millions in tax revenue to a private business is not well-served if the private business is not profitable nor likely to be so for a period of years. A stadium built for a shaky financial entity that is obligated to partially fund the stadium and help maintain and operate it would be a total waste; just look at the old Miami Arena for just one of many examples of poor city planning (although I saw a great Dylan show there way back in '87).

We've all heard Samson cry and whine on Lebby's show about how badly the Marlins are doing financially without a publicly-financed stadium in the picture, but now he refuses to answers questions at a deposition about this very topic? I guess we're stuck with his mediocre and stunningly pedestrian movie reviews instead.

I also don't get the Judge's ruling if it is based -- as it appears to be -- entirely on relevancy grounds. Something has to be completely way off-base for the entire topic to be excluded from discovery on relevancy grounds. Were there other grounds raised?