Judge Blames Roger Stone for Roger Stone's Problems, Refuses to Dismiss Charges
The judge denied Stone's motion to dismiss charges against him, but said he can use parts of the report to aid his defense, provided he does not share them publicly.
August 01, 2019 at 11:47 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Trump ally Roger Stone and his legal team will gain access to certain redacted portions of special counsel Robert Meuller III’s report, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington ruled Thursday.
The judge denied Stone’s motion to dismiss charges against him, but said he can use parts of the report to aid his defense, provided he does not share them publicly.
The order allows Stone to view information that the government had withheld to avoid affecting the ongoing prosecution of the case. But Stone still won’t be able to access any information that would infringe on the personal privacy of third parties or cause them reputational harm, or anything that would raise national security or law enforcement concerns.
Stone is accused of lying to congressional investigators looking into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, obstructing justice and tampering with a witness.
Jackson said Stone is in no position to complain, because he “chose to place himself directly in the vortex of multiple investigating bodies when he publicly took credit for the Wikileaks release of hacked Democratic Party emails, even if it were just ‘braggadocio.’
“Based on the allegations in the indictment which are assumed to be true for purposes of these motions, it is fair to say that Roger Stone has no one but himself to blame for the fact that he was investigated by the Department of Justice,” the order said.
Stone’s Fort Lauderdale attorney Bruce Rogow said his team looks forward to receiving the unredacted versions of Mueller’s report, and added, “braggadocio is not a crime.” He noted that one of the legal questions raised in Stone’s motion to dismiss was a first.
“The judge treated the serious constitutional issues we raised and did so seriously and at length. These are important issues, and, for example, the appropriations clause question as applied to the special counsel is one never addressed before,” Rogow said. “If Mr. Stone is acquitted, there will be no need to present that to the appellate court or the Supreme Court.”
Jackson disagreed with Stone’s contention that his indictment violated the U.S. Constitution’s appropriations clause, which gives Congress exclusive power over the federal purse, because the special counsel’s investigation wasn’t approved by Congress.
Stone also argued that he was selectively prosecuted because of his support of Trump. But Jackson disagreed, finding he’d provided no proof that he was singled out from anyone in a similar boat. Stone had claimed two people who weren’t prosecuted, Jerome Corsi and Randy Credico, were similarly situated because they allegedly lied to the special counsel. But the judge pointed out that Stone was indicted on a range of charges that Corsi and Credico never faced.
Stone is living under an enhanced gag order that bans him from posting anything on social media, after a series of run-ins with Jackson over his posts.
|Read the court order:
|Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Orders Rudy Giuliani to Court Amid Allegations He's Hiding Assets Under Receivership
'A Regressive Institution': SDNY Judge Rakoff Delivers Pointed Remarks on SCOTUS in Recent Appearance
2 minute readWho Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250