Arizona Lawyer, Pinch-Hitting in Kavanaugh Hearing, Plays Prosecutor and Defense
Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell's performance has divided attorneys following along on social media, with some calling her questions standard, while others said she's acting like a defense attorney for Republicans.
September 27, 2018 at 01:59 PM
4 minute read
Rachel Mitchell, in questioning the woman who has accused U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, is playing the delicate role of a prosecutor examining a witness and a forceful defense attorney.
Mitchell, the veteran Arizona sex crimes prosecutor brought in to pinch-hit for the Republican men on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday, has been a polite and engaging force, as she's probed Ford's memory. Christine Blasey Ford said she is “100 percent” certain Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in a bedroom at a social gathering in suburban Washington, D.C., in the 1980s when both were still in high school. Kavanaugh has denied the allegations.
“Do you recall prior to getting there … had you had anything to drink?” Mitchell asked Ford.
“Were you on any sort of medication?”
“What was the atmosphere like at the gathering?”
“At some point, do you recall [the music] being turned down?” she asked.
Yet her questioning—delivered in five-minute intervals—have turned from establishing a baseline of facts about the incident, toward questions of Ford's fear of flying and her travels domestically and internationally, her polygraph process, and the lead up to Thursday's testimony.
Committee member Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, likened Mitchell's questions to a cross-examination at a criminal trial meant to undermine Ford's memory of the attack and credibility. Hirono noted that Mitchell was not asking questions about the alleged assault.
As Ford has fielded questions from Mitchell and the committee's Democrats, she's been flanked by two of her attorneys: D.C. attorney Debra Katz and veteran prosecutor Michael Bromwich, who have alternately counseled their client and other times poured her coffee.
Lisa Banks, another Ford attorney from Katz, Marshall & Banks, sat behind Ford.
After a lunch break, Mitchell probed Ford on the matter of a polygraph test, submitted to the Senate committee prior to Thursday's hearing.
“I believe you said it hasn't been paid for yet, is that correct?” Mitchell asked.
“Let me put an end to this misery. Her lawyers have paid for her polygraph,” Katz said, butting in.
“As is routine,” Bromwich said in a follow-up.
In a separate exchange, as Mitchell pressed Ford on whether anyone helped pay for her legal fees, Bromwich butted in: “I think I can help you with that. Both co-counsel are doing this pro-bono. We are not being paid, and we have no expectation of being paid,” Bromwich replied.
Mitchell's approach and performance has divided lawyers on social media.
“Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell is conducting a pretty standard intake interview with a victim,” former federal prosecutor Joyce Alene wrote on Twitter, adding the observation that the arrangement of five minutes for questioning was a “ridiculous process.”
“I'd hoped Rachel Mitchell would act like a prosecutor, but she is 100% acting as the Republicans' defense attorney,” Allison Leotta, an author and former sex crimes prosecutor in Washington, D.C., tweeted.
“[A]re there any other efforts besides your own personal finances to pay for your legal fees, or any of the other costs incurred?”
“I think I can help you with that. Both co-counsel are doing this pro-bono. We are not being paid, and we have no expectation of being paid,” Bromwich replied.
Read more:
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 AllJudges’ ‘Unretirements’ After Trump's Win Spark Dubious Ethics Complaints
‘Badge of Honor’: SEC Targets CyberKongz in Token Registration Dispute
3 minute read‘BiT Global Lost’: Federal Judge Won’t Stop Coinbase From Delisting wBTC Token
3 minute readState High Court Bucks Trend Favoring Insurers, Sides With Restaurants Seeking COVID-19 Coverage
Trending Stories
- 1Miami Beach Hotel Sues Celebrity Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, Asserts It Won’t Be ‘Extorted'
- 2'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
- 3California Supreme Court to Weigh Reach of Peremptory Challenge Law
- 4Court Rules Thumbs-Up Emoji Can Constitute a Contract Agreement
- 5Delaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
Who 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