Vance May 'Rethink' Attorney Donations Amid Weinstein, Trump Fallout
Amid harsh criticism over his decision to drop investigations against members of the Trump family and Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein,…
October 12, 2017 at 05:52 PM
5 minute read
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. |
Amid harsh criticism over his decision to drop investigations against members of the Trump family and Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. has said that he and his office may “rethink” accepting campaign donations from criminal defense attorneys.
Within the span of a week, news reports revealed that Vance had dropped separate investigations into sexual assault claims against Weinstein and fraud accusations against Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and that at some point attorneys for the targets of the investigations had donated funds to Vance's campaign committee.
Meeting with a press scrum on Wednesday at John Jay College in Manhattan, where he was speaking at a conference, Vance said the practice of DAs taking donations from defense attorneys whose clients are being prosecuted be their offices is legal, but said that doesn't mean the practice shouldn't be questioned.
“It's absolutely legal but it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be reexamined office by office,” Vance said, according to transcript of the interview provided by his office. He also denied allegations of a quid pro quo with attorneys representing the Trumps and Weinstein and that contributions have never had the “slightest impact” on the way he handles cases.
Vance was first elected in 2009 and is running with no opponents on the ballot for a third term.
In 2012, Marc Kasowitz of Kasowitz Benson Torres, a longtime attorney for the Trump family, gave $25,000 to Vance's re-election campaign, but Vance later returned the donation.
The Trump siblings were being investigated on allegations that they used misleading statements to attract prospective buyers to the Trump SoHo hotel.
After the investigation was dropped, in 2012, Kasowitz made another $32,000 donation to Vance, but Vance returned the donation last week.
In the matter of Weinstein, in 2015, Vance's office investigated allegations that he sexually assaulted Italian model Ambra Battilana Gutierrez. Recently revealed audio of a conversation between Weinstein and Gutierrez appeared to portray her questioning why he had groped her breasts and Weinstein attempting to coax Gutierrez into his hotel room.
Vance said Wednesday, though, that his office determined it was not going to be a “provable” case.
New York City Police Det. Sophia Mason said in an email that, while there are no pending complaints against Weinstein, the department is conducting a review to determine if there are any additional complaints.
In August 2015, after the investigation was dropped, David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner made a $10,000 donation to Vance's campaign. But a spokesman for Boies Schiller said that Boies has represented Weinstein and his company in civil matters and never represented Weinstein in a criminal investigation.
“Neither David, nor anyone in his office, ever spoke to anyone in Mr. Vance's office about Harvey Weinstein,” the statement reads.
Regardless of their stated positions, taking campaign cash often raises questions of loyalty for any candidate or elected officials, depending on who the donors are.
In one recent example, earlier this year, acting Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez, who won the Democratic nomination for Brooklyn DA in September and who is unopposed in the general election, returned $7,500 that his campaign received from the bail bond industry after critics questioned how he would approach the issue of bail reform once in office.
Marc Fliedner, a former Brooklyn prosecutor who lost to Gonzalez in the primary, said Wednesday that he is running against Vance as a write-in candidate.
Rebecca Roiphe, a New York Law School professor and a former Manhattan prosecutor, said that regardless of whether a prosecutor's approach to a case is influenced by campaign cash, they should be concerned about giving any appearance of impropriety, which can be affected by their timing in meeting with donors.
With regard to Vance's handling of the investigation of the Trumps, Roiphe said, the sequence of events surrounding the decision to drop the investigation “looks so bad,” and said that Vance likely knew that it looked bad or “otherwise he wouldn't have returned the money.”
“The worst thing that could possibly happen to the criminal justice system is that it could be bought and sold and that's what's at stake here, in my mind,” Roiphe said.
Following the revelations about the investigation into the Trump siblings, Assemblyman Dan Quart, a Democrat who represents the Upper East Side and Midtown East portions of Manhattan, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Schneiderman calling on him to investigate Vance's conduct.
In an interview, Quart, who has practiced law in Manhattan for about 19 years and who serves on the borough's 18B panel, which provides representation to indigent defendants, said he also sees a pattern of poor defendants having their “lives ruined” by Manhattan prosecutors while the well-heeled are allowed to walk.
“There is a different track of justice for the wealthy and well-connected in Manhattan,” Quart said.
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 AllThe Unraveling of Sean Combs: How Legislation from the #MeToo Movement Brought Diddy Down
New York City Settles Wrongful Conviction Suit for $9.45 Million
US Judge Told Archegos Founder Can't Afford What Defense Says Is 'Unjustified' $10 Billion Restitution
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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