'They should stop': Jack Smith tells Mar-a-Lago judge to ignore Trump valet's 'deeply flawed' bid to toss case [View all]
Source: Law & Crime
Mar 28th, 2024, 8:41 am
The Special Counsels Office (SCO) on Wednesday asked the Mar-a-Lago judge to ignore the deeply flawed and meritless arguments that former President Donald Trumps valet Walt Nauta raised for the first time in a reply brief but not in his motion to dismiss the case on grounds of vindictive and selective prosecution.
Nauta faces charges of conspiracy to obstruct, false statements to the FBI, and withholding documents, connected to an alleged scheme to delete Mar-a-Lago camera footage and conceal boxes of classified documents from a grand jury. His lawyers most recently argued that the indictment should be thrown out because he was singled out and was impermissibly retaliated against with prosecution because he didnt testify in front of the grand jury.
Special Counsel Jack Smith countered on Wednesday by slamming the defense for just now and not when filing their motion to dismiss making numerous false factual assertions and meritless arguments. Smith said U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has seen this kind of procedurally improper and belated move before and that she should rule in the SCOs favor for a second time.
Arguments and factual assertions not presented in an opening motion and raised for the first time in a reply brief are not properly before the Court. These repeated attempts by the defendants to reserve arguments until their reply briefs in order to prevent the Government from responding serve neither the Court nor efficient process, and they should stop, he said, urging Cannon to ignore the falsities in Nautas reply.
Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/they-should-stop-jack-smith-tells-mar-a-lago-judge-to-ignore-trump-valets-deeply-flawed-bid-to-toss-case-based-on-lawyers-conversation-over-coffee-with-a-prosecutor/
Full headline:
They should stop: Jack Smith tells Mar-a-Lago judge to ignore Trump valets deeply flawed bid to toss case based on lawyers conversation over coffee with a prosecutor