GG89: NY Defense Attorney Calls the Tompkins County DA's Cornell Decision "Truly Stunning"

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:26 Thomas: Gavelinos. I'm Thomas. That over there is Lydia. How are you doing?

0:00:29 Lydia: Hi. Doing pretty well. I mean, given the topic of today, again, you know, but pretty well,

0:00:36 Thomas: I'm excited to welcome back to the show, Liz Skeen. And in particular, I the thing has been talked about a lot. What I love about this show is Liz Skean is somebody who specifically works in specifically New York as a criminal defense attorney. For people who get accused of stuff like now, it's going to be different because she doesn't represent very privileged ass people in elite universities. Universities, but I think it makes it even more vital to hear Liz's point of view because represents the kind of people who would give you a truer sense based on their experience of how the justice system actually works most of the time for the people you don't hear about. While I know that you've probably heard a lot about Cornell at this point, everyone, I think this is a really important episode to really get an the ground, realistic experience and fact based analysis of what went on here. Not what went at that night at the frat and all that, not that, but legally speaking, in terms of the investigation or lack thereof and the charging decisions and all all that uh why I'm really excited to have liz on for this because I just don't think a whole lot of that out there and so I'm doing great because

0:01:57 Thomas: It's a great day anytime we get to talk to liz but I'm also just excited to bring folks this recording I think it's really important to hear anything else going on around the around the round the we got the website up so

0:01:57 Lydia: It makes sense. Yeah. I agree. Websites up. Check it out. Seriouspod.com I

0:02:11 Thomas: If yeah if anyone's still in the year 2006 or so it's fucking great

0:02:14 Lydia: Mean there are there are surprisingly a lot of people out in the world who actually don't listen to podcasts and so they don't have podcast apps on their their phones or anything like that.

0:02:24 Thomas: We call them dead yeah

0:02:26 Lydia: But we have heard from some people who have wanted to share the show with people that don't otherwise listen to podcasts. And the website now offers that ability. It also has transcripts for every single show that we do.

0:02:39 Thomas: Not every episode is done yet but it says they're crunching the numbers yeah um exactly it's so funny I of the reason it took so long to get that done is like we don't need it but we do need it like it's in this day and age it's like who goes to a website but also there's like very specific things that it is good for especially sharing the the show we'd hear from a lot of people were like how do I share it and I'm like yeah I we do need a website for that yeah which is just ugly and you know so that's cool uh and that's seriouspod.com which has all the shows and uh everything if you want to go there check out well uh aside why don't we take that first break and then I can't wait to speak to liz skeen always but especially now about this

0:02:42 Lydia: Process. Yep. The Libsyn link. Like that's not very effective. Yeah I

0:03:29 Thomas: Liz Skeen, I'm so glad we have you for this. How are you doing?

0:03:32 Liz: I'm good. I I'm ready to talk about this topic that is really terrible and that's been consuming the news, um, try to break it all down with you guys. Um, best crew I know to do do it with.

0:03:44 Lydia: Thankful to have you here because uh yeah it's it's a big one it's a tough one Kretschmar

0:03:48 Thomas: Legally this is feeling a little weird, like when we read through the complaint it felt odd in certain ways, I am very curious about that and I know there's been another legal complaint that just happened somewhat recently that's related and then of course there's the one we also reference so right now I think there's like maybe three but I don't know how important the other two are yet so we got obviously jane doe's complaint then there's the guy who had already tried to say like oh this decision was invalid because I different wasn't things we can't yeah yeah he uh was like oh the sum uh fair that I was convicted found responsible for something that I didn't wasn't like initially kind of accused of. And that didn't go anywhere, but there was some paperwork we got through that. That was interesting. And then I just saw somebody, I don't know which dude, but one of the dudes tried to get the special prosecutor take dismiss.

0:04:19 Lydia: Yeah found it Gileo Lopez he's wants Letitia James pulled off of it because they're alleging bias I think you know based off of her statements that have come out already others

0:04:47 Thomas: Huh? That's interesting.

0:04:48 Liz: That's interesting. Yeah I mean

0:04:50 Thomas: Uh today we're mainly looking at that jane doe complaint and like we said on the first couple episodes I felt it was a little weird I've never seen so much boilerplate writing that went so long it was crazy how there's 101 pages and then so much what was it like 60 of it was just repeating the same things over and over which seems like a lot but I don't know maybe maybe not what'd you make of it okay

0:05:12 Liz: Seem like the worst thing I'd ever seen. Like there is a lot of repetition in complaints, particularly where this one, there are so so many different defendants. Right. So have to just like literally be like at all times this person was this at all time. This person was that, you know, this, Cornell University was subject to this law, that sort of thing. So don't I think the complaint seemed too odd to me on any procedural level. Like there is just a lot of repetition when you've got these multi defendant ones because you have to kind of repeat the allegations oftentimes as to each defendant in a way that is, I would would say jarring and annoying to the reader yeah

0:05:32 Thomas: I see yeah maybe it's just a little more than we've seen in the past but okay that makes sense wasn't it weird though to to do each defendant as negligent for not stopping themselves but then also negligent for not stopping all the other ones for sexual assault that felt I don't know that felt weird to me

0:06:00 Lydia: Spaghetti

0:06:04 Liz: Definitely a strategy of civil litigation where you just put everything in like know and again I'm just like half counting here I mean there are like 15 defendants or something like that's a crazy number of defendants um

0:06:14 Thomas: So is it plausible to be negligent for your own behavior in not stopping your own sexual assault and then so are you just putting in the bucket of like yeah this is civil litigation you're gonna you're throwing everything at the wall

0:06:26 Lydia: The wall yeah I think

0:06:26 Liz: You're throwing spaghetti on the wall here. Yeah, that's that's what I would say. You'RE throwing spaghetti ON THE WALL HERE. I thing that struck me that was a little unusual is, you was kind of curious about the attorneys here. And I feel like I haven't seen discussion of this one point where there's two attorneys listed. There's Thomas Jeffra, who's this attorney who seems to do a lot of these types of cases who's based in New York. And then there's a guy, Whitney Seals, Mills, who appears to be an insurance attorney in Birmingham, Alabama.

0:06:49 Liz: Googling him, I really just didn't get a lot of information as to why it is that he is, and he's listed, you know, as pro hac vice, as it would appear to a non -lawyer, pending. That means that he's getting like he's trying to get like this sort of temporary mission from out of state. But yeah, I was kind of curious about that.

0:06:49 Thomas: That's weird huh

0:07:07 Lydia: That maybe that has something to yeah yeah I'm wondering if it just has to do with because I know that Jane Doe left Cornell so maybe it was just like based off of proximity to finding a lawyer where she's based out of now perhaps yeah

0:07:07 Thomas: It's like like a relative or something could

0:07:19 Liz: It was something probably like that. It is just kind of funny because he really is doesn't mean, he doesn't even seem like he was the first person I would call if I were in Alabama. Again, maybe wrong about this, but I just thought that was kind OF interesting also because I he mean he could have just kind OF referred the case. He doesn'T necessarily need to BE on the complaint. He'S not doing any media. He doesn'T appear to to be. So I was just kind of, yeah, maybe. I have no idea. It was just a little odd. I'd be curious to know kind of what that was But, you I mean, it's a very long, very detailed, well, in some respects, very detailed.

0:07:37 Thomas: Be a relative then okay I would say not very detailed yeah real

0:07:49 Liz: Yeah, yeah! It's a long, not very detailed, actually. The allegation section is quite short. But very, I would say, comprehensive as to sort of arguing that, you all these people and individuals are, know, had engaged in various forms of negligence and to engage in reasonable care and so on, you know, even suing, I

0:08:13 Thomas: Authentic lawyer paper shuffling we're getting there I always love it with liz yeah

0:08:18 Liz: That's what you hear. There is real authentic lawyer paper shuffling. I mean, a I lot think there's a lot to break down here in the stuff that I have a lot to say about in particular is talking about the decision apparently of of the Tompkins County District Attorney to not prosecute the case, where I some really troubling things that happened in there I

0:08:20 Thomas: Does she do it yeah definitely well uh us through it yeah want to go we kind of read through the complaint already so So sure.

0:08:45 Liz: I mean I would direct and I would put a link or you can all can just google this but if you google the tompkins county district attorney statement on you know jane doe he district put attorney for for the county put out an eight -page statement as to why he made the decision or his office made the decision back in in not to you engage know in a criminal prosecution of the case and I so much to say about the statement there's much to stay about the process but the first thing I just kind of want to note is like when we think about this is how crazy the sort of process is in the sense that she so Jane Doe initially you this incident, I'm just going to be if you forgive me as as a defense, I mean, to call it this incident. This this thing happens. This terrible terrible, thing happens, and a couple of weeks later, she goes to the emergency room and Ithaca. She requests a rape kit, OK, which, by the way, like can, will trigger with the permission of the of police action. And then right after that, the day after she reports the incident to the Cornell police. And what I think is a little funny is like kind of like this relationship of like what goes on with like campus police. Like, and I don't know if you all remember from your times in undergrad or people who are listening, like, like are the police like real police? Are

0:10:04 Liz: They fake police? You know what I mean? Are They like peace officers? You You know, and I looked into this in the case of Cornell because I think this is important because question is like, like, who are they really working for? Because working for the university, they you know, they're like making decisions at the behest of the university potentially. Right.

0:10:14 Thomas: Yeah, yeah,

0:10:20 Lydia: Like HR For A company. Right, like they're not for the employee, they're for the company. I don't

0:10:25 Liz: Like that. A hundred percent. And this is exactly kind of what I'm thinking as I'm going through this. And and here, apparently at Cornell, I look this up, the county sheriff appoints the Cornell officers. They're like special duty sheriffs and they take an oath and they have these peace officer powers, but they're like kind of hybrid. And importantly, thank you, Lydia, they are employees of the university under its supervision and control. So, yeah, they have some powers that are authorized by the sheriff, but also they're university employees. And, you peace officers. They're not police officers. Right. I mean, we can call them that, like, but as a real. And so she reports it to them and they engage in some sort of investigation over the course of like basically like a week or something and they get her statement and they then reduce her statement or they have her reduce her her statement to like four four pages, which six pages.

0:11:18 Thomas: I think I saw six but I don't know if that's

0:11:21 Liz: Yeah, I think you're right. Six pages. And the DA get a copy of this. And he says in Doe provided a single, this isn't from the DA's press release, a single -spaced typewritten statement to Cornell University Police Department. Jane Dole had made more than 20 handwritten notations to of the six page document. The signature page contains the following language. I've read the statement and the facts that are incorrect, blah, blah. Point being, so the DA's office gets a six page statement and based on the statement, they decide not, that there's no criminal referral. There's no crime that happened here.

0:11:53 Lydia: Even want to ask questions like that's crazy to me yeah I think

0:11:55 Liz: That's crazy to me. It's crazy to me and also like, this these are a bunch of like, excuse my language, like a bunch bunch of effing police officers. They don't know the law. Do you know what I mean? I'm just like, they're not... And this is a really complicated case. There are basically three different subsections of the New York rape statute. There's rape one, rape two, rape three. There're different things that go into each of them. There are also things that could... Okay, she consented at this juncture, but then she said no. And at at the juncture at which she said, no, someone touched her breast. By the way, might that not be rape, but that's abuse crime. You know what I mean? There's so much stuff that happened here. And it's so clear so much staff happened here. There's just so many people. And I'm like, how did you not want to question her?

0:12:39 Thomas: Yeah.

0:12:39 Liz: That's crazy.

0:12:41 Lydia: The idea too that she, she added handwritten notations of things that she disagreed with, the, you know, officers, after they typed up her statement in quotes, because it was based off of their conversations with her. She didn't write it, and then she hand wrote corrections to things. To me, if I saw someone's, like, crossing something out and stuff, like, I would at least want to go talk to them and be like, I I want to know the story from you specifically right now. Like, like, let's talk about this, but crazy.

0:13:07 Liz: Yeah, Lydia, you're so good. Exactly. It's like, turn the page on that. He's trying to use that to be like, "Look, she really reviewed it." It's like, no, no, no, this means there were so many issues in it. And also, again, let's go back, it's HR wrote up the statement, like, and she's presented with it, and so she corrects some things, but maybe it doesn't contain some things that she thinks should be there, like, you know what I mean? It's maybe it's Doesn't, yeah.

0:13:26 Thomas: She, she's Not a lawyer, like, yeah, she knows the Story, but she's not a employer enough to know, like, which things might be more important in terms of sequencing, discrepancy, or anything like That.

0:13:35 Liz: Any Of that stuff, a

0:13:37 Lydia: To mention just like working through the psychological toll of this having just happened too.

0:13:43 Liz: Hundred percent. And so I just find that that to be stunning. And then, you know what the DA proceeds to do in his eight-page press release? You even longer, well, I guess it's double, still, the even, same length as Jane Doe's, by the way, apparently, like that he just dismissed, then goes on and then says, "Oh, he's not going to provide the statement," because paraphrases her own statement. Now I'm we're just now going three levels deep. Let's just do turtles on turtles. How about I paraphrase his statement and we just keep paraphrasing statements? What are you doing?

0:14:01 Lydia: He paraphrases it. Yeah,

0:14:02 Thomas: Six page one. Yeah.

0:14:13 Liz: If going to say that based on this statement that you didn't think there was a need to prosecute, I don't know, why don't you provide it or provide significant quotations? He says, oh, he kind of comes up with the, oh protection of her, whatever, provide it. I just find that to be crazy. Or put out your defensive statement. Either and so he paraphrases it and you know his paraphrasing, yeah, is not the most sympathetic, although still raises lots of questions. Like, even in the one that he has, um, know, he, he includes information about how one of the, the one participants wanted to make it a foursome and she says, "Hell no," you know what I mean, like, other reached for the area near her vagina and she would swat his hand away, like, things like that are still even in his version of the paraphrase. So I just have some questions. I'm interview her? Also, apparently there was a full transcript that, I mean, they have a full transcript of what then gets reduced into her statement, which is like 100 pages or something, and some news outlets got this. But why don't you read the transcript? Oh, come on. You're literally a lawyer. Read 100 pages. Unbelievable to me. Sorry, I'm getting really,

0:15:15 Thomas: No, totally. I do sort of wonder, like, why didn't she include any of that in her lawsuit? I mean, I guess she didn't have to, but it seems weird.

0:15:23 Liz: I think, think she knew what happened on the, um, she, she didn't know what happened on the police end until they well

0:15:28 Thomas: Even when she filed her lawsuit all the way that far?

0:15:30 Liz: I don't think she, no, no, I think she had no idea because this goes into another critique I have to the defensiveness of the Tommkins County DA statement, so he says in this, uh, I'll just read this, this least partial paragraph, uh, our review we confirmed with CUPD that criminal charges were not appropriate based on Jane Doe's statement. So first thing, we confirmed.

0:15:34 Thomas: Wait,

0:15:54 Liz: Tells you what's going on here. CUPD is like, we don't think this is rape. Doing an independent evaluation as attorneys, please. Thank you. Anyway, as is my longstanding policy in cases such as this, we also asked CUPD to inform Jane Dole at her option that we'd personally meet with her to explain our decision and answer any of her questions. If such a request is made, the police investigator facilitates a meeting with our office. CUPD thereafter explained the results of our review to Jane Doe. I mentioned, in the nearly two years since we were asked to review this case, neither Jane Dole nor her attorneys ever contacted the DA's office not to seek answers, not to see reconsideration of her case, and not to suggest her sworn statement was inaccurate. Rather, I reached out to Jane Doe's attorneys to understand and resolve this discrepancy. F you.

0:16:47 Thomas: What discrepanzee?

0:16:49 Liz: Yes, thank you. Thank you. The discrepanzee being that, oh, Dole should have reached outto them first. I'm sorry. After they said, we're not going to prosecute your case.

0:16:59 Lydia: So then you're putting it on like 19 a -year -old girl to upon a meeting. I

0:17:01 Liz: Putting on her again. Yeah. Yeah. Insane. It's like bananas to me. Like, I cannot get over that. Like – sorry, told her that you would meet – I am sorry that she did not want to meet with you after you rejected – like, also, she doesn't know the process. Like it's – like also your lazy process that you only reviewed the the four six -page statement? I mean, I just it is am gobsmacked. My mind is blown and that they blame her. Rather, I reached out to Jane's attorney, Doe's attorneys to understand and resolve this discrepancy. You kidding me?

0:17:26 Thomas: Ja. Ja, he's a hero. We're lucky to have him. You for service well

0:17:39 Liz: Is unbelievable to me. I

0:17:42 Lydia: Feel like they know things did not go well for this, otherwise they would just say we're reopening the investigation and that would be it. This entire thing is CYA, right? Like I think they are very well aware

0:17:52 Thomas: Well I mean just the fact that they are reopening it as a result of her lawsuit which has very little in it that should tell you like something's wrong like something went wrong somehow I don't know what but that ANYTHING THEY WERE SAYING WAS TRUE THEY SHOULD JUST BE LIKE YEAH NO WE DON'T CARE WE'RE NOT WE DONT NOT SHE CAN and pursue a civil thing but yeah we're we're not doing anything why the big change right

0:18:13 Lydia: We know the facts as they were presented to us and yeah yeah the

0:18:20 Liz: Other thing that that struck me and I consider this in comparison to cases that I have handled is would say and I don't want to overgeneralize. I think that there are many circumstances where rapes and sexual violence against women are under -considered and not. But I would say, in my experience with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, they take crimes sexual violence very, very seriously. And I think post -MeToo, that's absolutely the case. I think even pre -Me Too, in many instances, in most places, that was the case because I just want to say, if you're a prosecutor and you go to law school and you want to prosecute things like you you go to school because you want to prosecuted terrible rapes against women. Like that's what you want to do. Those are the cases you want. You don't want to be like, let's give this guy another chance. Like, that's not in general, like what most like this is what you go school for. This is what do you become a prosecutor for is like to.

0:19:14 Lydia: Idea of protecting people. Yeah,

0:19:16 Liz: Yes. And so, You I would just tell you, in terms of kind of how things proceed for my clients, and this is in contrast to the Cornell seven, who, as I say, were investigated by their HR department. I've had a couple of rape cases where I represented individuals dismissed. And the way this worked was I had clients who were basically, in instances I'm talking about, and they're not very many, right, but these were cases where, were, I mean, from the prosecutor's perspective, there were, there was not enough evidence. From my perspective, my clients were innocent. They were ones where the reporting happened very far down the line, and there wasn't physical evidence. And it was a single witness account, no other forensic evidence or like text message evidence that was supporting. And it then, like, we're like, also there, in all, all these like other potential motivations for reporting the rape that were not, you know, and what I want to say about that is my clients were charged. They were arrested, okay, on the basis of a single witness account that had problems with it. And the prosecutor knew that, right? They were arrest. They were charged. The prosecutor then proceeded to investigate this. In certain instances, I provided supporting information. I had, in one instance, a lot of information that was, uh, helpful to say that this was not what had happened. Um, at least one or two instances, the prosecutor actually met with my client in a proffer style interview. And then they also conducted additional, potentially reviewed client cell phone records, other cell phone reports. Like, they did an investigation. But, but I want emphasize, this is, like, these clients were, on the basis of a single witness account that everyone knew had some problems with it, were charged and arrested, like, and ultimately these cases were dismissed because the prosecutor did this investigation, and I think rigorously, and made the determination that rape charges were not warranted, right? And I just find it, sort of, the process that happens over in Cornell, where, like, HR department investigates, forces this woman, not forces, I shouldn't say that, but like gets some statement that she makes all these corrections to, gets her to sign it. And then, like, the DA's office reviews this time, like, that's just crazy to me. Like, why wouldn't you interview anybody? Again, if it were my clients, they all would have been charged, and then the investigation

0:21:24 Liz: Would have happened thereafter, just so you know.

0:21:26 Thomas: Saying even in a weak case where they're not they don't end up chart or you know prosecuting

0:21:31 Liz: Were all cases, the ones I'm thinking of, all three cases, they weren't indicted, so they never convened a grand jury. They basically, they kind of waited on that point. I waived time. So I said, if you're really investigating this, yeah, my client didn't do this. Do the investigation. You don't have to bring a grand jury tomorrow. We can do this. And based on their investigation, they determined that the charges weren't warranted.

0:21:52 Lydia: Think like some of that is the like potentially insulating effect of an Ivy League school that is a huge, huge part of this county in particular and their economy. And you know, like, do you think that they receive, I don't know, I don't want to say like special treatment, but they become almost like this monolith, I guess, where I Know, I Know But But What I'm saying is Like In Terms of pursuing anything Involving students there, like, do you feel like there's maybe that push and pull of politics involving Cornell, or

0:22:12 Thomas: She goes there too no but yeah right

0:22:16 Liz: I totally agree. Yeah. Think so. And I also think it is something, I think it's Cornell. I also Think it's just this idea of like, I do think privileged people just get a lot more consideration, right? You'll just see that sometimes you'll see, I don't have a good example offhand, but some privileged or wealthy person is investigating as to something. And maybe Harvey Weinstein, for example. And early days. And then the district attorney's office comes to its own conclusion that they ability to prosecute the case or something like that. But they never even get charged, right? Again, they give them a lot of... But that's when we're at least the DA's office investigates. I with you, Lydia. I think thinking about Cornell as an institution, it's obviously not in Cornell's interest have have lots of people, to have people in their school being violently raped, right? It's not in their interest. That being said, it's also really not in their interests to have high -profile rape trials happening in Tompkins County. That doesn't look good for Cornell, and that's not good for the relationship between the police, the district attorney, and Cornell. So yeah, I agree. Of One the largest employers, no doubt, if not the largest in that county.

0:23:26 Thomas: But it's hard to know it could Could be that or could be a personal bias of this guy. You know, it's like, can't really know for sure.

0:23:33 Lydia: Just like absorption of just rape culture and, you know, like, he sees a thing where she says that she was interested in Ingalls and he's like, oh, okay, well, you know, and brushes off the rest of it, you know. And I think kind of breaking down some of those biases that people have just like allowed to be part of their psyche over decades and decades is, you, it's work, but you got to do it.

0:23:55 Liz: I think that's absolutely right. Think I that's a big part of it. I was so struck by the language where they say they confirm to the CUPD. It's like no one. Wanted this to be a rape case. It was The first thing that I had read before Where, our review, this is of the statement. We confirmed with CUPD that criminal charges were not appropriate based on Jane Doe's statement. I just found that, like, the use of The Verb "confirmed," like, was like, CBPD, I think, it to me, and this is a lawyer you, choosing words. So I'm gonna hold them to it. Like, it implied, me, CUPD basically came to him being like, we don't think this is a rape, And he's like, we confirm it's not a rape. And it's just like, everyone doesn't want this to be a rape. And yeah.

0:24:06 Thomas: Confirm the CUPD. What's that? Hmm. That's weird.

0:24:33 Thomas: Yeah. Well, I think that's important. Like, do we know if that's bullshit or... You know what I mean? Because that is trying to pass off the buck or whatever. Be like, well, we checking their work. Work. And we're like, yeah, no, it makes sense. Looks good. Or is that true or not? Or is it one of those things where it's like the Cornell police thought like other police were going to actually do something, you know?

0:24:48 Liz: I well It's the Cornell police, you know, refer this thing, being like, we don't think this a rape. And the district attorney, who s supposed to be the lawyer, who know knows the different charges of rape, who knows also, like, all the different sex abuse charges as well. And also like assault charges, just regular old assault, because apparently she had said that she was, you know, being hit really fucking hard.

0:25:18 Lydia: Yeah, she ended up with bruises.

0:25:20 Liz: And up in bruises. And so it's we confirmed with them, but that's not your job. Like you're supposed to, I, often tell my clients, um, to do a slight tangent. But oftentimes, when I get my clients' papers, when they just get arrested and I meet them behind the courtroom in the jail cells, they'll tell me, oh, the police told me I was arrested for blah, blah, bla. And the papers charge them. Maybe the said it was only a robbery in the third degree, but they're charged with a robbery the first degree, or a pettit larceny, but their charged with grand larcenies, or any number of things. Things. And I say, I constantly have, I swear to you, this has to be one out of 10 interviews I have. I say the police are not lawyers. They're making their best guess. But what they say to you what they put on the papers, because sometimes my clients will have the arrest paper that says the police arrest charges. Are not relevant. Like I mean, they, maybe there can be interesting issues that can come up at that in terms of how the police did the investigation, why they thought something that then the DA charged differently. But what I see them is like, they're they're making best guesses there. And it's like, I just find it stunning that you would rely on a short statement that was written by police officers effectively again. And

0:26:27 Liz: In order to make such an important charging decision, truly, I truly stunned by this. And I just think that they must have done this in the past. And maybe this is their thing. And, you know, know it just, it discourages, uh, having to deal with messy, you know, rape cases at Cornell University. I am beside myself, no.

0:26:54 Thomas: There's a lot that's that come out, and I feel like, like, I'm a little bit worried about some of what feels like contradictions, maybe, and and Not entirely sure, but I do think like your point, and I, this is kind of what I was thinking too, like at the very least the police should have done more. There's They were going to eventually say, oh, we can't do it. Like, they got to do more than see six, six pages of a summary that's like, oh, as notes on it, that, that seems like unjustifiable in any world.

0:27:24 Liz: I mean, yeah, the district attorney has to do more than just read a short summary. Of There's a lot of actors, and honestly, again, a lot of potential charges, um, to make charging determinations. And this woman had requested a rape kit. She believed herself to have been raped, and they needed to take that seriously, she is their witness. Um, again, this is, I think, kind of, as we get into, like, you know, what is the three different, different levels of rape in New York. And I would say some of the other charges that I haven't really heard in the media that these individuals, you know, could have been subject to, you, there are questions here that you certainly, and, like, I just, to preview this, I can tell you, like, I don't feel comfortable. I've seen like some hot takes of like, oh, this case is totally unprovable. I'm like, no, like I, I don't think so at all. Also I'm not comfortable with saying it's a totally provable case, but that's the point.

0:28:15 Lydia: Of course Not. Yeah.

0:28:16 Liz: Should have been interviewed and all these people should've been interviewed. And did you not have lawyer? Well, Well, actually, if they they should not have been interviewed by the DA's office. They should have asked for a lawyer, excuse me, but withdrawn. But should've had been interviewed and they should have built out something there and they just didn't do it.

0:28:33 Thomas: Well, and what about like documents and phone records and any of that?

0:28:37 Liz: Yes.

0:28:37 Thomas: Like, did any of that happen?

0:28:39 Liz: I'm curious how they got, you know, the famous kind of Snapchat screenshots. Right.

0:28:44 Thomas: Was because a student turned it in.

0:28:46 Liz: I guess a student just turned that in. Right. But I'm like, the why other thing is like the DA's office, like they'll seize phones and they'll use their power to, you Know, do search. I'm Like you, you know, what he did by not investigating this when he did it is like now it's like, yes, two years later, it's not going to be there. And so it's it's really just so it is so head in the sand and confident that is truly stunning to me. Like is the Tompkins County, like district attorney's office on the list of people that she sued. I'm just checking. They should be, honestly.

0:29:00 Thomas: Help cover it up. Cause it's yeah. Like the evidence is there.

0:29:20 Thomas: Well, if what you said before is true and she didn't know even at the time she filed the lawsuit, then yeah, that'll who knows

0:29:25 Liz: Well, right. I guess she didn't know. But you let's do a new paper and add them for just being totally incompetent. It's actually very hard to sue prosecutors. But nevertheless, I think everyone should do it when they can. I mean, I guess the other thing that might be worth going through is I don't know how much we want to go through the different kind of charges that these individuals could be subject to under New York law.

0:29:43 Lydia: Would love to do that, yeah what's on the table there, yeah

0:29:45 Thomas: Charges assuming the, uh, you know, Letitia James does something. Yeah, yeah.

0:29:51 Liz: Yeah. I mean, maybe it's worth even just going through like, so timeline wise, you know, basically this County DA did say he was reopening the case at the end, you know, at the very end of his eight page statement that was highly defensive, which is a little little weird, but good for you. And then, you it became very clear that Hochul was very frustrated with what was happening there. She wanted an outside investigation. She appoints Tish James to go ahead as a special prosecutor. Right. James is the attorney general in New York. So they have like kind of like all encompassing jurisdiction. So in theory, their office can do they don't normally do criminal cases, but in theory they can. So I'll go through the of rape under New York law, which I think are somewhat standard based on, similar to other states. There is this thing called the Model Penal Code, which a lot of states' criminal laws are based on. And New lot of New York's laws are based on it. So rape in the first degree is obviously the highest degree of rape. Uh, a person is guilty of rape in first degree when they engage in vaginal sexual, conduct, oral sexual conduct or anal sexual conduct. And I'll just read the relevant things by either forcible compulsion or someone who is incapable of consent by being physically helpless. Is forcible compulsion? Either use of physical force could be a threat, but that's not relevant here. And then what is physical helplessness? Physical helplessness is essentially being unconscious. Just don't know everything here, so I'm going to speak at a high level. As I can see, hasn't I been an explicit allegation that she was unconscious, but

0:31:30 Thomas: What

0:31:30 Liz: I also don't know. That also may not be the case.

0:31:34 Thomas: May not be the case, yeah

0:31:36 Liz: Remember a lot of what happened, right?

0:31:37 Thomas: I, you know, I noted that, and I actually think the way the complaint was written, I think think she does remember because there's not much in the complaint, but in what we have of her allegations, uh, to like the initial investigation, don't think it's supportable to say that she was like unconscious for any of it because I think she remembers, stop, she, she went to and like, so you know what I mean, like, because I noted that too, I was like, why would she know if anything additional had had happened or not, and I, I really think I feel like she would have made that allegation if she could have, or at least left it open. Don't you think? Hmm.

0:32:10 Liz: That's fair. But what I would say, in contrast, is there was an ABC News report that that seemed to have gotten a copy of the transcript of the interview. And what, to that ABC News report, they said, she said in the transcript that she didn't remember the end of the night, in quotes, where I was raped and didn't know how many people had sex with her. So, I mean, didn't -remember is different from losing consciousness. Of, I And means, the issue is physical helplessness. You It have to be unconscious. I mean and there's a lot of justifiable critique of this. Like if you are are like really sloppy, but like conscious or, you know, that doesn't count. Right. So again, I don't know, just understand that like, if, seven individuals have been charged, maybe someone would have cooperated and they would have had some things to say. Like, I'm just saying like that things come from, I don'T want to encourage unnecessary criminal charges, but things come From charging people criminally, right? Like cooperation, uh, other information, people are throwing other people in the bus. I didn't do this, but he did this. I mean, you can get a little more information here and maybe phone records could have said something. I don't know, but.

0:32:52 Thomas: Good point good point yeah right yeah absolutely, absolutely

0:33:14 Lydia: Crazy to think though that like you could be like, don't even bring other drugs into it, but like you could be like blackout drunk, you're still technically conscious and you'll have no memory at all of anything that's happened like that, doesn't count because you're conscious, okay yeah

0:33:27 Liz: Yeah, I exactly. And I completely agree. And we'll talk actually about that because that dovetails with second degree rape, too. But I agree. It's also it's also crazy that you could be like coming in and out of consciousness. And as long as you're conscious for like the sex, but then when you're out of of conscious for, right. And then you fall out of conscious and maybe it stops, you know, like that's crazy. Um, that is the law. The, that's physical helplessness under first degree. The other thing has forcible compulsion. Forcible York law, a wide variety of conduct can establish the use of, of forcible compulsion by physical force to accomplish rape. And so it could be that someone was hitting somebody, striking them, punching them, choking them, forcibly grabbing, overpowering, restraining, of bruises can support a finding that physical force was used. Also, encounter that starts as consensual can evolve into one that involves forcible compulsion, right? Like that's,

0:33:39 Lydia: For part part of it wow yeah, exactly

0:34:26 Liz: That's always the case. And so I I feel a little like I'm not doing proper work by analyzing like the limited information we have, but there were certainly indications of of her, apparently there was some point where she's swatting someone away. You think it would be hard to prove forcible compulsion, but again, we just, there's a lot we don't know here.

0:34:45 Liz: And, you reasonably be charged. Maybe as to the end of the night, when if she's saying that if pushes, tries to push them away and they come back onto her, that's, you know, she's covered in bruises. She's being hit. Like, I don't know. Seems like that's certainly, again, a chargeable offense. That doesn't mean proof beyond a reasonable doubt at a trial. But I think that that's one of the things that I find to be odd is that a lot of the analysis that's so negative on this case is coming from like, you these backseat drivers as though it's a trial. Right. Like we're not at trial yet. Like, is there enough to charge these people? I think certainly. Right.

0:35:20 Thomas: Forget that, too, was there enough to even do a proper fucking investigation, litigation.

0:35:21 Lydia: Ask another question, you know, like one more one more question

0:35:27 Thomas: I think

0:35:28 Liz: Exactly. Certainly to ask way more questions and figure out a little better about what we should actually charge these people. So

0:35:33 Thomas: That's, yeah. Some documents, get some cell phone records or something. Yeah. That, that, so bad too, because it just, like you said a second ago, I mean, it's gone. Yeah. It's gotta be pretty much gone. Yeah.

0:35:37 Liz: And all lost now. Yeah. You, the destruction of evidence, essentially DA's office. Great job there.

0:35:47 Thomas: Man.

0:35:48 Liz: Right. Rape in the second degree under New York law. The That's relevant provision of this, is a person shall be guilty of rape in the second degree when she engages in vaginal, oral, or anal sexual contact a person who is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally disabled, not or mentally incapacitated. Mentally Mentally incapacitated mean under New York law. This has gotten, I think, deservingly quite a bit of intention. I did quite a little bit of a write -up on this. So mentally incapacitated means that someone was, you impaired, so intoxicated that, you were unable to consent. But it be that they have voluntarily involuntarily consume the substance. It has to be involuntary consumption. I'll actually pull up, let me pull up my definition section so all the nerdy listeners can hear the actual definition.

0:36:41 Thomas: We we did our non-lawyer attempt at this. Uh, so I'm curious to hear from you.

0:36:45 Liz: I mean, so yeah, mentally incapacitated means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct due to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent or any other act committed upon him without his consent. Interestingly, it could be that another person has drugged you, but then a different person rapes as you, just a little side note. But this, the way, is the law. I tried to figure out how many states have this as kind of their law. It has to be this involuntary like you didn't voluntarily consume the substance. It seems like roughly half the states in the US have this, and the other half half can you voluntarily did it to yourself. Right. Or partially some mix of the two. Right? This is the original Model Penal Code variation is that it has to be this involuntary. Someone else drugged you, someone else. It was not without your consent. But that's that's a law on rape in the second degree. Um, knowing more information a rape in the second degree charge would be hard to support but they should get more information. I also it was curious, I mean, I've just seen prosecutors really stretch theories here and there and I'm curious if like, and I didn't see anything about this, but if you could kind of stretch a theory of it was involuntary because this person was incapable of consenting to doing more ketamine or having more drinks. I was wondering if you could stretch the theory that way. I've

0:38:10 Liz: Then basically leave it to an appeals court to decide what happened there. But I mean, think, that's an argument.

0:38:10 Lydia: Like a first cousin once removed kind of thing, like just take it a step further out, yeah, interesting. Like

0:38:21 Liz: Consumption, saying of ketamine was without, without her consent because she was incapable of consenting to it based on her level of intoxication. Like, just looking at the news on this, that there's some pressure within New York to change the law on this. Certainly Kathy Hochul, I think, indicated she would support it. And that is the more modern progressive trend. And I do think the Model Penal Code, which is quite old, reflects a much older understanding of things. And and I think, you would probably be a good change to New York's law. That's where we find ourselves with rape in the second degree. I don't know if there's much else to kind of, discuss you there other than like, I mean, that kind of is what it is. Rape in the third degree is sort of interesting. Rape in the third degree, as compared to rape in in the first degree, is of basically rape in the third degree is some anal, vaginal sexual contact, the lack of consent is by some reason, it's by some factor other than the incapacity to consent. Consent, so what rape in the third degree is, it's like, it's a really odd, it's honestly I think a bit of an odd charge, uh, sorry

0:39:30 Liz: I shouldn't laugh about this it's sort of like a catch-all but it's like it's that isn't rape in in the second degree.

0:39:30 Thomas: A catch -all sort of.

0:39:37 Liz: So incapacity to consent is rape in the second degree, right? So you have, you know, you lack the capacity based on being drugged or mental capacity or something like that. Rape in the third is there's no consent, but just read exactly from the statute. Vaginal sexual contact, also anal and oral, with another person without such person's consent, where the lack of consent is by reason of some factor other than incapacity to consent. So this often comes up in cases where there isn't physical force. Not punching somebody. You're not... I mean, it's hard to say because force is so broad, by the way. It often comes up in kind of cases where someone says they do not want to have sex and you know, give their consent, but another rapes them basically. Right. But will often charges where there's like not significant physical force involved.

0:40:29 Lydia: Holding down kind of things like

0:40:31 Liz: Down. Right, exactly. I say all the rape three cases I've had are a little unusual, But it comes up oftentimes with people who are familiar with each other or, you know, someone who's like doesn't want this, but they're trying to be polite so they don't start punching somebody, you Know, like that tends to be the kind of world of rape in the third degree.

0:40:50 Thomas: You'd think think that could cover this

0:40:51 Liz: Degree. That is to note about rape in the third degree, and I agree, and I think it potentially could, once again, we would need to do a little more investigation, is third degree... Again, it can include forcible compulsion, but it can include force. It can include the same conduct as rape in first, but also it also includes, as I mentioned, express non -consent. So the the victim expressed that they did not want to have sex, clearly. And a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have understood that. And I think it does seem like there are certain aspects, even in the summary of the summary, where she says hell no to something, or she swats away. In the the third certainly could be, I think something that could have potentially been a something charge that couldn't have been charged here. Uh, or certainly something they should have really, it's rape in the third degrees. Like, I don't know, it's a tricky wicket. Like even attorney had interviewed her, we would have a little more information here. And that's, that's once again, like why it's so really tricky one. Like it's even hard for me to to explain. And it's like, we're having a bunch of peace officers make this determination, who are HR employees? Like, okay.

0:40:51 Thomas: At least, right, yeah

0:42:04 Liz: That's the world of rape in the third degree. And then I would just say, you know, it'll get too deep for me to go into it, but there's a whole series of sex abuse charges that you Know, relate to unwanted unwanted sexual touching and contact, but that people convicted with both as to rape one and sex abuse in the first degree, that sort of thing. Again, could be very applicable in this situation where there's think there's a lot of references to unwanted touching of her, of her genital areas and things like that. And again, it's the same issue, you know, the same sort of kind of questions about what consent is and all of these, right? Like get around the voluntary involuntary intoxication by going with one of those, but still like, there's like, this is why you should have had a proper interview of this woman, um this victim, right. Like, because understand like what she remembered, like did someone touch her breast and she said, stop doing that. And she, they kept touching her breast. That's a sex abuse charge. The complaint and reading the summary of the summary. I think that's something that totally plausibly could could have happened and seems to have been implied in some of them. You other thing is also like the the slapping and the bruising and those are assault misdemeanors. Anyway, that's what I have to say.

0:43:17 Thomas: And it's so interesting for you because you see so many clients that are on the way other end of this spectrum where they're probably getting the book thrown at them and so you're over here like, hey, I know that you have a lot more that you can do, Mr. Prosecutor, like I've seen it, you know, like I know there's plenty more you could have tried to do, yeah.

0:43:36 Liz: That's exactly why you hear my my tone of exasperation is is that like, I think of my clients who I, I've had clients who charged with rape and life ruinous to be charged with rate. Let me just be clear. But, know, and I'm thinking one person in particular, and I'm just going to keep it a high level. But this case was dismissed. And there was really no, it was didn't happen. Right. And I, I believe this person who have been innocent. And it's like, my clients get no consideration at all as to like the circumstances of their life and know they, you get charged, the prosecutor does the investigation, and yes, you know, I'm really glad that they came to the right outcome and they dismissed the charges, okay, but it's like these, these Cornell kids, I, I cannot believe that this DA's office, this district attorney's office, just like, they couldn't interview, they couldn't, what are they so busy doing? Are they so busy doing in Ithaca, New York? Okay. Not exactly a place known for like gang violence, other violent crime, even like, you know, big, you know, fraud. Like what are they doing that they can't bother to interview a woman who got a rape kit, believed that she was raped and, you know, in her apparently in the the kind of statement that, again, the hundred page statement that she, like the transcript of her statement that ABC VC News got, said, and I quote, I can say with a hundred percent confidence I was raped, but

0:44:25 Lydia: Couldn't

0:44:57 Liz: You, what are you doing that you didn't have time, that you were just gonna, you sent her a note

0:45:00 Lydia: Even put an hour meeting on the books, like, just to chat with her, yeah, at

0:45:04 Liz: But, but hey, if you want to have a meeting with us, we can pencil you in.

0:45:08 Thomas: It feels like they just put her in a category, you know, or just put this whole thing in a category of like, ah, well, it was, you know, drunken, drug-fueled, uh, group sex like well yeah, whatever you I mean you could be literally in the middle of a gangbang and get raped by somebody, like, that it's like, like, that's how consent works but I don't think, I feel like these male police officers, possibly, I don't really think they think that or something, or I don't think they're gonna like go too far out of their way to try to consider what that might be, you know, because otherwise it just makes, yeah, it really makes no sense

0:45:18 Lydia: Party yep yep yep yeah

0:45:40 Liz: I that's exactly right and just have this very square box of what rape is and what rape isn't, and they, like, I think there are potentially some problems with New York laws, but there's still there a lot of space and what seems to be alleged here to constitute criminal acts, and no one did that work, and now this woman's case has been, you know, thrown into the spotlight. The criminal case is compromised because, as we keep saying, two years later, text messages, people's memories, everything. I mean, people's memories were already potentially not so good, but now they're real bad. So

0:46:13 Thomas: Think we can just hope that maybe the Title Nine investigation preserved, like, definitely not that level of stuff that should have been but but there's, there's a lot there and it's going to be interesting to see how, what Letitia James does with it.

0:46:18 Lydia: Hopefully, hopefully hopefully take

0:46:28 Liz: Yeah, I think it's going to be really interesting to see. I mean, I think it's gonna be interesting to see what happens here in terms of potential changes to New York's laws, but I also hope, you know, the laws of other states, I, I just think I do think the voluntary versus involuntary intoxication is, is so, it's so outdated, um, someone's voluntarily intoxicated, like, like you just go to a bar and find the drunkest person there and then buy the and then like buy them more drinks, exactly.

0:46:53 Lydia: Them out back well you

0:46:54 Liz: Buy them or drinks that they, they drink by choice and then, like, no matter what sex happens, that's okay, like, I don't know, that seems bad.

0:47:01 Lydia: Don't even have to buy them more drinks, you could just walk in, find the drunkest person and then take them back, yeah

0:47:05 Liz: Exactly. Exactly. You just find the drunkest person.

0:47:07 Thomas: I mean, again, assuming they're not saying no, because that would be covered. I want to be, I want To get the accurate lawyer view on that because I was trying to figure out like what the gap is. It's like, no matter what intoxicated or not, theoretically, again in practice might be A different thing, but in theory, it's a crime. It's rape if she expressed, like, no, don't do this, right?

0:47:11 Liz: Assuming they're not saying no. no. Yeah exactly.

0:47:27 Thomas: Like no matter what. But

0:47:29 Liz: 100% rape 3, right? 100% rape 3. And also, if you can make the argument that this person was, forcibly you compelled, right, like it was physical force. And there's actually an interesting New York case that deals with this. Even if it's physical force, but someone doesn't expressly say, I don't want this, they're like, no, that can still be rape, right? Someone could be punching you and shoving themselves inside you, and you don't explicitly say, I don't want this. And no, that can still be rape one, forcible compulsion. Absolutely.

0:48:00 Thomas: And it seems like that her allegations, it seems like that would fit. It just seems like the prosecutor or whoever just decided that that didn't happen or something. Right.

0:48:10 Liz: Mean, nothing, had a very frustrating week at work, just as I often do, because because there are some very annoying things that have happened in the courthouse at 100 Center Street. But no, truly the most frustrating thing I encountered was the district attorney from Tompkins County's defensive statement as to why he chose not to prosecute this. It was pathetic.

0:48:31 Thomas: Yeah, man.

0:48:32 Liz: Like, this is an elected individual that's charged with, like, protecting public safety. Unbelievable.

0:48:47 Thomas: So, um, a little bit of time left, I know it's kind of fresh, so I'm not sure how much time you had to look at it, but you mentioned you might have something to say about the, attempt by that one guy to get Letitia James off the case.

0:48:58 Lydia: Yeah, yeah, what are your thoughts there and

0:48:59 Liz: I, this arguments that the attorney for one of the, one of the Cornell seven here, uh, you know, sort of trying to get the AG removed as a special investigator owing to bias. Want to be clear, this is as much now a legal case as it is a case in the media, right? I guess the allegation is that had demonstrated some sort of bias or presumption of guilt on the basis of a media post, so on, so on. Mean, I think that prosecutors, prosecutors always do that, right? I'm just like, what do you mean? I just, I don't know. I mean, it's not clear to me that there's much of a basis here. I guess the alleged social media post is, you know, James says on social media that, you know what this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I'm holding her in my heart and prayers to her and all survivors. You're not alone. We stand with you.

0:49:52 Thomas: They always say that about victims of stuff, right? I mean, like what?

0:49:56 Lydia: That was also in advance of her being appointed You Like had She Said that, yeah, yeah, so she posted that September 28th, and then October 1st was when she was appointed special prosecutor and I would assume that you, now I have have a different hat on and I need to pursue this without bias and stuff, but when you're not in that capacity, like, why wouldn't you be allowed to say something like that?

0:50:00 Thomas: You Mean Before Right I She still should be able to say, like, prosecutors do that all the time, I mean, like, think of all the prosecutors that are like, it's time to put an end to the mafia in this town, you know, or whatever, can they be like, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's not fair, you can't yeah wow wow wow wow we're getting you off this case no

0:50:28 Lydia: You have a bias against the mafia continued

0:50:38 Liz: Exactly everything both of you said. And like the post doesn't even demonstrate a legal conclusion. Like I think. We can all. Agree what she's been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. Like no matter what like what she was forced to wouldn't.

0:50:47 Thomas: That's probably a pretty careful statement right there, that's

0:50:51 Liz: Holding her in my heart and in my prayers to her and all survivors, you're not alone.

0:50:55 Thomas: Nothing, that's literally a lawyered statement to make sure she's not saying anything, like, yeah, yeah

0:51:01 Lydia: It continued on to, and for each of those men that obviously did this, I hope you burn in hell for the crimes that you've committed, you know what I mean, like, that that would be definitely different, but that didn't happen.

0:51:05 Thomas: Your days are numbered list them by name, yeah yeah that that seems like like a terrible case

0:51:14 Liz: It isn't. So I just I think that's kind of ridiculous. I think this is sort of a media war. Not read or look at any seriously right wing news coverage of this. So, I don't know what extent it's taking a right versus left wing.

0:51:25 Lydia: So bad. Yeah.

0:51:27 Liz: You know, I just, I had to preserve my mental health a little bit. That being said, like, I just think it's like, you now know that's like a talking point probably on certain angles of media. Like, oh, it's this left wing Tish James, you know, prosecuted by Donald Trump, is like, it just, it is all, it all taking shape as a war in the media. And I just, I don't know. I think that's, it like a bit of a silly thing to file. Wouldn't say it's it's frivolous as a legal matter, which is a thing. But, you know, you also you see these sorts of things where, you I think we've we saw some version of a motion like this with Luigi Mangione complaining about the statements that were made by the prosecution. You know, other prosecution is engaging in, you know, biasing the potential jury pool, biassing this. Those those types of motions really don't win very often or it's all kind of part of the show, but

0:51:26 Thomas: Good don't don't do it, oh yeah, 100 % yeah yeah yeah I think

0:52:16 Lydia: It's interesting that, that he and his legal team have decided to kind of pursue that avenue specifically.

0:52:23 Thomas: Liz is right, it seems like PR, probably right

0:52:24 Lydia: Yeah I don't know, like why are you even like getting involved in saying anything at this point? Like I mean his, his, know, situation with what, what he experienced was was that he wasn't found, I think, I mean, I don't think he was found responsible for sexual assault. He was only suspended for three semesters, like he was allowed to return to campus and finish.

0:52:43 Lydia: Yeah, yeah, this particular student defendant, right? So, so that's kind of why I'm like, why bother?

0:52:44 Liz: Kind of

0:52:42 Thomas: That particular, really Oh Wow oh Geez I think I just assumed it was one of the ones that was found

0:52:48 Lydia: Like, why? Yeah, why are you bothering to try and like, I Don't know, I feel if you stayed quiet, like, that's probably a better position at this point, at least.

0:52:52 Thomas: That's interesting that's That's interesting.

0:52:58 Liz: Agree, it was a little too early to be filing that. I feel like I would have if I were a defense attorney, I kind of would have filed that with, like, you, she made the social media post, then she made this statement at a press conference, you know, I would really kind of like try to have a little more going for me, but I would be staying quiet right now, like, I I think that's the best move.

0:53:14 Lydia: Could

0:53:14 Thomas: Wonder, this is pure speculation, but I would read that maybe as like a little bit of worry, like, okay, maybe he, maybe the extent of his culpability was not touched by the title nine thing. And so he's kind of happy where he is right now and doesn't want anything to change.

0:53:26 Lydia: Be yeah wants to shut it down as much as he can yeah please

0:53:34 Liz: Maybe. I mean, I could also just read it as a little like, I don't know, sometimes people are, sometimes have clients who really want me to do certain things. I'm like, no, this is not the time for me to Do something. Trust me. Just let's, let's be chill. And they're like, No, you need to put on the record this, this and this. And I want you to file this one. I'm Like, no. Like, there are real strategic reasons to not please listen to me. But like, you know, what's good is that like, um, as a non hired attorney, I can kind of there There are certain things my client is absolutely in control of in this case, guilty plea, not guilty plea going to trial, whether or not he testifies. But there's some things where if my client wants me to file something that is totally ridiculous or in my view, bad strategy, I can say as a public defender, I'm like, I'm not going to do that, right? If you're a paid attorney, going back to my paid practice, if your client really wants you to do something and they're paying you money to do it, you

0:53:52 Lydia: Listen to me yeah you

0:54:23 Liz: Do it. So I don't know if maybe also the client was just really agitated about this and was like, I want you to do something. I want to you to like, and he's like, I don't know, should I do like a bias thing? He's like yeah, let's file that. I don't know. I mean I'm, I think we're all spitballing but the point is like there's some real questions here.

0:54:39 Thomas: Yeah it just really, I didn't realize it was one of the ones that hadn't been found, you know, fully responsible. Cause that, that does change it in my mind. It's, it's a very weird thing to do. Huh? Interesting to keep an eye on that. Well, uh, let's see. We blew right through the time we had. Uh, that was really compelling. Is there anything else you want to make sure that we know about this?

0:55:01 Liz: At this juncture, but I'd obviously love to come back on and to update more. Now Now that everyone is so well-educated on these issues and has heard my rant and everyone else's rant as to the things that went wrong here.

0:55:06 Thomas: Course. Absolutely. Uh, Liz Skeen, thank you so much. We really appreciate your time.

0:55:20 Lydia: The best