Judge in Mar-a-Lago docs case delivers blow to Jack Smith, considers tossing evidence from Trump’s former lawyer

The original decision permitted the use of information from Trump's lawyer despite attorney-client privilege. Judge Aileen Cannon has set a hearing to reconsider the inclusion of this evidence.

ADVERTISEMENT

The original decision permitted the use of information from Trump's lawyer despite attorney-client privilege. Judge Aileen Cannon has set a hearing to reconsider the inclusion of this evidence.

ADVERTISEMENT

Judge Aileen M. Cannon, who is overseeing former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, announced on Thursday that she will hold a hearing to reconsider a previous decision that allowed prosecutors to use information from one of Trump’s former lawyers.

The original decision, made by another judge, permitted the use of this information despite attorney-client privilege, citing the crime-fraud exception. This exception typically overrides attorney-client privilege if it can be proven that legal advice was used to commit a crime.

Cannon’s decision came just two days after Trump’s lawyers and prosecutors held a sealed hearing about whether or not to religitate the debate over the crime-fraud exception, according to the New York Times. Deputies for special counsel Jack Smith argued that readdressing this topic would “devolve into a ‘mini-trial’” before the actual trial takes place.

Judge Cannon reportedly dismissed this argument, stating that there is a difference between “a resource-wasting and delay-producing ‘mini-trial’” and a hearing that is “geared to adjudicating the contested factual and legal issues.”

“It is before this court — in this post-indictment context — to make factual findings on contested questions pertinent to the second prong of the crime-fraud exception,” Cannon wrote.

Judge Cannon's decision to revisit the legal arguments regarding the crime-fraud exception could potentially weaken the prosecution’s obstruction charges against Trump and further delay the trial.

The crime-fraud exception has been pivotal in the prosecution’s efforts to indict the former President. When Judge Beryl A. Howell determined that the legal work by one of Trump’s lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran, was likely used in the commission of a crime, prosecutors were able to question Corcoran in front of a grand jury and have him provide information that was eventually used in Trump’s indictment.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign in to comment

Comments

Powered by The Post Millennial CMS™ Comments

Join and support independent free thinkers!

We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.

Support The Post Millennial

Remind me next month

To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 The Post Millennial, Privacy Policy | Do Not Sell My Personal Information