[Dog Gone]

I never understood her original court order. You always coach the witnesses before they testify.

[AmishDude]

And in most trials, previous testimony is known, as it is usually public.

[Terabitten]

I never understood her original court order. You always coach the witnesses before they testify.

Regardless of whether her order was unusual, the fact is that it was her order. The TSA lawyer should have known better.

We'd all be screaming bloody murder if it was a defense lawyer who coached the witnesses in violation of the judge's orders. We'd all be demanding that the "tainted" testimony be thrown out. Hell, I'd be at the front of the line.

[blau993]

It is not unusual in criminal trials, and sometimes even in civil cases, to "sequester" witnesses, meaning the witness is not allowed in the courtroom in advance of his or her testimony. In criminal cases, it is not uncommon to extend this to a prohibition on the prospective witness learning what other witnesses have said by reading or watching news reports, or by reading a transcript. That does not mean a lawyer can't prep the witness. The lawyer simply cannot do so by telling the witness directly what other witnesses have said.

That said, Brinkema is raising a tempest in a teapot, and I don't doubt for a moment that her ideological bent has something to do with it.