The travesty verdict against Rudy Giuliani and the left’s lawfare against lawyers: This is intended to put fear in all who believe the courts provide recourse for wrongs done to them

American Thinker ^ | 12/16/2023 | Andrea Widburg

[SeekAndFind]

A mother and daughter duo sued Rudy Giuliani in Georgia, alleging that he had defamed them in connection with the Fulton County vote county. They just received a $148,000,000 verdict (and yes, that’s the right number of zeroes). But all is not as it seems, and the story is a reminder of the multi-level lawfare being practiced against conservatives, especially Trump supporters.

The headlines are screamers: The jury awarded one plaintiff $16,171,000 in compensatory damages and the other $16,998,000 in compensatory damages. In addition, the jury ordered that Giuliani pay each plaintiff $20,000,000 for intentional infliction of emotional distress and pay an additional $75,000,000 to both as punitive damages. The grand total is $148,169,000. These verdicts aren’t meant to punish someone; they are meant to destroy him.

But as I said, all is not as it seems. You see, Giuliani’s case was never actually tried before a jury. No jury saw the videos of the plaintiffs or even heard their or Giuliani’s testimony before, during, or after a full trial.

Instead, Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee, sanctioned Giuliani for failing to produce documents…and she used the harshest sanction available to a judge, which is an automatic verdict against the party who failed in his or her discovery obligations. What this means is that the only thing “tried” was the plaintiffs’ claims about their suffering due to the wrongdoing that Howell mandated had taken place.

In thirty years of practicing law, I never saw a judge apply that sanction, no matter how egregious a party’s conduct was. Judges (rightly) will do anything to avoid having a party to a case lose the chance to have due process determine who should prevail.

[SeekAndFind]

But here’s something even worse. It turns out that Giuliani couldn’t comply with significant parts (or all?) of the discovery request because the material demanded wasn’t in his care, custody, or control (those are legal terms of art). And why wasn’t it in his care, custody, or control? Because the FBI confiscated much of it.

The fact that Giuliani never had his case actually tried also means that all the recent headlines about Giuliani refusing to testify in his trial (see here and here, for example) are misleading. They imply that Giuliani refused to testify in his own defense on the substantive charges. In fact, he was already barred from doing so. All that he could do would be to sit in court and listen to the plaintiffs explain why they were entitled to almost $150,000,000 in damages.

Giuliani also said that he was having a hard time paying his attorneys, which affected his ability to respond to discovery, and that possibility leads to a different issue. There is a possibility that his attorneys messed up. I am not saying that they did. It’s just something that can happen.

[sauropod]

.

[kiryandil]

[Sicon]

But here’s something even worse. It turns out that Giuliani couldn’t comply with significant parts (or all?) of the discovery request because the material demanded wasn’t in his care, custody, or control (those are legal terms of art). And why wasn’t it in his care, custody, or control? Because the FBI confiscated much of it.

Can Giuliani appeal this travesty of a decision?

[stylin19a]

Right on point...should be appealable.

and, never-mind Ruby originally got caught on bodycam about admitting there was election fraud...I don't see where Rudy's attorney's went down that road.(I posted this elsewhere)

still no mention of the cop's bodycam or other videos or the audio tapes found here... scroll near the end of the article:(Rumble drawback, no closed captioning)(I saved what i could..still have trouble saving rumble videos)

this is an old report....

https://www.georgiarecord.com/elections/2022/12/25/ruby-freeman-body-cam-admissions-revealed-in-the-georgia-ballot-scanning-scandal/

Newly uncovered police body cam footage of Ruby Freeman reveal her stunning admissions that directly contradict allegations made under oath by January 6th Committee witnesses, by certain reporters and show hosts, by members of Congress, and by lawyers in sworn statements to Federal Court. Freeman volunteers to blow the whistle on election fraud.

In the body cam, Ruby Freeman alleges a coverup by the Georgia Secretary of State, the DOJ/FBI, the GBI, and the Fulton County DA.

911 call transcript, body cam videos, and police report were obtained by Open Record Requests. From that information investigators have learned that the police report was supplemented in contradiction of the facts.

[Captain Rhino]

No matter how carefully the laws, policies, and procedures are crafted, it won’t matter if the officials administering them are persons of corrupt and/or partisan character.

[smokingfrog]

Never seen anything like it.

[PGR88]

This can’t continue

[JohnBovenmyer]

I saw one commentator claim that Rudi wouldn't be able to file an appeal unless he first posted a bond to cover the whole judgement, which given its size, he probably wouldn't be able to raise enough funds. Allegedly it's possible a judge could wave that requirement. But if the requirement is so — I'm no lawyer and don't know if that commentator's claim is correct — given the overall performance of judges in any remotely anti-MAGA cases I wouldn't be optimistic to have anything anti-Rudi waived.

MSM has been harping that Rudi was 'proved' wrong, that all that we'd thought we'd seen when the overnight GA vote counting actions of Rudi's 'trial' winners, had innocent explanations. The small,not clearly seen, items transferred weren't flash drives but mints. The same stacks of votes weren't repeatedly fed thru the vote counting machines, contrary to what a lot of irate video viewers at the time thought. Supposedly GA investigators proved their innocence. Not that I can tell Rudy ever got a chance to cross examine the investigators regarding their alleged evidence. And it had long 'seemed' that GA SOS, AG and Gov, albeit being registered republicans, weren't acting like partisan republicans might be expected to help regarding any election problem GOP complaints. Which might engender suspicion over any GA investigation of such matters. Also this report from Friday (bulk of the info is in a 40 minute audio interview) claims Gov. Kemp's lawyers are now admitting that at the chap, Rossi, interviewed had presented evidence showing 17k+ invalid votes from just Fulton county. Which IIRC was more than Biden's statewide margin of victory. And Rossi, in the interview, said his data DID suggest votes had been scanned repeatedly, contrary to that GA investigation. Rossi claims three times GA has tried to cover up his findings. But the GA legislature gets another look at them.

[A strike]

“Whoo ya gonna believe ...?”
or was the video inadmissable?

-fJRoberts-

[RideForever]

It's about to get undone. Look for the meeting in GA on the 20th discussing the 17k illegal ballots were included in the counts. Margin of victory was 12k votes.

link to meeting agenda

[Organic Panic]

That lying nasty woman ADMITTED on video she was changing votes. What a sham.

[Fuzz]

Link to the video please?

[Dr. Franklin]

But here’s something even worse. It turns out that Giuliani couldn’t comply with significant parts (or all?) of the discovery request because the material demanded wasn’t in his care, custody, or control (those are legal terms of art). And why wasn’t it in his care, custody, or control? Because the FBI confiscated much of it.

Sure, it wasn't fair, but our judicial system doesn't care about fairness. The job of the trial court judge in this system isn't to be fair. It's to shape the outcome of the case. ALL of the procedure is wrong, but good luck getting an appellate court to reverse this judge, but the appellate courts frequently don't care about justice for the average person, and care less for political opponents.

The fact that Giuliani never had his case actually tried also means that all the recent headlines about Giuliani refusing to testify in his trial (see here and here, for example) are misleading. They imply that Giuliani refused to testify in his own defense on the substantive charges. In fact, he was already barred from doing so. All that he could do would be to sit in court and listen to the plaintiffs explain why they were entitled to almost $150,000,000 in damages.

The longer a judge sits on a federal court, the more arrogant they get because they know how much they can get away with doing.

Giuliani also said that he was having a hard time paying his attorneys, which affected his ability to respond to discovery, and that possibility leads to a different issue. There is a possibility that his attorneys messed up. I am not saying that they did. It’s just something that can happen.

Giuliani is the guy who told Trump not to give Sydney Powell the paperwork for her special counsel appointment to investigate the 2020 Big Steal. Giuliani told Trump if he did that, they would all go to jail. How did that work out?

[Dr. Franklin]

I saw one commentator claim that Rudi wouldn't be able to file an appeal unless he first posted a bond to cover the whole judgement, which given its size, he probably wouldn't be able to raise enough funds. Allegedly it's possible a judge could wave that requirement. But if the requirement is so — I'm no lawyer and don't know if that commentator's claim is correct — given the overall performance of judges in any remotely anti-MAGA cases I wouldn't be optimistic to have anything anti-Rudi waived.

The bond applies to the other sides legal fees on appeal, not the judgment
"Rule 7. Bond for Costs on Appeal in a Civil Case
In a civil case, the district court may require an appellant to file a bond or provide other security in any form and amount necessary to ensure payment of costs on appeal. Rule 8(b) applies to a surety on a bond given under this rule."

[SeekAndFind]

RE: It’s about to get undone. Look for the meeting in GA on the 20th discussing the 17k illegal ballots were included in the counts. Margin of victory was 12k votes.

___________________________

Thanks for the link, but more questions arise from this.

OK, so there were 17,852 invalid votes. But can Trump prove that they were not split evenly between him and Biden, or most of these invalid votes went to Biden?

There’s more work to be done.

[JohnBovenmyer]

This fall a race for Sheriff in Louisiana was "won" by one vote, but thrown out and a new election ordered because, IIRC at least 11 illegal votes were proven. Which the judge ruled made it impossible for him to know who really won the race. Different jurisdiction, but at least 17k illegal ballots included with a margin of merely 12k allows the same argument to be tried. I'd wonder if there were any fulton county only races which 17k illegal ballots could overturn. Courts might be more willing to call belated redos of them. JUST the GA illegal ballots wouldn't be enough to boot Biden. At best they end the presumption that Trump's claims are completely without merit.

[RideForever]

But can Trump prove that they were not split evenly between him and Biden

I believe these are the mail-in ballots with no envelopes. So, no registered voter. No voter; no vote. It's not that hard to understand.

[bitt]

P