On the eve of the D.C. Madam trial, lawyers are scrambling to keep their clients off the witness list. One person's name that will be a high profile witness to the defense: Diaperman Vitter!
U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson rejected a motion on Friday to quash the subpoena of Sen. David Vitter (R-La.).
Henry Asbill, Vitter's attorney, says Palfrey only subpoenaed the senator to embarrass or harass him, and he has nothing to add to the case.
Asbill said his client would plead the Fifth Amendment, and asked that Vitter not be required to appear in court
Judge Robertson denied Asbill's request, saying even someone who plans to plead the Fifth Amendment has to appear in court.
While Asbill did not mention Vitter by name, he has been Vitter's attorney throughout the Palfrey case.
After the judge's ruling, Asbill was asked whether his client would take the Fifth Amendment or decline to appear - risking being held in contempt of court. Asbill declined to comment.
In a lighter moment, Judge Robertson joked that the topic expected to be covered during the trial would be an educational experience for him.
Jury selection and opening statements begin in federal court on Monday.
http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=596&sid=1381009
And there is more on the prosecution side from BLT:
Zuckerman Spaeder partner Steven Salky also made a brief appearance at the hearing. His client, a male witness for the government whose name is under seal, was granted immunity to testify during the grand jury probe into Palfrey's business.Salky said prosecutors should grant him immunity again, if they want him to testify at trial. Robertson told Salky it appeared likely his client would be called to the stand.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Butler said the man’s name would be on the witness list when it was presented to the jury next week.
“If the government wants to go spreading the names around . . . it’s on their heads to do it,” Robertson said.
So, that is number two of government witness that is granted immunity. The other government witness granted immunity is Paula Neble, former employee of Palfrey's business. It does make you wonder what type of criminal acts that both witnesses for the prosecution did in exchange for immunity?
2 comments:
Vitters thought this would all go away and he could continue hiring prostitutes with Media attention. Look even his fellow Republicans cheered him on with his Christian Religious conduct. Now he is back in the spot light. Taking the 5th will be a joke as all the Defense has to use is the video tape of him crying and asking for forgiveness.
Seriously the witnesses should really ask for this case to be dismissed. If the Prosecutions witnesses say they had sex then they broke their contract. If Vitters does say he had sex and not following the contract of the business it's over. As for the jurors this will be the quickest verdict in history. After closing arguments the jurors will leave for lunch and return with a verdict of Not Guilty.
Over and out for sure Jackie. There were soo many irregularities etc its glaringly obvious to the rest of us- they know a jury would see right through it
Post a Comment