(TNS)Â Dishonest: Government accountability watchdog Judicial Watch said Friday the organization has filed an ethics complaint against the lawyers for Christine Blasey Ford, who accused — without corroboration — Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault stemming from an alleged incident 35-plus years ago.
“Judicial WatchÂ announced today that itÂ filed a complaintÂ to the Board of Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals of Debra S. Katz, Lisa J. Banks, and Michael R. Bromwich for violating the rules of professional responsibility in their representation of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee during the hearings on the nomination of the Honorable Brett Kavanaugh,” the organization announced on its website.
The complaint says that “by not informing their client Dr. Ford that Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee offered inÂ a letterÂ to ‘fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Fordâ€¦ in California, or anywhere else, to obtain (her) testimony,’ Katz, Banks, and Bromwich violated the following District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct,” said the JW announcement.
Specifically, the complaint alleges violations of:
Rule l.4(a) â€“ A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.
Rule 1.4(b) â€“ A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.
“On September 21, 2018, Chairman Grassley wrote anotherÂ letterÂ to Ms. Katz, where he stated that â€œ[t]he Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview,” said JW. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Fordâ€™s testimonyÂ [emphasis added].”
But during her testimonyÂ September 27, however, Ford indicated that she had hoped the committee would come to her in California — meaning she was never informed the offer was made.
During her testimony, she was asked by special prosecutor Rachel Mitchell about McConnell’s offer, but her attorneys would not allow her to answer directly.
“…I was willing â€“Â I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request,” she said.
Mitchell asked at one point, “Was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else, that the committee had asked to interview you and that â€“ that they offered to come out to California to do so?”
After being counseled off-mic by her lawyers, Ford said she appreciated the offer, adding, “I wasnâ€™t clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and had you â€“ had been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not â€“ it wasnâ€™t clear to me that that was the case.â€œ
That is more evidence that she was not informed by her counsel of the offer.
“Thus, it is clear, by Dr. Fordâ€™s own testimony, that her attorneys did not communicate the Committeeâ€™s multiple offers to take her testimony in California, despite the fact that this was Dr. Fordâ€™s preferred option. In fact, Dr. Ford testified that she ‘wasnâ€™t clear on what the offer was’ and regarded the possibility of investigators taking her testimony in California as ‘unrealistic’ — when in fact it had beenÂ specifically offered,” JW’s announcement said.
Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter â€”Â Click here!