Washington — Former FBI Director James Comey is looking for to dismiss the prison case in opposition to him due to what he claims had been “elementary errors” within the grand-jury course of and interim U.S. Legal professional Lindsey Halligan’s dealing with of the indictment.
Comey’s submitting, submitted to the federal court docket in Alexandria, Virginia, on Friday, displays info revealed throughout a court docket continuing earlier this week, throughout which federal prosecutors mentioned that the grand jury that indicted Comey on two prison counts didn’t vote on the operative indictment.
Protection attorneys as an alternative mentioned that the grand jury rejected the one indictment that Halligan introduced to it, and argued that the federal government’s try and prosecute Comey and not using a “legitimate” indictment violates his Fifth Modification rights.
Along with questioning the validity of the operative indictment, which costs Comey with one rely of mendacity to Congress and one rely of obstructing a congressional continuing, protection attorneys argued that the case needs to be dismissed due to alleged misconduct by Halligan earlier than the grand jury.
Halligan, who was appointed interim U.S. lawyer in late September, mere days earlier than Comey was indicted, was the one prosecutor who introduced the case in opposition to Comey earlier than the grand jury, and solely she signed the indictment. Comey has pleaded not responsible to each counts.
“These errors replicate the reckless and ill-conceived nature of this prosecution: A president intent on prosecuting Mr. Comey earlier than the statute of limitations expired directed the appointment of a White Home aide, Lindsey Halligan, as interim U.S. Legal professional, and she or he then rushed to safe an indictment whereas flagrantly violating primary grand jury guidelines within the course of,” Comey’s attorneys wrote of their bid to dismiss the case. “These grand jury errors warrant dismissal twice over.”
Questions concerning the proceedings earlier than the grand jury gained steam Monday when a federal Justice of the Peace choose recognized what he mentioned was a “disturbing sample of profound investigative missteps” in its dealing with of the case in opposition to the ex-FBI director.
U.S. Justice of the Peace Decide William Fitzpatrick discovered that in Halligan’s presentation to the grand jury, the previous White Home aide made two statements that “on their face look like elementary misstatements of the legislation that would compromise the integrity of the grand jury course of.”
Halligan labored as a former insurance coverage lawyer earlier than becoming a member of Mr. Trump within the White Home for his second time period. She had no prosecutorial expertise when she was tapped to steer the U.S. Legal professional’s Workplace for the Jap District of Virginia.
Grand jury transcripts are sometimes secret, however U.S. Justice of the Peace Decide William Fitzpatrick reviewed them as a part of a separate listening to on the grand-jury materials in Comey’s case and whether or not it needs to be handed over to the protection.
Fitzpatrick mentioned one assertion Halligan made to the grand jury “suggests” that Comey doesn’t have a constitutional proper to not testify at trial. The second comment from Halligan steered that the grand jury “didn’t should depend on solely the file earlier than them” and that there was “extra proof — maybe higher proof” that the Justice Division had that may be used at trial, the choose mentioned.
In an announcement, a Justice Division official mentioned that “when the grand jury transcript is learn in full — as federal judicial ethics require — it reveals that U.S. Legal professional Halligan’s statements had been totally correct. Selectively quoting half-sentences can not create impropriety the place none exists.”
Fitzpatrick additionally raised issues with the proof the Justice Division utilized in its grand jury presentation, discovering that a lot of the fabric used was seized by the FBI in an earlier probe into Daniel Richman, a legislation professor at Columbia College and buddy of Comey’s who was investigated throughout the first Trump administration for allegedly leaking to the media. The investigation was closed in 2021 and no costs had been filed.
Fitzpatrick mentioned the supplies seized from Richman had been the “cornerstone” of Halligan’s presentation to the grand jury that voted to indict Comey, and located that the Justice Division could have used info that was collected however outdoors of the scope of the preliminary Richman search warrants, in addition to doubtlessly privileged info, throughout the grand-jury proceedings in Comey’s case.
The FBI, Fitzpatrick mentioned, “selected to rummage by means of” the fabric it seized greater than 5 years in the past once more this summer time when it started investigating Comey, and “inexplicably, the federal government elected to not search a brand new warrant for the 2025 search” of Richman’s units, “though the 2025 investigation was centered on a distinct individual, was exploring a essentially totally different authorized concept, and was predicated on a completely totally different set of prison offenses.”
A Justice Division official mentioned “the Authorities stays dedicated to following the legislation, respecting grand-jury secrecy, and making certain that judicial selections relaxation on info — not assumptions. The Justice of the Peace choose’s order doesn’t meet that customary.”
Throughout a listening to Wednesday earlier than U.S. District Decide Michael Nachmanoff, who’s presiding over Comey’s case, the choose repeatedly questioned federal prosecutors concerning the validity of the operative indictment and the occasions surrounding the grand-jury proceedings on Sept. 25.
Paperwork made public in Comey’s case present that the grand jury was initially introduced with a three-count indictment, however rejected one of many counts and voted to indict him on the 2 others.
Tyler Lemons, an assistant U.S. lawyer, instructed the choose that after the grand-jury coordinator knowledgeable the U.S. lawyer’s workplace concerning the consequence of the vote, a second indictment was drafted to take away the rejected rely and checklist solely the 2 accepted by the grand jury.
However the admission prompted Nachmanoff to query whether or not the grand jurors had ever been introduced with and voted on the second two-count indictment, or whether or not it was given straight to a U.S. Justice of the Peace choose who was presiding over the return of the indictment.
Lemons mentioned the two-count indictment was given straight to the choose, and argued it was not a “new” indictment. As a substitute, he mentioned it had been edited solely to replicate the grand jury’s choice to cost Comey with mendacity to Congress and obstruction of a congressional continuing.
Nachmanoff then requested if the second indictment was by no means proven to all the grand jury. The prosecutor mentioned that was appropriate. Halligan individually instructed the choose that solely the foreperson for the grand jury and one other grand juror had been within the courtroom when the indictment was introduced to the Justice of the Peace choose. That assertion was additionally backed up in a court docket submitting Wednesday, when the Justice Division mentioned that the “corrected indictment” with solely the 2 counts marked was introduced to the grand jury foreperson and deputy foreperson.
Comey’s attorneys seized on that admission, and argued throughout the listening to that the operative indictment was by no means introduced to the grand jury and by no means voted on.
“There is no such thing as a indictment that Mr. Comey is going through,” Michael Dreeben, certainly one of his attorneys, instructed the choose.
Prosecutors tried to clear up confusion concerning the proceedings and, pointing to the transcript of proceedings when the indictment was returned, wrote in a submitting Thursday that the foreperson instructed the court docket that the grand jury voted on the two-count indictment.
“The whole file eliminates any doubt: The foreperson confirmed the vote. The Court docket acknowledged the vote. The Court docket docketed the two-count true invoice because the operative indictment. Solely Rely One lacked concurrence; Counts Two and Three had been true-billed by at the very least twelve jurors,” they mentioned.
However of their newest bid to dismiss the costs associated to the alleged grand-jury points, Comey’s attorneys argued that “there isn’t a file of the grand jury seeing the brand new indictment — not to mention voting on it.” Prosecutors’ “late-breaking” effort to appropriate the file “can not save the putative indictment,” they continued.
Their submitting, protection attorneys mentioned, “contradicts quite a few different representations that the federal government has made to this Court docket. And it rests on an inaccurate overreading of an ambiguous alternate between the grand jury foreperson and the Justice of the Peace choose.”
The subject of the listening to earlier this week was Comey’s effort to dismiss the indictment on the idea that his prosecution is vindictive and selective. Nachmanoff has but to rule on that movement. Comey can be looking for to have the costs tossed out on the grounds that Halligan was unlawfully appointed interim U.S. lawyer. A special choose is weighing that request and has mentioned she intends to rule earlier than Thanksgiving.
