Cuomo Accuser’s Lawyer Alleges He is Interfering in Harassment Investigation
“This is highly improper and we object in the strongest possible terms to this obvious interference with what you have stated would be a ‘thorough and independent’ investigation.”
Debra Katz, who is representing a woman accusing New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo of harassment, claimed he is interfering with the attorney general’s investigation:
Ex-Cuomo aide Charlotte Bennett’s lawyer cited a recent report “that the Executive Chamber is providing staffers with in-house attorneys to meet with them in advance of their investigatory interviews…and to attend those interviews with them.”
“It is my understanding that these attorneys are also ‘debriefing’ staffers after their interviews with investigators,” lawyer Debra Katz wrote in a letter to Attorney General Letitia James.
“This is highly improper and we object in the strongest possible terms to this obvious interference with what you have stated would be a ‘thorough and independent’ investigation.”
Katz noted that accompanying the staffers “will have a chilling effect on potential witnesses or other accusers who wish to come forward.” She claimed she spoke to witnesses who “fear retaliation if they refuse to cooperate with the Executive Chamber’s lawyers.”
“We believe that this offer of counsel constitutes a deliberate attempt by the Governor to interfere with your office’s investigation.”
James’s office did not respond to the Times Union when asked for a comment. I do not know if she has responded to Katz.
But an attorney for a woman who accused Cuomo of groping her spoke to the Times Union about the situation:
“It’s absurd. Why would you be doing that?” said the attorney for the woman who has accused Cuomo of groping her. “It’s not appropriate, and obviously we’re concerned with the ramifications and the effect on witnesses and the quest for the truth.”
He characterized it as a “shadow investigation.”
The woman has not filed a formal complaint. The woman and attorney do not want their names revealed to the public.
The governor’s office still employs the woman.
Cuomo’s acting counsel responded:
Beth Garvey, the governor’s acting counsel, issued a statement late Wednesday: “We fully informed the (attorney general’s) office of the required process with this type of allegation and they said to follow it. The matter was referred to GOER (Governor’s Office of Employee Relations) and (we) informed local law enforcement and that is the full extent of the action.”
Previously, the governor’s administration has distanced itself from GOER, contending it is a separate office that conducts sexual harassment and other employee investigations without involvement from the Executive Chamber. Last June, the governor’s office handled the sexual harassment allegations of another female aide, Charlotte Bennett, without referring the matter to GOER.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
You gotta love the political doublespeak. “We’re following the process” does not in any way address the allegations of impropriety. Yet they will act as if it does.
If Dems aren’t cheating, they aren’t trying.
That last word, there, should be “breathing.”
Certainly shades of the USSR. Political officers who were purposely embedded with Soviets troops to keep them indoctrinated with Soviet ideology and to report those who were considered weak or not sufficiently enthusiastic for the Soviet way of life (i.e., life totally stripped of freedom).
In the Hunt for Red October such an officer was on board. His name was Captain Second Rank Ivan Yurievich Putin; he was killed early on in order that he would not interfere with the planned defection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_commissar
I can’t believe that I’d say this in support of a Soros stooge but the AG’s investigation is the only one that I have a modicum of respect for. The DOJ investigation is probably the biggest joke of all….Governor Nipple Rings’ chief aide’s mother in law is the US Attorney for the SDNY–so I’m sure that the EDNY’s investigation will be totally fair and unbiased [sarcasm off].
Letitia has aspirations for the Governor’s mansion so her hatchet is sharp and ready to start hacking.
Why would EDNY investigators care about protecting a USA of a different district’s daughter-in-law’s boss?
If you think justice is blind…you probably still believe in the Easter Bunny or in Lindsey Graham’s promise to see that justice is done on Russiagate. It’s called “professional courtesy” and it’s now Joebama’s DOJ.
This sounds like #believeallwomen crap. Providing them with counsel may open the door to interference, but what’s the alternative? Should they be expected to walk into the lion’s den without counsel?! Or they should have to hire and pay for their own counsel?! With what money? Doesn’t seem very fair on them, does it?
Calling it improper only makes sense if you start with the premise that the accusation is of necessity true, and the investigation a mere formality, and the witnesses are at no risk if they just speak honestly (ha ha) so they don’t need a lawyer.
The problem is then reporting it back to Cuomo and his circled wagons, so they can get a leg up. As a reminder, there is no discovery phase of a trial at this point. That’s where the corruption comes into play.
Certainly that’s a problem, but what’s the alternative. It wouldn’t be fair to make these witnesses go in without a lawyer, or to make them scrape up the money for a lawyer on their own. Of course Cuomo could pay for independent lawyers for them, but really why would he do that?
“…but really why would he do that?”
Bingo! They’re not independent; they’re working for Cuomo. Therefore Cuomo is their client, and not the staffers who are being interviewed in this Potemkin “investigation” as witnesses. Therefore attorney client privilege covers Cuomo, not the staffers.
Therefore this is the very definition of interference. It’s no different than when any other crime gang leader gets to the witnesses and let’s them know he knows who they are, what they saw, and what the better know not to say about what they saw. It’s witness tampering.
So what’s the alternative? The people complaining don’t seem to give a shit about the witnesses’ rights. That’s typical of the #believeallwomen fanatics.