Audio: Former Deputy US Attorney Avi Moskowitz Speaks About The Rubashkin Motion For A New Trial

Moscowitz is a former deputy Assistant US Attorney for the Southern District on New York and is currently a noted defense attorney,

Avi Moskowitz was on Zev Brenner's Talkline show tonight.

Moskowitz based his remarks on the presumption that Judge Linda Reade did not disclose her involvement in planning the aftermath of the May 12, 2008 immigration raid on Agriprocessors. But I believe this presumption – circulated by Nathan Lewin – is misleading.

Rubashkin's lawyers began to move for Judge Reade's recusal long before Rubashkin's trial, but stopped when Judge Reade said her involvement in the raid's planning was limited to logistical issues. Nathan Lewin admitted this in a recent interview and I recall reading about Rubashkin's move to get Judge Reade recused long before the trial in one of the newspaper reports on the case.

it would seem to me the only real issue is whether or not Judge Reade's involvement was limited to those logistical issues.

Nothing I can see in the 170 pages of documents Lewin released shows Judge Reade did anything other than deal with logistical issues, and Nathan Lewin has not cited anything in those documents that proves otherwise.

It seems to me what Lewin is trying to do is fabricate the appearance of impropriety where none exists, and then use that 'impropriety' to get his client a lighter sentence.

When you combine that with Lewin equating Judge Reade with Haman HaRasha, the paradigm for all enemies of the Jewish people, and other similar behaviors, you can see why those of us who are not vested Rubashkin supporters find Lewin's behavior revolting.

I also think Lewin's behavior is bad for the Jewish community as a whole.

Moskowitz said he found the Lewin FOIA documents "very distressing," largely, it seems, based on the number of meetings, not on anything actually found in the documents.

Moskowitz also pointed out Lewin's misrepresentation of a section of the documents, noting that the quote in Lewin's press release is not a quote from the judge (even though it is presented as such) – it is quote from an ICE agent summarizing a meeting. He also notes that Lewin's press release only quotes the first half of that sentence, and points out that the entire sentence is talking about logistics, and that the meaning of the sentence is substantially changed by the way Lewin's press release quotes it.

You'll recognize this because I was the first to point this out. I did this on Thursday and again on Friday, and said that this type of reprehensible behavior is indicative of Lewin's tactics. And so it is.

Moskowitz also said that a judge's involvement in logistical planning – arranging translators, computers, IT staff, defense attorneys, room for them all to work, courtroom space, bailiffs, etc. – is proper and is not a problem, something I also noted last week.

He spoke about the logistical difficulty in arresting and processing hundreds of defendants at one time, and did not think six months of planning was excessive.

He also noted that the government always uses massive force in situations like this, and that it does so to prevent violence – something else I've pointed out several times in the past.

Therefore, the money spent of the raid – $5 million – is not excessive or unusual, especially when the scope of the raid and the number of arrests is taken into account – something else I've pointed out previously.

The bottom line is that based on the documents Lewin released, Moskowitz thinks that there is a possibility Rubashkin's sentence will be sent to another judge for resentencing, but he thinks the possibility of a new trial is remote.

Listening to Moskowitz one can understand how a good attorney could make the case that Judge Reade should have disclosed more information on her involvement in planning the raid's aftermath, and how that attorney might argue for a new trial or resentencing, without resorting to misquotes, misrepresentations, and unsupported claims of antisemitism.

Unfortunately, Moskowitz is not Rubashkin's counsel.

Please click on the gray bars to listen or right click on them to download:

Moskowitz1

Moscowitz2

As always, I urge you to read the original documents and make up your own mind.

Related Posts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

[Hat Tip: Burich.]

Comments

[Menachem Mendel lll]

"I also think Lewin's behavior is bad for the Jewish community as a whole"

[feivel]

Shmarya, you make it sound Avi Moskowitz is really anti this whole motion. If one listens to it, he believes that these finding defiantly disturbing, and at the very least it leaves room for inference that something terribly wrong went on between the judge and prosecution.

This is no CONCRETE PROOF, but it defiantly leaves much room for one to believe this...

Readers: before you scoop up all of Shmarya’s commentary on this interview, you may get a very different idea of Avi Moskowitz’s opinion.

He clearly says that had he been Rubashkin’s Lawyer, he would argue the same thing! (he also calls the 27 year sentence “draconian”...)

[frum chaim]

Editor of this post: Is all your commentary as thorough, and accurate as this analysis of Mr. Moskowotz’s remarks?

In this case, you clearly either don’t understand what he is saying or your intentionally manipulating his words. In no part of this interview does Mr. Moskowitz criticize the actions of Rubashkins attorneys! He is giving his analysis of the situation, and states unequivocally, that these revelations – at the very lease – cast big doubts as to what actually transpired.

He says that he doesn’t currently see a definitive smoking gun, but there is definite problem in the way this situation was handled. Apparently he would handle this in a very similar (or identical) way.

I’m sorry, but how you came up with the commentary in this blog post totally baffles my mind...

[Shmarya]

Shmarya, you make it sound Avi Moskowitz is really anti this whole motion. If one listens to it, he believes that these finding defiantly disturbing, and at the very least it leaves room for inference that something terribly wrong went on between the judge and prosecution.

I think if you had better reading comp skills, you would not say that.

Past that, Moskowitz does very carefully criticize Lewin toward the end of the audio.

[Shmarya]

n this case, you clearly either don’t understand what he is saying or your intentionally manipulating his words. In no part of this interview does Mr. Moskowitz criticize the actions of Rubashkins attorneys!

See my comments immediately above.

[chaim1]

this RBS is not going to go away. I dont know much about it but I read that he got an extra 2 years for perjury.
I suppose that means after swearing on the bible or tanya, i am not sure what they use or what is most holy to the chabad he told lies.
Now i have not heard that he denies this and if this is true what excuse is there for it.
Is one allowed to swear on gods name to get off prison?

[chaim1]

this RBS is not going to go away. I dont know much about it but I read that he got an extra 2 years for perjury.
I suppose that means after swearing on the bible or tanya, i am not sure what they use or what is most holy to the chabad he told lies.
Now i have not heard that he denies this and if this is true what excuse is there for it.
Is one allowed to swear on gods name to get off prison?

[Yosef ben Matitya]

haman?
then rubbishkin would be dassan und avirohm!? no?

[OMG]

I made deliberate decision not to listen to the recording, I am willing to rely on Shmarya description, one, so far I never came across a deliberate bending of the truth by Shmarya, two, Moskowitzs views, as described by Shmarya sound rational, based on my reading of the motion and all accompanying documents.

That said, from the little I know, I will pose to readers this question, how is it possible that Nat Lewin argues in his memorandum of law, that this information was newly discovered with the FOIA lawsuit, and therefore this demand for a new trial should be allowed, because it is newly discovered. The fact is that we saw this argument over here and on VIN for months before the trial. That tells me that all this information was known to the defense way before the newly released FOIA documents. In my view, Guy Cook and Montgomery Brown made a deliberate decision not to ask Judge Reade to recues herself, for whatever reason, but now after losing the trial, they decided in concert with Lewin to argue that if they had the newly released FOIA documents they would have requested Judge Reade to recues herself.

Finally, upon the reply by the prosecution we will get a better view of the full portrait, but regardless, as I said before, Nat shot his load, and it is not impressive.

[effie]

As a defense attorney Moskowitz knows which side his bread is buttered on.

[effie]

I love how Moskowitz says Reade was involved in the planning of the raid about 50x and then near the end of clip one he says that to say Judge Reade was involved in the planing of the raid is an over statement. LOL!

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

OMG,
I was thinking along the same lines as you. One of the documents our moderator posted was Attorney Cook's affidavit:
http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/files/guy-cook-affidavit-rubashkin-motion-for-new-trial-8-5-10.pdf

There is reference to a document, O8-CR-1313-LRR, Document No. 60, (Order Denying Motion to Recuse). Per Mr. Cook, he thought the chances to again try to get Judge Reade to recuse herself were low. It would be nice if we could read what was in that document.

The reason for the "newly discovered" business is to get the court to consider the motion. The district courts won't rehash old meterial.

The only problem is that the "new material" is a bunch of status reports and internal memos not written with the rigor of a legal decision. A lot of those reports may not have been written by participants to the meetings. For example, one synopsis talks about meetings representatives of ICE held on March 17th, 2008 with other Federal agancies and two judges. But, the synopsis does not indicate if everyone attended the entire meeting, if there were separate meetings, and if anyone recused themselves from any of the proceedings.

[neighbor girl]

Any comments on this prison sentence?
wcfcourier.com

WATERLOO, Iowa - A Waterloo resident will go to prison for taking $2 from a driver in January 2009.

Judge Stephen Clarke sentenced Dwayne Williams, 46, to 25 years in prison for a conviction of first-degree robbery.

According to authorities, Williams sneaked into the back seat of a car when the driver stopped at Kwik Star to buy milk. When the man returned to his vehicle and started driving, Williams held a knife to his neck. He fled with change.

[sage]

Good going, NG!!!

Let's see:

$2 gets you 25 years.

$27 Million gets you 27 years.

Now let's hear again from the RCF trolls that SMR got an unfair deal.

[WoolSilkCotton]

++ neighbor girl | August 10, 2010 at 09:06 AM++

Sounds perfect. You sneak into someone's car, hold a knife to his neck and demand money, you've made it clear that you are unfit to live in free society. The amount you were able to rob from the victim is immaterial.

Important lesson for Rubashkinites- when you've made it clear that you are unfit to live in free society, because of lying, cheating, and screwing everyone in sight over a 20 year period- you must be removed from society. Bye bye Sholom Mordecai.

[A E ANDERSON]

At the end of the day, I think the Charles Manson beard did Rubashkin in. To the gentiles of Iowa, judge included, he does have what might be seen as a wild, Manson-like look. I think his defence erred by not making him more rabbinic (he is an ordained rabbi) to reduce the Charles Manson factor.

[WoolSilkCotton]

++I think the Charles Manson beard did Rubashkin in++

I disagree.
It was the cheating, lying, screwing, and stealing that did him in.

[unbelievable]

As if moskowitz would be Rubashkuns lawyer shmaryah would think differently. You jew hater!

[Isa]

"""
I disagree.
It was the cheating, lying, screwing, and stealing that did him in.

Posted by: WoolSilkCotton | August 10, 2010 at 09:52 AM
"""
True but also

It was Ha-Shem hearing the lamentations of the needlessly tortured animals and oppressed workers that did him him.

[Yosef ben Matitya]

those calling everybody jew hater
maybe should think proffessional help!

[Hometown Postville]

NG, Sage, and WSC: Hey, you guys beat me to the punch- I just read the article about the $2 robbery. But I WILL add... did you notice he was NOT identified by his race or religion! Ya think HIS lawyer argued on the grounds of anti-whateverism? or perhaps "he should be pardoned because he planned on giving the $2 to charity and he is such a GOOOOODDDDD man!!!" Oops- bet his lawyer wasn't from New York!
Well, Mr. Rubashkin, I guess you need to hear the truth:
Too bad you committed your crimes in Iowa where the judges don't accept under the table deals.

[dh]

If Mr. Lewin behaved in an unethical manner and he is licensed in New York a formal complaint can be made, and will be investigated. See http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Public_Resources&CONTENTID=40748&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm.

[Desperado]

I'm a retired meat packer and honestly, I have never ran across a guy as distasteful as Rubashkin and the likes of him. I am not Jewish nor a lawyer. Could it be the sentence was the max so the Feds have some kind of bargaining chip going after Chabad RICO crimes? Chabadnik or not, I'm sure Rubashkin would spill his guts to get 15-20 years off his sentence in exchange for his cooperation.

[WoolSilkCotton]

++Desperado | August 10, 2010 at 02:40 PM++

That's probably why Chabad is fighting so hard on behalf of Rubashkin to get him freed.
If SMR were to ever sing for the Feds, there would be busloads of hasidic crooks led away in handcuffs.

[Cheskel]

""""That's probably why Chabad is fighting so hard on behalf of Rubashkin to get him freed. by: WoolSilkCotton""'""

Chabad is not fighting and not leading the campaign. They may have jumped aboard but for sure not started it.

It is lead by activist from many different organizations chassidic,litvish etc.

A pity that Rubashkin is chabad. had he not been maybe this blog wouldn't report on him this much in such a negative way.

[neighbor girl]

22 leading Jewish musicians are teaming up to record a rare musical tribute to imprisoned Sholom Mordechai Rubashkin, COLlive.com has learned.
I didn't see the name of our favorite songwriter, YL.

[sage]

LOL!!!

I don't think that YL's songs would be welcome, to put it mildly.

[sage]

LOL!!!

I don't think that YL's songs would be welcome, to put it mildly.

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

"(which, btw, the judge was found unworthy to judge the case afterwards)"

From a music blog, discussing the "Unity for Freedom" fundraising album:
http://www.thecooljew.net/2010/08/unity-for-freedom-new-all-star-album-in.html

[neighbor girl]

A blog post by Grant Schulte on the desmoines register website credits failedmessiah.com for first breaking the story about SMR's move to Otisville.
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/08/10/rubashkin-moved-to-downstate-n-y-prison/

[neighbor girl]

http://chabad.info/index.php?url=article_en&id=19942
Debbie Maimon has written another article for Yated. It's always interesting how sentences from her articles get cut and pasted into speeches and other articles by SMR's supporters. Dont' think there's much new in her article, although the heading "Justice or just ICE" appears to be new. I'm still trying to figure out what this phrase means.

[sage]

I think this woman should change her name to Debbie Mammom.

[sage]

I think this woman should change her name to Debbie Mammom.

[lou]

awww-I think I love woolsilkcotton!!!! :)

[OMG]

I think it is a good thing that some NK A..H… tried to beat this rabbi; he deserves a good beating, because he is part of the Orthodox cabal trying to impose sharia law, with a Jewish twist, on the people of Israel.