Aug
30

Who Is Talking To Your Clients?

If you have ever tried to get the personal address of an FBI agent in an ongoing criminal case, you know what futility means. This sort of information is kept confidential. It is personal, off limits, and even asking for the addresses will yield a storm of consternation. I used to accept that as part of the process.

But then I learned that federal agents are now working through a list of clients represented by a Connecticut lawyer. Most of those interviewed are former clients. But, ominously, some of those interviewed are current clients. This intelligence shocks me, and suggests a bold new aggressiveness on the part of federal agents.

The interviews are taking place as part of a federal investigation of whether a Waterbury defense lawyer, Martin Minnella, has developed too close a relationship with a prosecutor, State's Attorney John Connelly of Waterbury. (Disclosure time: I represent Minnella.) The focus of the investigation seems to be whether Connelly received gifts and/or other things of value in exchange for favorable consideration of Minnella's cases.

So agents have been active in the state's prisons and residential neighborhoods. They are asking clients why they chose Minnella, how much they paid him, how they paid him, and whether he offered them assurances of an outcome. Some of these questions are clearly privileged, so I would like to think that the agents are reminding people that the attorney-client privilege is theirs to waive. But I suspect agents aren't so fastidious. Odds are, they are bulldozing their way into people's lives, trying sugar first, and resorting to spice when sweetness fails.

This is the first time I have become aware of federal agents systematically working their way down a list of a lawyer's clients, and I find the practice shocking. I sat next to the incoming president of the Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association the other day, Jennifer Zito. I urged her to action. I called the president of a sister organization and urged him on, too. Folks don't seem to be as shocked by this as I am.

Perhaps I am naive. But it seems to me that granting agents easy access to clients and former clients is over the line. I can understand an interview if a client reaches out to the feds, but permitting the feds to fish in our own backyards without so much as a protest is giving up too much without a fight.

Do you know whether the feds have been to your client's cell or home lately? Do you care? Is the defense bar asleep at their desks? Or are we all so busy being buddies with the government these days that these things don't matter?

Question: Do you know the home addresses of the agents working your client's case? How do you suppose those agents would react if your investigator turned up at their home some night to ask questions about their conversations with the prosecutor?
Comments
No comments yet
For Display:
Number of states in the U.S.
Confidential:
(Won't be displayed with comment)

Link must be approved, then will show on this page.

x

About Norm Pattis

Norm Pattis is a Connecticut based trial lawyer focused on high stakes criminal cases and civil right violations. He is a veteran of more than 100 jury trials, many resulting in acquittals for people charged with serious crimes, multi-million dollar civil rights and discrimination verdicts, and scores of cases favorably settled.

Personal Website

www.normpattis.com
www.normpattis.com

Law Firm Website

www.pattislawfirm.com
www.pattislawfirm.com

I believe that the state is a necessary fiction and that failing to combat it is the first step toward tyranny.
– Norm Pattis

Disclaimer:

Nothing in this blog should be considered legal advice about your case. You need a lawyer who understands the context of your life and situation. What are offered here are merely suggested lines of inquiry you may explore with your lawyer.

Pattis Video