Legal News

Will Bill Get His Excellent (Euro) Adventure? The DOJ Hopes Not

By Ashby Jones

Should Bill Lerach, on probation after his jail sentence, be allowed to take a 44-day European vacation this summer?

Some might say, who cares? But those “some” would not include the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles, which is fighting the request. Click here for Josh Gerstein’s article on Politico; here for the DOJ’s objection.

So why is the DOJ trying to kill Bill’s buzz? It seems a series of comments the famed plaintiffs’ lawyer has made throughout the months has irritated the you-know-what out of the prosecutors who brought the case. They complain that Lerach has made a series of public statements seeking to minimize the seriousness of his guilty plea and seems to be backing away from offers he made during the sentencing process in 2008 to perform community service by speaking to lawyers about the need to avoid the transgressions he committed. They’re apparently not thrilled by the prospect of Lerach traipsing through Europe with a large entourage shortly after his prison release in March.

Gerstein writes that prosecutors seem “particularly galled” by a recent interview Lerach gave to the California Lawyer. “I’m not ashamed of myself in any way,” Lerach said in the interview. He said there was “no question this was a politically motivated prosecution,” but also added,”You can be targeted and be guilty. They’re not mutually inconsistent.”

In their request, Lerach’s attorneys cited various family reasons for making the trip soon, including Lerach’s desire to take along elderly relatives. They also mentioned Lerach’s son’s “special interest in the Holocaust and WWII” and noted Lerach’s service on the U.S. Holocaust Council.

So far, writes Gerstein, the tea leaves don’t look great for Lerach’s European sojourn. Judge John Walter, who gave Lerach the maximum 24 month sentence permitted under his plea agreement, recently rejected Lerach’s attorneys’ request to file the itinerary for the trip under seal. Lerach’s lawyers cited “security reasons” for the request, but Walter rejected the motion to seal. “Denied without prejudice - no showing of good cause,” he wrote.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on January 13, 2010 (boomark / email).