Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzle03
This is such a terrible misinterpretation of the article.
First, it's Judge Sand, not Kaplan. Kaplan is presiding over criminal cases, except bitar's.
Great. I'm glad it's not Judge Kaplan. I hope Judge Sand isn't easily antagonized.
Quote:
Second, Eolis is not blaming the judge for anything and two days is not a ridiculous amount of time for a judge to review a large and likely complex settlement. And others have said basically what Wendeen said, that a judge is unlikely to deny it in a case like this.
Please don't misquote me. What I said was, "Wendeen opts to position the judge as a potential bad guy in all this."
Potential bad guy.
Quote:
I'm not sure how you flip her making that statement to comfort people, that a judge is unlikely to object to the deal, into her blaming the judge.
In my experience, people don't like to be told how unreasonable it would be for them to act in any way other than the way someone wants them to. Talking about "esteemed lawyers," behavior that would be "unfathomable," and "torpedoing" a deal is incendiary language. It's manipulative, and looks like an attempt to box someone into a corner. People with authority (like judges) especially don't like that kind of nonsense.
Quote:
The fact of the matter is that if it is signed and submitted to a judge and he rejects it, you can blame the judge, though that's not what was being suggested.
And if there is a gag order, explicit or implied, can you blame the person who violates the gag order? It's clear that Wendeen's source isn't supposed to be talking, and
knows that they aren't supposed to be talking. If you have any doubt about that, read it again:
"The breaking story emanated from a highly knowledgeable source, who allowed the word to get out, on the condition it could not be traced back."
That sounds like someone who knows that the people involved are going to be pissed about the leak. "Whatever you do, don't let it be traced back to me. I could lose my job/get sued/whatever."
The deal hasn't closed. It got close once before, and something happened in the 11th hour. Anyone who wants the deal to close this time should be going out of their way
NOT to antagonize anyone who has the power to prevent it from closing. And I assure you, in any confidential negotiations, leaks are antagonistic. Why give anyone an excuse to back out?
Quote:
As to why they arent speaking, they've been under a no public disclosure of settlement talks order the whole time. They can't speak until it is ok'd.
And yet, someone is speaking. Someone who shouldn't be. Do you really think there's anything to be gained by this? Do you think Isai or Arlo are happy about the leak? People who want to control information do not like having that control taken away from them.
Consider the DOJ's point of view: Either there is someone in their office who is leaking, and that makes them look incompetent. Or the people on the other side of the deal don't respect them enough to keep their mouth shut. That makes them look like chumps.
I get that you think that you deserve to know what's going on. But this is not Howard et al trying to keep you from finding out that they screwed you. This is a negotiation between people who are ultimately trying to help you get your money back, dancing an incredibly delicate dance on a floor covered in eggshells. Distracting them seems like a bad idea.
I wonder how much money Wendeen has locked up on FTP. She seems more eager to please people than she is to protect their interests.
One last thing: if Wendeen releases evidence that this was leaked to her with Arlo and Isai's consent, I will issue an immediate retraction and apology. Hell, I'll send her flowers. I would love to be wrong about all of this.
Last edited by Lovelander; 07-30-2012 at 11:49 PM.
Reason: bad anagram: typed 'night' when I meant 'thing'