NRA, NY Pretrial Disclosures

Everyone was required by court rule to file witness lists (with estimated time for the testimony) and exhibit lists, yesterday. Here are New York’s exhibits and witnesses, and NRA’s exhibits and witnesses.

Update: and by popular request, here are John Frazer’s exhibits and witnesses, and Woody Phillips’s exhibits and witnesses. Josh Powell has no attorney and has filed nothing.

NY has over 5,000 exhibits; NRA has over 800. NY may call 36 witnesses, NRA may call 47. (All these are maximums).

NY witnesses: Many former directors — Oliver North, Rocky Marshall, Esther Schneider, Judge Journey, Pete Brownell, Ronin Colman, Frank Tait, Sean Malone. Other former insiders- Tony Makris, Josh Powell, Chris Cox.

Some present-day insiders, to be carved up — David Coy, Charles Cotton (who’s marked for four hours), Millie Hallow, Richard Tedrick, Joel Friedman, LaPierre and Frazier. Willes Lee.

Gayle Stanford, LaPierre’s “private travel agent,” is listed for just under four hours.

NY exhibits: on a skim, these seem worth watching: P-1782, 2165, 2167, 2581, 3229, 3262, 3265, 3276, 3568, 3589, 3948, 4019, 4288, 5335. All we know now is the description of each. There are hundreds of invoices relating to the leased jet flights and Ackerman billings.

NRA witnesses and exhibits–hard to see anything surprising or worthy of note.

We were thinking over the NY Attorney General’s motion to exclude evidence, and concluded that at least one part has real merit, and would seriously disrupt the NRA strategy. NRA leadership’s core argument is the supposed “course correction,” “360 review,” whatever you want to call it. “We’ve put in safeguards against this happening again.”

It’s of course BS. If they knew that the organization needed a course correction, why did they purge its president, VP, attorney for the board, outside attorney, head of ILA, and 10-20 directors, when those people called for a course correction? Why did they have Marion Hammer write to the board, saying those people got what was coming to them, and if anyone imitates them, they’ll get the same? Why did they terminate Willes Lee’s succession to the presidency when he said he would not lie to the board?

Apart from being nonsense, NY’s argument that it shouldn’t factor in the first, the jury, trial seems convincing. The first trial is to establish whether misconduct occurred in the past (and whether money should be paid over that). The second, judge, trial would be to determine what ought to be done in response — appoint a financial monitor, fire LaPierre, etc.

Having reformed has nothing to do with the first trial, which is about past misconduct of certain people. It would be something for the second trial, on what should be done about it. If police bust a burglar, and he wants to claim that he’s reformed and given up theft, that alleged reform is not a defense to the charges, though the judge might take it into account at sentencing. It doesn’t deny the crime, although it may affect what the judge does about it.

NRA leadership’s main defense — just about its only defense — may be barred from the jury trial. The trial may be shorter than six weeks, in that event. LaPierre took leased corporate jet trips to vacations, at NRA expense. What’s the defense, it clearly happened? He used the jets to fly his family around when he wasn’t with them? Same thing. He let Associated TV siphon off millions, while he accepted vacations and yacht stays from its owner? What witness does NRA call to deny this, when it all clearly happened? Hundred of thousands went to Ackerman on invoices saying only “out of pocket expenses.” Here are the invoices. Who can deny it? Etc., etc. Eliminate the “course correction,” narrow the issue to “did these things happen — yes or no?” and NRA leadership has a very short defense, indeed.