Here’s where we’re at.
It wasn’t just that the lawyers on the Wednesday afternoon Zoom call said their clients were vindicated after the judge dismissed the case against them. Or that the decision proves the case should not have brought at all.
You can find that talk on any day outside of any court in the country.
This went further. There were accusations that the justice system has been weaponized. Sound familiar? And suggestions that the press did not do enough to seek the truth in the matter. Oh, boy.
Then there’s this: Maybe the lawyers were right this time?
These weren’t just any lawyers. The group representing George Norcross and five co-defendants (Philip Norcross, Dana Redd, William Tambussi, Sidney Brown and John O’Donnell) are some of the most highly regarded attorneys in the state:
- Michael Critchley (Critchley law)
- Kevin Marino (Marino, Tortorella & Boyle)
- Lee Vartan (CSG Law)
- Noel Hillman (Gibbons PC)
- Gerry Krovatin (Krovatin Nau PC)
- Henry Klingeman (Klingeman Cerimele)
They are a dream team that delivered for Norcross and the others without the need of a trial.
They are the group that helped lead Superior Court Judge Peter Warshaw to a 96-page ruling that was amazingly complete in its writings – with Warshaw concluding that even if all of the allegations made last June by Attorney General Matt Platkin in his 111-page indictment were true, they wouldn’t equal a crime.
No extortion. No criminal coercion. No racketeering enterprise.
No case.
Platkin has promised an appeal, because “too many have come to view corruption as simply the way the powerful do business in New Jersey.”
And that corruption has consequences. “It breeds a loss of trust in government and in our public servants, at a time when we must work to protect and restore faith in our institutions,” he wrote.
But there’s no reason to believe an appeal will go anywhere – especially since Platkin’s time in the role will be over in less than a year.
The only question that remains is whether the bluster of the attorneys against Platkin – they questioned his competency, character, integrity and experience – extends past the typical spoils of victory.
Critchley, Marino and the others said all options are on the table when asked if a civil lawsuit was possible.
But this goes deeper than that. This goes to the feeling around the nation that seemingly every case can be called a political witch hunt – and that prosecutors no longer should be free from total immunity.
Vartan suggested that perhaps the OPIA (the office of public integrity and accountability) should look into the matter.
Critchley quoted the Roman poet Juvenal, who is famed for asking, “Who watches the watchmen?” – and then brought the phrase into the modern day.
“Who investigates the investigators?” he asked. “In New Jersey, no one does, and someone should look into this allegation, because just as he (Platkin) keeps talking about corruption – every word out of his mouth is corruption – I say that someone should look at this man, because this appears to be a corrupt investigation.”
One that weaponizes the justice system?
We’ll turn to the judge for that one. Judge Hillman, that is.
Hillman recently joined Gibbons after nearly two decades of distinguished service on the bench of the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey.
Hillman addressed the issue head on.
“This case demonstrates the importance in our democracy of an independent judiciary acting as a check against the excesses of the executive branch,” he said. “That is not a political statement. It’s a fact.
“This, when you take the time to read it, is a masterful opinion, comprehensive, analytical, thoughtful in how it assessed each defendant, separately and individually, faithful to the law and intellectually honest.”
Intellectually honest? Holding those in power accountable?
Isn’t that the job of the press?
Critchley asked the approximately two dozen reporters on Zoom that very question.
“I have a question for the press?” he said. “Don’t you have any questions as to how they could try to resurrect facts that go back almost a decade ago?
“These allegations occurred in 2016, and as is pointed out in the indictment, (are) based upon recorded conversations that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Philadelphia had (and the) U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey had. They didn’t find any crime; they didn’t find any extortion. Nothing changed.”
Critchley questioned how Platkin could take 10-year-old wiretap communication that he did not participate in – one that other law enforcement agencies rejected – and find a crime.
“Don’t you find that, as journalists, inquiring journalists, a little unusual?” he asked.
There was no good answer.
Just an understanding that this is where we are today.
It’s an era where there will be continual suggestions that prosecutors should be prosecuted – and journalists should be held accountable for not holding others accountable. And one where no matter the verdict, someone will say it was “rigged.”
Most of the time it will bluster. A sound bite. A campaign slogan. But sometimes you’ll have to stop and think.
It’s up to you to make the call from there.
