Former Minnesota Viking quarterback Daunte Culpepper has been cleared of charges in the Lake Minnetonka boating incident from last season, reports Associated Press:
A judge ruled there wasn’t probable cause to determine a crime was committed by Culpepper, one of four Minnesota Vikings accused of misdemeanor lewd conduct during the cruise last fall on a suburban lake.
Considering all the evidence and witnesses, I consider this an incredibly impressive feat for an attorney to accomplish.
In addition to Laurie Coleman having her own representation, I find it notable that she is now being represented by Earl Gray himself. Norm Coleman’s attorney, Doug Kelley, is across the river in Minneapolis.
I guess this will be a step up for Gray after defending a football player who masturbated on a passed-out woman’s face: http://www.startribune.com/local/17554214.html
Earl Gray is one of the best, if not the single best, criminal defense attorneys in Minnesota. He has an excellent reputation with judges and is a charismatic, effective advocate for his clients. If I were ever accused of a crime and had an unlimited budget I would probably hire Earl Gray myself.
My question is this: I was told by conservatives that this entire story about Norm and Laurie receiving money was made up by the Franken campaign to try to affect the November 4th election and would be dropped immediately thereafter. Why hasn’t it been dropped or dismissed? And why do the principals need the best and most expensive criminal defense attorneys in town to represent them?
He makes a nice tea too.
What’s your point? I agree with A-Train — there is nothing wrong with (or particularly newsworthy about) hiring the best counsel available, and Mr. Gray’s track record speaks for itself.
What is interesting is that the Colemans have lawyered up separately, which tells me that each of them are looking at different allegations. Was Mrs. Coleman involved in some shady dealings of her own, apart from what her husband did/didn’t?
Laurie and Norm may have legitimate conflicts of interest that require different counsel, but perhaps the best reason Norm wants a different lawyer than Laurie is that Norm’s senate campaign is going to be paying all his legal bills. They are calling it a “politically inspired legal action” and paying for it out of campaign funds. I’d love to see any real evidence suggesting it’s “politically inspired.”
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/17/senators-lawyer-denies-corruption-allegations/
I think A Train is right. A republican “friend” of mine is openly bragging about how he’s helping pay Norm’s legal fees. So I figured that Norm’s Campaign money must be footing the bill somehow, unless he started some separate legal defense fund that his supporters can donate to.
I also can’t help but wonder if having separate lawyers allows Norm to reveal information to his own Lawyer that he doesn’t want Laurie to know about.
Ain’t it amusing how Repugs like to pour the hate on trial lawyers, but then when they f*** with the public trust, they go to the best Trial Lawyer they can find.
One question that should be answered, even if nothing illegal was done is this:
What kind of value does an over-the-hill, never successful actress and model bring to an insurance company that is worth 100K per year? It is clearly funneling money to Coleman from his rich buddy.
Now, now, BobT, I think you’re vastly discounting the value of the Blo-N-Go. I bet Hays has installed them in all the lavatories on premises.
Yowsa… Smokin’ hot comments even including hot tea dude. I sure have heard a lot of brief statements about the “strange relationship” the Colemans have. Garrison Keillor for one said something to that effect, going so far to say that any St Paulite knows about it. What is this strange relationshipshipship, (Prince), they have? Inquiring minds want to know.
By trial laywers, Republicans are referring to lawyers who handle civil claims. These are not trial lawyers in the sense that the term is used.
Criminal Defense Lawyers are not Trial Lawyers. As a matter of fact, their associations are adverse in their relationship meaning, what’s good for the interest of Defense Attorneys is not necessarily good for Trial/Plantiff Attorneys.
Aaron and HM might want to take another look at the facts before they go disparaging Mr. Gray’s accomplishments…