He defendants seem desperate to separate themselves from Glenn. The judge seeing right through all the smoke.
The defendants claim Shein told Kinkeade on Oct. 16 that he just mentioned the conversation with Swajger to plaintiffs lawyer Mark Lanier in passing and “then this all blew up.”
“Mr. Lanier, however, extrapolated that some conspiracy to intimidate witnesses was afoot. … This extrapolation was unjustified and unreasonable, and does not suggest that any witness tampering occurred,” the defendants said in the response.
Lanier chose not to have Shein testify on Oct. 16 after he raised questions about possible witness tampering based on Shein’s affidavit. In an email on Monday, Lanier took umbrage at the defendants’ allegations in the response.
“The evidence of jury tampering was by the witness, not me,” Lanier wrote in the email, adding, “Judge Kinkeade said there is a prima facia case of attempted influence. He referred it to the FBI, not me.”
Lanier wrote that the defendants are only telling half of the story in their response.
“They continue to parade half-accurate statements ignoring the full truth and thereby distorting the reader’s understanding of what happened. This is akin to citing Dickens for claiming everything was fantastic because he wrote in a ‘Tale of Two Cities,’ ‘It was the best of times.’ Of course, leaving out the next clause, ‘It was the worst of times,’” Lanier wrote.
