If you have ever watched a TV show about lawyers such as Perry Mason, Matlock, The Good Wife or Boston Legal, you have seen how they use previous cases that were decided in court to convince the judge or jury to take their side.
If you are like me, you have wondered how judges can remember all of those cases in their heads. As it turns out, they can’t. They also can’t or won’t look them up either.
Former Trump lawyer and current ex-convict Michael Cohen and his lawyer merely fabricated court cases using AI technology. When Cohen was convicted of campaign finance and lying to Congress, his lawyer produced court cases that were too good to be true and sure enough they weren’t.
So why did it take them so long to catch on? Maybe it took no time at all. Try this on for size.
At the time of his trial, Cohen was the fair-haired boy of the Democratic party. He was supposed to have evidence that would send President Trump to prison.
He would be testifying that Trump asked him to inflate the value of his properties in order to secure loans. But, he had to testify before the court, he was asked about that and Cohen changed his story and admitted that Trump never did that.
So, now he had to be punished by the Deep State and now they have him. Is that what happened? I really don’t know, but how many times have we seen the same thing? If you choose the “wrong” side, they will seek to destroy you.
Trump attorney Cliff Robert immediately asked the court to throw the case out since it was Cohen who was the key witness and now he’s not. So, the evidence totally disappeared but the indictment based on that evidence was not. Tell me again how these prosecutions are not political.
Robert immediately asked Judge Engoron to dismiss the case after Cohen, a key witness, told the court that Trump never instructed him to inflate his assets. That motion was, of course, denied by the Judge who had already determined Trump was in the wrong before the trial even began.
President Trump immediately got up and walked out of the courtroom and addressed the press:
Trump defiantly storms out of courtroom after judge denies motion to dismiss in New York civil fraud trial.
— AF Post (@AFpost) October 25, 2023
On December 12th, New York U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman questioned the validity of three citations that claimed there was precedent set by the Second Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals to allow Cohen to terminate the 2018 court-ordered supervised release early.
Judge Furman gave Cohen’s counsel, David M. Schwartz, until December 19th to provide the decisions cited in the filing, according to a December 14th report from Newsweek.
Judge Furman said that if they could not provide the citations, then they would be required to provide a “thorough explanation” as to how a motion was made, citing “cases that do not exist and what role, if any, Mr. Cohen played in drafting or reviewing the motion before it was filed.”
In a December 28th e-mail to Judge Furman, E. Danya Perry, who represents Michael Cohen “with respect to his reply letter”, wrote:
To summarize: Mr. Cohen provided Mr. Schwartz with citations (and case summaries) he had found online and believed to be real. Mr. Schwartz added them to the motion but failed to check those citations or summaries. As a result, Mr. Schwartz mistakenly filed a motion with three citations that—unbeknownst to either Mr. Schwartz or Mr. Cohen at the time—referred to nonexistent cases. Upon later appearing in the case and reviewing the previously-filed motion, I discovered the problem and, in Mr. Cohen’s reply letter supporting that motion, I alerted the Court to likely issues with Mr. Schwartz’s citations and provided (real) replacement citations supporting the very same proposition. ECF No. 95 at 3. To be clear, Mr. Cohen did not know that the cases he identified were not real and, unlike his attorney, had no obligation to confirm as much. While there has been no implication to the contrary, it must be emphasized that Mr. Cohen did not engage in any misconduct.