MANHATTAN (CN) — Private lawyers tapped as prosecutors asked the defendant to foot the technology bill for holding the proceedings remotely. Witnesses from around the globe prepared to testify, and attorneys from across the country worried about how to best serve their client in New York. There would have been no jury.
It was supposed to have been the first criminal trial in Manhattan Federal Court for the coronavirus age, but the plan fell apart — with the man on the dock complaining about a constitutional and public-health crisis in the making.
“It was pretty obvious to me that if the trial was going forward, it would have deprived me of my constitutional right to a fair trial, with potentially devastating results for me and my family,” Steven Donziger, a now-disbarred environmental attorney fighting for his freedom, said during a series of interviews conducted before and after the adjournment.
Facing misdemeanor contempt-of-court charges, Donziger’s initial trial date today long appeared certain, and his prospects looked grim. A judge rejected three of his requests for an adjournment and brushed aside entreaties by his attorneys in Seattle, Washington; Eugene, Oregon; Cape Cod, Massachusetts; and the coronavirus hotspot of Dallas, Texas, not to make them travel to New York for quarantine and trial.
But on Friday, U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska unexpectedly changed her mind, excoriating Donziger for what she called delay tactics.
“That we find ourselves in this situation is deeply disturbing, especially given the court’s view that it is largely the result of the machinations of Mr. Donziger and his legal team,” Preska wrote, setting a new trial date for Nov. 3.
Denying that accusation, Donziger argued that Preska’s ruling showed her distaste for him.
“This isn't a jury trial right now,” the 58-year-old Donziger said. “She is the fact-finder, and she's already obviously prejudged it. So she should not be overseeing this case. She should really recuse herself.”
‘I’m No Spring Chicken’
Behind Preska’s frustrated 5-page ruling, there is another inside story of the collapse of the would-be debut criminal trial for the Southern District of New York since it scaled down operations in March. The tale involves a defense attorney threatening to sue his own client, a defendant expected to fund technology that he claims violates his rights, and a uniquely complicated case with a court record that spans decades.
Every court proceeding in the age of the coronavirus has its challenges, probably none so more than the case of Steven Donziger.
Still a fresh-faced lawyer in his late 20s when he began the case that defined his career, Donziger toiled for decades to help indigenous Ecuadoreans win a $9.8 billion verdict against Chevron for polluting the Amazon rainforest in 2012. During the oil giant’s blistering counteroffensive, he has encountered strange setbacks and a string of judicial oddities that he calls the “Donziger exception.”
When Chevron filed a lawsuit branding Donziger a racketeer, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan rejected his request for a Manhattan jury trial on the grounds that no money damages were sought. Donziger would be on the hook for potentially millions in legal fees anyway after the judge labeled him a fraud. Judge Kaplan’s ruling went out of its way to characterize Donziger’s conduct as criminal, but federal prosecutors never charged him with any of the offenses the judge laid at his feet. And when the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to prosecute, Kaplan personally charged Donziger criminally for contempt of court.
Based on Kaplan’s ruling, Donziger was stripped of his law license, even though the referee who presided over his disbarment proceedings passionately attested to the former human rights attorney’s fitness to practice law.
