Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby has previously, and hypocritically, stated she doesn’t want to argue the merits of her case in the court of public opinion.  Of course she customarily does this in interviews with media who report to the venue of public opinion.

Keeping with this tradition, her office now tells the media about a ridiculous legal filing they are considering, claiming the defense team is calling them names, or something…

BALTIMORE – Prosecutors plan to seek sanctions against the defense attorneys for six Baltimore police officers charged in Freddie Gray‘s death, accusing them of “factual mendacity and legal malarkey.”

“Courts may justifiably recoil when a lawyer refers to opposing counsel as liars, and the State does not do so here, but what term is a lawyer to use to describe their deliberate falsehoods?” Chief Deputy State’s Attorney Michael Schatzow wrote in a motion filed in Baltimore Circuit Court.

Prosecutors accuse the defense of abusing the subpoena process when it obtained the cellphone records of an assistant state’s attorney. They also contend the defense crossed the line by accusing prosecutors of “judge shopping” to obtain a search warrant.

Schatzow’s colorfully written motion begins with a quote from Winston Churchill: “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

[…]  In general, lawyers sanctioned for improper behavior could be fined or publicly reprimanded. Sanctions against lawyers could also have implications for a court case, such as a judge deciding to exclude evidence or — in the most extreme cases — to dismiss a case.

“Judges do occasionally impose sanctions on parties in a case,” Nachtman said. “People can ask for it, but it’s very infrequently given.”

He added: “I don’t know anything the defense team has done in this case that could rise to the level of sanctions.”  Attorneys for the officers did not respond to requests for comment Friday.

[…] In his motion, Schatzow objected to the defense team’s attempt to suppress evidence obtained when prosecutors searched the officers’ departmental cellphones.

In arguing that the evidence should be tossed out, the defense accused the prosecution of “judge-shopping” to get the search warrant for the cellphones approved.

“The Defendants’ Motion to Suppress is a baseless, scurrilous attack on the integrity of a distinguished Circuit Court Judge and a well-respected Assistant State’s Attorney,” Schatzow wrote.

Schatzow also focuses in his motion on the defense’s obtaining the cellphone records of an unidentified prosecutor — in what he calls a “shocking abuse” of the subpoena process.

“The purpose of this abuse can only be seen as an obvious attempt to embarrass and intimidate a prosecutor from performing his duties, just as the purpose of the Motion can only be to entice newspapers to print lies in a continuing effort to poison the jury pool and strengthen defense preliminary motions,” Schatzow wrote.  (read more)