Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Christie Lackey Bridget Kelly's Desperate Discovery Gambit

Gov. Chris Christie's (R-NJ) former deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, said through her lawyer Monday evening that she will invoke her 5th Amendment right not to testify before a state legislative panel. She is also refusing to turn over documents subpoenaed by the panel, according to the Bergen Record. Kelly's attorney, Michael Critchley, Sr., told the panel that the requested information "directly overlaps with a parallel federal grand jury investigation" while also invoking Kelly's general right to personal privacy. "Unfettered access to, among other things, Ms. Kelly's personal diaries, calendars and all of her electronic devices amounts to an inappropriate and unlimited invasion of Ms. Kelly's personal privacy and would also potentially reveal highly personal confidential communications completely unrelated to the reassignment of access lanes to the George Washignton Bridge."
That privacy argument?  Not going to fly.  It must have been tough to write that with a straight face. 

The 5th Amendment is one thing.  Document discovery is another thing entirely, and she will turn those docs and records over or face serious charges.
Gov. Chris Christie's (R-NJ) former deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, said through her lawyer Monday evening that she will invoke her 5th Amendment right not to testify before a state legislative panel. She is also refusing to turn over documents subpoenaed by the panel, according to the Bergen Record. Kelly's attorney, Michael Critchley, Sr., told the panel that the requested information "directly overlaps with a parallel federal grand jury investigation" while also invoking Kelly's general right to personal privacy. "Unfettered access to, among other things, Ms. Kelly's personal diaries, calendars and all of her electronic devices amounts to an inappropriate and unlimited invasion of Ms. Kelly's personal privacy and would also potentially reveal highly personal confidential communications completely unrelated to the reassignment of access lanes to the George Washignton Bridge."
I've got a feeling this case is going to keep us interested for a long time.

No comments: