THIS IS THE PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT THAT THE SUPREME COURT BURIED. IT IS THE RECORD OF NEW YORK DA ALVIN BRAGG. PART THREE

Review

The two earlier Supreme Court newsletters established the U.S Supreme Court’s burial of the professional misconduct of New York DA Alvin Bragg. These newsletters are here: https://therunnymedereport.substack.com/p/the-supreme-court-buries-professional and here: https://therunnymedereport.substack.com/p/the-supreme-court-buries-professional-ee1.

Then Part One of DA Alvin Bragg established his professional background and blue-ribbon credentials in education, training and skill in the field of protecting defendant rights in the prosecution of criminal cases. This newsletter is here: https://therunnymedereport.substack.com/p/this-is-the-professional-misconduct

Then Part Two of DA Alvin Bragg established his professional misconduct from being passive while his lead prosecutor, Mark Pomerantz, published damning comments against Donald Trump to the news media from his prosecutorial investigation. Those comments amounted to removing Trump’s legal right to be presumed innocent and would prejudice any potential jury against Trump in the event DA Bragg decided to indict him. The link to this newsletter is here: https://therunnymedereport.substack.com/p/this-is-the-professional-misconduct-098

Review of The Applicable Rules

As documented in Part Two of DA Bragg, DA Bragg was obligated to comply with Rules 3.6(a), 3.8(f) and 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. In short, he was obligated to not materially prejudice the adjudication of the case and not to heighten the condemnation of the accused. Most importantly, under those same rules he was required to exercise reasonable care to assure that none of his investigators and assistants did any of this either. Here again are these Rules of Professional Conduct: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents/

What will follow below will show that DA Bragg remained passive as former Lead Prosecutor Pomerantz piled on even more damning negative extrajudicial publicity against Trump.

Alvin Bragg’s Self-Interest in Breaking the Rules of Conduct

It is axiomatic that people knowingly take actions in light of their self-interest. It is also obvious that people will not knowingly take actions or assume responsibilities that will put them in harm’s way.  

To understand DA Alvin Bragg, therefore, is to understand that he would never intentionally break the rules of professional conduct if he thought, even for a moment, that the Grievance Committee of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York (the state bar association) would prosecute him for the violations. Nor would he break the rules if he had any concern at all about what his judiciary overseers— from Juan Merchan (the trial judge presiding over the hush money case) all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court — would do.

To put this another way, DA Bragg knew ahead of time that all of these justice institutions had his back as he made the decision to break the rules of professional conduct in acquiescing to Mark Pomerantz’s statements to the news media.

Pomerantz’s Condemnation against Trump Benefits DA Bragg

To review, former Lead Prosecutor Pomerantz published his condemnation comments to the New York Times against Trump that overwhelmingly inferred Trump’s guilt, on February 23, 2022, on investigative allegations that only the prosecutor’s office knew and that was never subject to cross examination as corroborated in this link.

Knowing the depth of those guilty inferences, DA Bragg allowed the people of New York to be influenced by them for nearly a year. DA Bragg would reap the benefits of this Trump is guilty campaign through the news media in the event he were to indict Trump from Pomerantz’s extrajudicial allegations.  

Yet there was more. Indeed, on February 7, 2023, Pomerantz caused to be published by Simon and Schuster, the tell-all book, “People vs. Donald Trump: An Inside Account” in which he digs in much deeper to tell the public how guilty Mr. Trump was by virtue of what he personally investigated while he was one of the lead prosecutors in the case.

As documented in the last newsletter (DA Bragg Part Two), DA Bragg was under a duty of reasonable care to not allow this to happen. Nor did Bragg condemn it. Both of these duties are required by the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Then DA Bragg officially indicted Trump on March 30, 2023, based on the Pomerantz guilty allegations from the New York Times and from his book.

Consider: the people of New York already knew that the prosecutor’s office harbored no doubts about Trump’s guilt on alleged facts that only that office knew from what Pomerantz had said in the New York Times. Consider: they also knew, that according to the prosecutor’s office (from what Pomerantz published in the New York Times), it was a grave failure not to pursue criminal charges against Trump. This information is documented in Bragg Part Two as linked again here: https://therunnymedereport.substack.com/p/this-is-the-professional-misconduct-098

By DA Bragg announcing that he indicted Trump, it quickly became a recognition of one great reality. Even though it was a grave injustice not to pursue criminal charges against Trump according to Pomerantz, it no longer was a grave injustice because DA Bragg fulfilled what Pomerantz had already concluded more than a year earlier. That Trump was guilty from the New York Times announcement and the tell-all book, making a trial by an independent, unbiased jury unavailable.

DA Bragg thus had every reason to be confident of an easy conviction on the 34 felony counts due to the fact that he breached the performance of his professional duty of reasonable care to prevent this negative extrajudicial publicity against Trump with a fall-back breach of duty of condemning it if preventing it was no longer available.

After all, not fulfilling his professional duty would insure Trump would be found guilty. Indeed, DA Bragg had every reason to be assured he could do this because he knew that the grievance committee of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court (the state bar association), Juan Merchan the trial judge, and all justice officials all the way up to the Supreme Court had his back.

The Message to the Readers

The American people, for far too long, have been totally in the dark about what the prosecutors, the state bar associations and the judges have been up to. The foundation to understanding them is derived from what the rules of professional conduct have to say, particularly in the field of the abuse of negative extrajudicial publicity against suspects and accused defendants. Once that understanding is gained, it is then up to the American public to be able to use that information so that they can do their own discerning in evaluating the conduct of these justice officials in this publicity field.

There is Much More to this Assessment in Part Four.