1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Prosecutors ‘gravely injured’ his reputation…

Prosecutors

Prosecutors ‘gravely injured’ his reputation with misleading assertions, SCOTUSblog founder Goldstein says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 21, 2025, 9:20 am CDT

Updated: SCOTUSblog co-founder Tom Goldstein is alleging that federal prosecutors “seriously misled the court” and should be rebuked for misstatements in public filings in a tax fraud case against him.

Goldstein criticized the government in a bid to compel production of grand jury testimony from an office manager who received an offer of cryptocurrency and other compensation from Goldstein. The government had characterized the compensation as an apparent attempt to influence a witness, an assertion contested by Goldstein in a March 18 document filed in federal court for the District of Maryland.

Goldstein’s court filing said his reputation was “gravely injured by the government’s false and misleading allegations in public filings,” including allegations that he likely tried to bribe the potential witness.

Goldstein said the court should address at a March 25 hearing “whether sanctions against the government are warranted—in the form of a rebuking the government on the record—for its lack of candor.”

Bloomberg Law and Law360 have coverage.

Goldstein, a former high-stakes poker player and U.S. Supreme Court litigator, has been accused in a federal indictment of hiding millions of dollars in income and cryptocurrency transactions on tax returns. He is also accused of using his boutique law firm to help cover his debts and of making false statements to mortgage lenders.

Prosecutors made allegations about attempting to influence a witness while seeking to keep in place conditions of Goldstein’s pretrial release.

The witness was a manager who had decided to leave Goldstein’s former firm, Goldstein & Russell. Prosecutors had said Goldstein was apparently trying to influence the manager when he offered the departing employee a $10,000 bonus, student loan payments and cryptocurrency.

After Goldstein sought disclosure of the grand jury testimony, the government said in a court filing the witness “has explained that defendant did not suggest that the witness not assist in the investigation, and the witness cannot testify as to defendant’s subjective intent.”

Goldstein’s lawyers characterized those caveats as a “belated confession” that discloses “exculpatory witness testimony” by the manager.

Goldstein also said there is another explanation for offering compensation to the manager: to retain the manager to assist the firm in gathering materials responsive to government subpoenas.

Goldstein’s court filing also criticized the government for alleged “false and misleading allegations” that he “used cryptocurrency accounts in violation of his release conditions” and “that he has access to millions of dollars in secret cryptocurrency accounts.”

The government’s lack of candor on the witness issue is “part of a broader pattern of misleading statements and omissions in the litigation over Mr. Goldstein’s release conditions,” the court filing said.

Updated March 27 at 10:37 a.m. to report that the office manager received an offer of cryptocurrency and compensation.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Suspect in custody after courthouse explosion…

Criminal Justice

Suspect in custody after courthouse explosion that injured several people

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 25, 2024, 4:05 pm CDT

Updated: Police were questioning a suspect Wednesday afternoon after he was arrested following an explosion at the Santa Maria Courthouse in California.

The Wednesday morning explosion was caused by an improvised explosive device, the Santa Barbara County sheriff’s office said in a series of posts on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Police later identified the suspect as Nathaniel McGuire, 20, of Santa Maria, California, who had been scheduled for arraignment on a firearms charge on the day of the explosion.

McGuire allegedly threw a bag at a screening station when he entered the courthouse, causing an explosion in the hallway near the arraignment courtroom, according to a Sept. 25 press release by the Santa Barbara County sheriff’s office.

McGuire then ran to the parking lot, where he was detained by authorities, the sheriff’s office said. He was wearing body armor underneath his jacket when apprehended.

Six people injured in the explosion were treated and released from the Marian Regional Medical Center in Santa Maria on Wednesday, the New York Times reports, citing information from a hospital spokesperson.

Darrel Parker, executive officer of the Santa Barbara Superior Court, said the injured people were thought to be bystanders, rather than court employees.

McGuire has been charged with felonies that include attempted murder, manufacturing an explosive device and use of an explosive device for attempted murder.

A witness at the courthouse, Shane Mellon, said he heard a loud bang, according to a report by KSBY cited by the Associated Press. The bailiff evacuated Mellon and others. In front of the courthouse, Mellon saw a smoldering sweater and saw a man screaming while four or five people were on top of him trying to restrain him.

“I think this could have been way worse than it was if not for the deputies just jumping on top of that guy,” Mellon told the broadcast station.

Other publications with early coverage of the explosion included Noozhawk and Reuters.

Updated Sept. 26 at 4:15 p.m. new information from the New York Times and the Santa Barbara County sheriff’s office’s press release.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Accusation that naked ‘idiot’ lawyer injured…

Ethics

Accusation that naked ‘idiot’ lawyer injured Phish fan while rushing stage leads to legal discipline for writer

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 30, 2024, 2:38 pm CST

A Colorado lawyer’s “demeaning and unprofessional language” and threats of disclosure in a demand letter seeking $50,000 for her client’s injuries at a Phish concert have led to a public censure.

Lawyer Sarah Jay Schielke of Colorado received the public censure for her demand letter to another lawyer who is identified as V.D. in a Jan. 25 stipulation to discipline.

Law360 covered the case, while the Legal Profession Blog published parts of the Jan. 26 opinion imposing censure and a KDVR report on her successes as a civil rights lawyer.

Schielke’s letter alleged that V.D. rushed the Phish stage, while naked, at a February 2022 concert in Mexico. Schielke claimed that her client, who was a close friend, was injured when the naked lawyer pushed her while on his way to the stage. The client had previously had spinal surgery.

In the letter, Schielke called V.D. a “violent psychopath,” “a violent a- -hole,” “an idiot,” “obnoxious,” “stupid,” “a shameless, ridiculous boasting s- – -,” “a terrible f- – -ing attorney” and “a disgrace to the Colorado Bar, the Phish community and [his] family.”

Schielke sought $50,000 for her client plus an agreement to never touch or contact her again and to stand at least 25 feet away from her at future Phish concerts. In exchange, the letter said, Schielke’s client would not sue over the incident and would not disclose it to the lawyer’s employer and his undergraduate university.

If the lawyer did not agree to the proposal, Schielke wrote, she would file lawsuits in the United States and Mexico, issue a press release, report the incident to police, and release an unredacted video said to show the lawyer interacting with security at the concert.

The opinion by the presiding disciplinary judge of the Colorado Supreme Court said Schielke’s conduct violated two disciplinary rules. One says a lawyer representing a client can’t use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay or burden a third person. The other says a lawyer can’t threaten criminal, administrative or disciplinary charges to obtain an advantage in a civil matter.

Schielke had no prior discipline, and she cooperated in the disciplinary proceedings.

Schielke forwarded this statement to the ABA Journal, which was also provided to Law360:

“This guy decided to strip naked and violently stampede through a peaceful crowd at a beach concert. In so doing, he injured and traumatized someone I love and care about. Then, using his actual name, he went online and bragged about it, in multiple public forums, causing my friend even more distress. It was a lot.

“I stand by everything I said about the guy, but I recognize that none of that content should have been included in a demand letter from an attorney. I lost my objectivity, and that was a mistake. Lesson learned. When you’re close to the client and emotions are high, the better way to help a best friend is to just refer the case out.”

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Chicago isn’t liable for bicyclist injured…

Tort Law

Chicago isn’t liable for bicyclist injured by pothole on road that wasn’t designated bike route, court rules

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 2, 2024, 3:37 pm CST

A bicyclist who wasn’t on a designated bicycle route when he was injured by a pothole can’t recover from the city of Chicago, even though there was a Divvy bicycle rental station nearby, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled last month.

The state supreme court ruled against bicyclist Clark Alave, who said he was thrown from his bicycle after striking the pothole in 2019, fracturing his teeth, injuring his hip and shoulder, and causing facial cuts and scars.

The Chicago Sun-Times, the Cook County Record and Capitol News Illinois via WTTW have coverage.

The Illinois Supreme Court interpreted the Illinois Tort Immunity Act, which said cities have a duty to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition for use by people “intended and permitted” to use the property.

Chicago permits bicyclists to use any roadway that motorists use, but that doesn’t mean that bicyclists are intended to use all those roadways, the Illinois Supreme Court said in its Dec. 14 opinion.

In Alave’s case, he was riding on a road without a designated bike lane and signage, indicating that the city did not intend him to be using the road, the state supreme court said.

The presence of a Divvy station about 100 feet away only establishes that the city permitted bicycling on the road—not that it intended it, the state supreme court said. The Illinois Supreme Court noted that city code allows bicyclists to ride on the sidewalk to access the nearest bicycle lane; in this case, the nearest bicycle lane was one block away, the city said.

Michael S. Keating, who filed an amicus brief on behalf of the advocacy nonprofit Ride Illinois, said in a statement the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision affirmed “harsh precedent” that distinguished between permitted and intended users of roads, according to the Cook County Record.

“This holding simply does not reflect that massive surge in bicycling that has occurred in Chicago, the suburbs and throughout the rest of Illinois,” Keating said. “On that fact alone I think the Illinois Supreme Court should have clarified more specifically what ‘intended’ means beyond just the presence of bike lanes, a bike map or signs.”

Keating did, however, praise the Illinois Supreme Court for a Nov. 30 decision holding that an uninsured motorist policy must cover a policyholder’s son who was injured by a hit-and-run driver while riding his bicycle.