From the Hartford Courant:
Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz Tuesday afternoon abruptly withdrew her motion to prevent release of her deposition testimony in her lawsuit to establish her credentials to run for state attorney general.-----------------
Last week Secretary of State and candidate for Attorney General Susan Bysiewicz gave a deposition in a lawsuit she helped bring about in order to get a ruling on the statute requiring a minimum of ten years of "active practice" in order to be AG.
As reported in the Hartford Courant, Bysiewicz yesterday:
...asked a Superior Court judge Monday to block disclosure of the transcript and videotape of her sworn testimony in a deposition, which is part of her lawsuit to get a judge to rule that she is qualified to run for state attorney general.Okay, I'm not a genius or anything (I can almost hear the chorus of agreement rising from my loyal readers) but it seems that Susan has handled nearly every aspect of this controversy in as clumsy a manner imaginable.
Bysiewicz's lawyer, Wesley W. Horton, filed a motion for a "protective order" directing all parties in the case "not to disclose publicly the transcript or videotape of any depositions in this case, except to the extent necessary to prosecute or defend any potential motion, unless and until they are unsealed" by order of the judge in the case.
It's difficult to pretend that something didn't go wrong during her deposition, especially after the FOI requests for the video and/or transcripts of her testimony from various news agencies.
But regardless of whatever was said during the deposition, I'm sure that getting a favorable ruling on the case is what matters most here for Susan. Hopefully this will happen sooner rather than later, because if Bysiewicz eventually is found ineligible to run, the Democrats will need some time to bring up the numbers for other candidates, like George Jepsen or Cam Staples.
In any case, I think the video and transcripts should be released as soon as possible, but after a ruling if there's sufficient legal reason for it.
Post a Comment