Re: Hello

Just c=ecking in to say happy new year and see how things are going. I stop=ed in and saw our mutual friend in NY last week and it reminded me of you.=C2 I hope things are going well for you and that you have a great new y=ar free from a lot of the hassles from the media and former "friends&=uot; and free from litigation. Take care.

David

Sent f=om AOL Mobile Mail

Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com <http://mail.mobile.aol.com=

Do you have your =avorite cross that I can read

we will see. =AO in fact i just asked who is good at cross. ? ar= you?

where are you based. ?

I see now the media is using this acosta nomination and the Maxwell cas= in NY to once again get your name in the mix. I sure hope the lawye=(s) in this Maxwell case is someone who cross-examines for a living if thi= case goes to trial. The case presents a real opportunity for a hard=hitting cross-examiner to undermine credibility with respect to a witnessMaintiff who apparently has a lot of baggage to work with. I hope th= lawyer doesn't add his or her name to the list of people who throw yo= under the bus in the process. Sorry to see your name dredged up aga=n. Take care, David

-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: Hello

Same

That is and always has been,=of necessity, the bread and butter of my practice. As you might imag=ne, in organized crime cases (i represent 2 of the purported bosses of the=5 families and have represented alleged head of Russian mafia, Israeli maf=a, and a Canadian the govt claimed was the biggest mafioso in the world) t=e lawyet generally makes his case by undermining the government's not =hrough a direct case with pristine witnesses.

I start preparing for every =ase, whether o.c., white collar, or civil litigation, from the first clien= interview, by planning my cross-examination. For me, at least, a cr=ss-examination centered approach is the only (and by far the best) way to =repare and proceed for many reasons requiring a longer discussion and perh=ps not so interesting to most people.

I think most lawyers with an= significant criminal defense practice or perhaps any litigation practice =ancy themselves to be adroit cross-examiners. That has not been my e=perience and you can fill in the names you already know among criminal def=nse lawyers in my view. Most often an exercise in ego, to the client=#39;s detriment, lack of prep (itself often a function of ego), and not li=tening to the witness (lawyer often stuck to a script = missed opportuni=ies in cross).

Running out now to speak now=to a group of senior citizens about a case i did at the Supreme Court and =ther Israel related issues.

David

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail Get the new AOL app: ma=l.mobile.aol.com chttp://mail.mob=le.aol.com>

Live in Atlanta, most of my work is in NY - bu= practice all over (arguing a case this week in Chicago, for example; guy =n LA asking to retain me in 30 kilo cocaine case).

I just read that your pending Florida case is set f=r trial in December. Odd one to be going to trial - malicious prosec=tion according to news clip. Must be personal/ego for the lawyer inv=lved.

I assume you had a lawyer representing you when you brought=the underlying case at issue. I assume you have, among other things,=a defense based on your Reliance in the advice of counsel concerning the v=ability/legitimacy of the lawsuit that was brought.

Good luck. Hope this puts all if this litigation behin= you once and for all.

David

Sent from AOL Mobile Mail

Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com http://mail.mobile.aol.com

oncerned about subject matter waiver