2014-01-22 Amacker Depo - Redacted

1
2
3
4
5
LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD
IN RE: JOYCE NANINE MCCOOL
DOCKET NO: 13- DB - 059
6 Deposition of HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER,
taken in the offices of FLANAGAN PARTNERS, 201 St.
7 c harl es Avenue, Suite 2405, New orl eans, Louisiana
70170, commencing at 1:00 P.M.on Wednesday, the 22nd
8 day of January, 2014.
:: PARTNERS' L. L. p. OR/Cf ff AL
(BY: THOMAS FLANAGAN, ESQUIRE
12 SEAN P. BRADY, ESQUIRE)
201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 2405
13 New orl eans, Louisiana 70170
(Attorneys for the Honorable Dawn
14 Amacker)
15
16 LOUISIANA ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD
(BY: DAMON S . MANNING, ESQUIRE)
17 4000 s. Sherwood Forest Boulevard
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70816
18 (Attorney for the Louisiana Attorney
Disciplinary Board)
19
20
21 DUCOTE LAW FI RM
(BY: RICHARD DUCOTE, ESQUIRE)
22 4800 Liberty Avenue , Third Floor
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15224
23 (Attorneys for Joyce Nanine Mccool)
24
25
1
(504)831l753
433 METAJRIE ROAD, #220
HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)7491753
METAIRIE. LA 70005
1 REPORTED BY:
2 BROOK KERRIGAN, RPR, CCR
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER
3 (22037)
Huffman & Robinson, In c.
4 Suite 220, Meta i ri e office Tower
433 Metairie Road
5 Metai ri e, LA 70005
6
7
8
9 I N D E X
2
10 PAGE
11 EXAMINATION BY:
12 M R . D U C 0 T E . . . . . . . . . . . 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(504)831-1753
433 METAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 S T I P U L A T I 0 N
2 It is stipulated and agreed by and between
3 counsel for the parties that the deposition of
4 HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER is hereby taken pursuant to
5 the Louisiana code of civil Procedure in accordance
6 with law, pursuant to Notice , on January 22, 2014,
7 at the offices of Flanagan Partners, 201 st. Charles
8 Avenue, Suite 2405, New orl eans, Louisiana 70170;
9 That the formalities of sealing, certification,
10 an d f i l i n g a r e h e r e b y s p e c i f i ca l l y w a i v e d ;
11 That the formalities of reading and signing are
12 s p e c i f i c a l l y r e s e r v e d ;
13 That all objections, save those as to the form
14 of the quest i on , are reserved u n ti l such ti me as
15 th i s de po s i ti on , o r any pa rt the re of , may be us e d o r
16 s o u g h t t o b e u s e d i n e v i d e n c e ;
17 That BROOK L. KERRIGAN, Registered Profession al
18 Re po rt e r , i n a n d f o r t h e s t at e o f Lo u i s i a n a ,
19 off i c i ate d i n ad mi n i st er i n g the oath to the
20 above-named witness.
21 * * * * *
22
23
24
25
3
(504)831-1753
433 METAIRIE ROAD. #220
(800)7 49-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER
a witness named in the above stipulation,
was examined and testified as follows:
MR. BRADY:
I'm Sean Brady. I represent Judge
Amacker, who is the witness here today. She is
not the complainant in this action.
third-party witness.
she is a
And I guess we've been talking with
Mr. Ducote about the deposition that's going to
take place today for about a month. Yesterday
afternoon we received a fax from Mr. Ducote's
office telling us for the first time that the
deposition will be videoed, and we're objecting
to that - - and the reasons we're objecting to
it is -- the principle reason is this is really
a case about the use of the internet, the
alleged use of the internet and social media in
order to put pressure or influence a judge's
actions. we think that allowing the video
deposition of the Judge, which may well be
edited and posted on the internet on various
Facebook and petition sites that are the
subject of this particular action, simply adds
fuel to that fire. You got to balance that
4
(504)831-1753
CERTIFIED COURT REPOR'I'ERS
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
against the fact that there is we don't see
any reason for the videotaping of the
deposition today. This is a discovery
deposition. The Judge is appearing here
voluntarily. she's going to be subpoenaed to
6 appear at the hearing. There's no need to
7 perpetuate her testimony or anything like that.
8 so the fact that it's right for abuse and
9 balanced against the fact that there's no real
10 reason for it, we think mandates that the video
11 be struck.
12 o n to p of t h at , t h e re i s a co u p 1 e o f o t h e r
13
14
15
things involved here . Judge Amacker,
obviously, is a judge. The deposition of the
Judge is afforded some extra protection. There
16 is code of Evidence Article 519 and a whole
17 raft of the case law that discusses the special
18 protections that are given to a judge in a
19 deposition particularly without answering
20 q u est i on s that de a 1 the j u d g e ' s de 1 i be rat i v e
21 process.
22 This proceeding also involves cases that
23 are pending in family court in the 22nd JDC,
24 some of which have been sealed, many of which
25 involve issues, contentious custody issues
5
(504)831l753
433 METAHUE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
6
1 involving the alleged sexual abuse of minor
2 children, and those issues have been sealed
3 many of those cases have been -- the records of
4 those cases have been sealed in the 22nd JDC.
5 we think that all of those things together
6 especially balanced against the lack of a need
7 to videotape the deposition and the late notice
8 would mandate that the video be struck.
9 And I think that I should just add the
W very end here that Mrs. Mccool, who is the
11 1 aw ye r that i s u n d e r i n vest i g at i on i n th i s
12 proceedings is act ually running against
13 Judge Amacker for her seat on family court in
14 the 22nd Judicial District court. so that, I
15 th i n k , adds to the concern and I th i n k to the
16 likelihood that this video would be used for
17 p u r po s es o the r than t h i s h ea r i n g i n th i s
18 particular disciplinary proceeding.
19 MR. DUCOTE:
20 This i s Richard Ducote. I represent
21 Mrs. McCool.
22 First of all, I do not believe that
23 Mr. Brady on behalf of Judge Amacker really has
24 standing to object to the videoing of the
25
deposition. seco nd of all, Article 1443 of the
(504)8311753
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
code of civil Pro cedur es specifically says ,
"Examination and cross examination record of
examination of the objections. (A) Examination
and cross examination of witnesses may proceed
as permitted at the trial under the provisions
of the Louisiana Code of Evidence. The officer
before whom the deposition is to be taken s hall
administer an oath or affirmation to the
witness and shall personally, or by someo ne
acting under hi s direction and in his presence,
record the testimony of the witness. The
testimony shall be taken ste nographi cally or
recorded by any other means." we have a
stenographer here, and we also have
videotaping.
Now, these other concerns that Mr. Brady
raises, which I really don't think he has
standing to raise, a re things that would have
the same concern even on the transcript of the
deposition. The sensitivity of the matters and
this case and that case, whether this is sealed
or that's sealed. The video has nothing to do
with that one way or another. If there are
any -- nobody intends to do anything improper
with the transcript or the video. That can be
7
(504)831 1753
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
used interchangeably, one for the other. so
none of those objections, I think, have any
merit.
The Code of civil Procedure, which governs
the taking of this deposition, controls, you
know I note -- I believe Mr. Manning was
informed that this was going be videoed as well
on Monday. He didn't interpose any concern as
I appreciate it until Mr. Brady raised an
objection this afternoon.
of this has any merit.
so I don't think any
Mrs. McCool 's livelihood, her license is
on the line here. we believe that videoing of
the deposition is important. I think in the
event that Judge Amacker is going to be the
subject of any impeachment at the trial of this
disciplinary action, I think the actual visual
representation of the answers that may be the
subject of impeachment would be important.
I just don't think there's any basis of it.
Mrs. McCool has a right to have that
deposition -- or this deposition recorded by
video and she intends to exercise it.
MR. MANNING:
Madam chair, this is Damon Manning on
So
8
(504)831-J.753
433 METAIRlE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 behalf of the office of Disciplinary counsel.
2 I think both sides have very eloquently stated
3 their positions. I would, I guess for the
4 reason and concern expressed on behalf of Judge
5 Amacker by her counsel, I would just point out
6 that Rule 4.4 of the Rules of Professional
7 conduct states, "In representing a client, a
8 lawyer shall not use means that have no
9 substantial purpose other than to embarrass,
10 d e l a y , o r b u r d e n a t h i r d p e r s o n . . . " a n d i t
11 continues on with some other things there.
12 And I would just ask you in making a
13 decision here today whether there is a
14 subs tan ti al p u r pose f o r vi de o i n g the de po s i ti on
15 when it's going to be captured by stenographer,
16 and there's certainly no objection to the
17 stenog rap her re cording it and it being provided
18 to t h e p a rt i e s an d co u l d b e u s e d i f t h e re i s a
19 n e e d f o r an y i m p e a c h m e n t o r o t h e r p u r po s e s ,
20 could be used as any other transcript could be.
21 Other than that, I would just rely on both
22
23
24
25
parties', again, very well-stated argument on
this issue.
MR. DUCOTE:
Ms. Goldsmith, can I just respond briefly
9
(504)8311753
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to the citation to the Rules of Professional
conduct?
HEARING COMMITTEE CHAIR:
Is that Mr. Ducote?
MR. DUCOTE:
Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry.
Yes. Go ahead.
MR. DUCOTE:
I would just point out under that
reasoning, I guess, I suppose the argument is
that any attorney who intends to video any
deposition is violating that rule because it
may tend to embarrass or some how be
inappropriate. I don't think that's a
plausible argument at all. That could be said
of cross examining a witness or anything else.
I mean, representation involves a variety of
things and certainly utili z ing the procedure
set forth in the code of civil Procedure for
taking a deposition can't be presumptively
violative of the Rule of Professional conduct.
Anyone else?
MR. BRADY:
10
(504)831-17 53
(800)7119-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
11
1
No, Madam Chair.
2
3
I appreciate everyone's argument. I think
4
5
6
7
8
9
they were well stated. Although ordinarily I
think you do have a right to a videotape
deposition, I'm inclined in this case to side
with Mr. Brady's arguments. I think there is
some potential for abuse, and I think it would
be more prejudicial than a transcript. Given
w that coupled with a lack of notice when
11 noticing a deposition, I do not think that the
12 vi d e o t a p e n e e d s t o g o f o r w a rd i n t h e
13 deposition.
14 MR . DUCOTE:
15
well, if I can just respond briefly. I
16 think one remedy would be to just have the
17 videotape he 1 d i n the custody of the ch a i r.
18 That would be one remedy subject to its use at
19
the hearing. second of all, the only notice
20 that's required of a video deposition i s when
21 the video is going to be used as the means of
22 pres er vation of the record because it then
23 requires s afeguards to be built in for the
24
25
accuracy of the deposition record. There i s no
actual notice required for a deposition that' s
(504)8311753
HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, I NC.
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
12
going to be videoed as well as stenographically
2 recorded.
3
MR. BRADY:
4
I think I disagree with that. I think if
5 you look at the Code of Civil Procedure 1438
6 requires reasonable notice, and code of Civil
7 Procedure 1440 requi re s that if the deposition
8 is to be videoed that the video was mentioned
9 in the notice . so read those t wo articles
10 t o g et h e r - -
11 HEARING COMMITTEE CHAIR:
12
I agree with that. I agree as a matter of
13 practice, hone s tly, that' s typically the way
14
it's done. so I am going to -- again, I do not
15 think the videotape deposition should go
16 forward.
17 MR. BRADY:
18 Thank you very much.
19 MR . DUCOTE:
20 Thank you very much.
21 HEARING COMMITTEE CHAIR:
22
Thank you. Thank you-all .
23
(Reces s taken, 1:19; resumed, 1:27.)
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. DUCOTE:
25
Q
Just state your full name for the record?
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
A Dawn Amacker.
2
Q
And I'm sure you understand the rules of
3 the deposition, and just so we're all clear, I'm
4 going to ask you questions. I'll ask that you wait
5 until I finish asking them before you start to
6 answer. You have to answer in words as opposed to
7 sounds and gestures. If you don't understand the
8 question, let me know and I'll rephrase it in a way
9 that makes sense, hopefully. And if you do
10 u n d e r s t an d t h e q u e s t i o n , t r y to g i v e u s as co m p l et e
11 an answer as possible.
12
A (Nods head affirmatively.)
13
Q
You have the right to read and sign the
14 deposition to ensure its accuracy or you can waive
15 that.
16 MR. DUCOTE:
17 we'll decide that at the end.
18 BY MR. DUCOTE:
19 Q so yo u a r e t h e J u d g e o f Di v i s i o n L i n t h e
20 22nd JD c ; correct?
21 A That's correct.
22 Q And you've been Judge since when?
23
A I was elected in 2008. My term began
24 January 1, 2009.
25
Q Have you ever filed a complaint against
13
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 Joyce Nanine Mccool with the Louisiana office of
2 Di sci pl i nary counsel?
3
A No.
4
Q
Is it your position that Mrs. Mccool has
5 violated any of the Rules of Professional Conduct
6 vis-a-vis any representation of any clients in your
7 court?
8 MR. MANNING:
9 I'm going to object to that question. It
14
10
11
asks the Judge to issue her opinion on the
ultimate thing in dispute here as to whether or
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not rules have been violated, Rules of
Professional conduct. That's for the Hearing
committee to determine, and I think it's
improper for that question to be asked of the
Judge of any fact witness in this case.
MR. FLANAGAN:
Let me join in that objection before you
respond. I want to join in that objection.
object to the form to the extent it suggests
the Judge has a position in this case. She's a
witness, as you have just established, not the
complaining party.
legal opinions.
I think it also asks for
MR. DUCOTE:
(504)831-1753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
433 METAIRIE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)7 49-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
15
1 well, I'm not asking for her legal
2 opinions or let me rephrase the question.
3 Maybe we'll solve it this way.
4 BY MR. DUCOTE:
5 Q Do you have any knowledge of any
6 violations or any acts or omissions that you believe
7 Mrs. McCool engaged in in connection with any
8 representation in your court that would violate the
9 Rules of Professional conduct?
10 MR. FLANAGAN:
11 same objection.
12 MR. DUCOTE:
13 That's a totally different question.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
she's a fact witness. she's listed as a
witness in this bar complaint. she's listed as
a person with knowledge. I'm trying to find
out what that knowledge is.
MR. FLANAGAN:
I think she's here to testify as a witness
about facts, and you're certainly welcome to
ask her about particular incidents that are
alleged in the formal charges. where I'm
having a problem is is that you are asking her,
kind of as Mr. Manning said, an ultimate
question whereas I think she's here as a fact
(504)831-1753
(800)749- 1753
METAJRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
witness and someone else will apply the law of
the facts.
MR. DUCOTE:
16
4
I'm not asking for legal conclusions. I'm
5 asking her about her knowledge of the facts.
6 I'll try to rephrase it one more time that
7 maybe will solve these concerns.
8 BY MR . DUCOTE:
9 Q Are you aware of any facts in the form of
10 acts or omissions on the part of Mrs. McCool that
11 you believe -- and I'm not asking for your opinion
12 or ju di c i a 1 con c 1 us ion - - but that you be 1 i eve or
13 contend would be in violation of the Rules of
14 Profess i on a 1 conduct?
15
A I'm aware of facts which I have placed in
16 w r i t i n g to t h e off i c e o f D i s c i p 1 i n a r y co u n s e 1 , w h i c h
17 might constitute violations of the Code of
18 P r o f e s s i o n a 1 R e s p o n s i b i 1 i t y . As a judge and as a
19 1 aw ye r , I have a resp on s i bi 1 i t y i f I have know 1 edge
20 of facts w hi ch mi g ht tend i n a subs tan ti a 1
21 situation , serious situation , I have an abs o 1 u t e
22 obligation to bring this to the attention, whether
23 as a complainant or as a witness to the office of
24 Di sci pl i nary counsel.
25
Q
Let's get back to the question asked and
(504)831l753
HUFFMAN & ROBINSON. INC.
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
17
1 maybe you ans we red it. I don't believe you did.
2 Are you aware of -- setting aside because you
3 already said you didn't file any complaints with the
4 office of Di sci pl i nary counsel. so I think the
5 first question calls for "yes" or "no." Are you
6 aware of any acts or omissions on the part of
7 Mrs. McCool during a representation of any clients
8 in your court that you believe constitute violations
9 of the Rules of Professional Conduct?
10 MR. FLANAGAN:
11 I'll make the same objection as before.
12 subject to the objection.
13
A It is not for me to determine if these are
14 vi o l at i on s . The facts I will say this again,
15 M r . D u cot e . My answer is the same as before. The
16 fa c t s a r e a s I g ave t h em to t he off i c e of
17 Di sci pl i nary counsel as a witness in this case. The
18 com p l a i n t was mad e by an o t h e r j u d g e .
19 BY MR. DUCOTE:
20
Q
I understand that, but that's not the
21 question I 'm ask i n g . I'm asking you if you have
22 let me ask it this way: Do you have personal
23 knowledge of any acts or omissions on the part of
24 Mrs. McCool during her representations of any
25 clients in your court that you believe constitute
(504)831-17 53
433 NIETAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct?
2
3
4
5
MR. FLANAGAN:
objection.
MR. DUCOTE:
Asked and answered.
It wasn't answered. It was, "I gave
6 something to the office of Disciplinary
7 counsel."
8 BY MR. DUCOTE:
9
Q That may be but I'm asking you now that
10 q u e s t i o n .
11
A I believe it's been asked and answered .
12 Do you want me to give you the same answer all over
13
a gain? Is that necessary?
14
Q
I would like you to answer the que s tion.
15
A I have answered the question.
16
MR. FLANAGAN:
17
She answered it twice.
18 BY M R DU C 0 TE :
18
19
Q
Is that "yes" or "no"? I don't under s tand
20 the answer.
21
A The answer i s the same I gave you to the
22 earlie r exact question. That's the answer.
23
Q
I'll ask it again . Let me ask this way:
24 Is it your position that in the course of
25 representing clients in your court Mrs. Mccool has
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
19
1 violated the Rules of Professional conduct?
2 MR. FLANAGAN:
3
same objection . You're suggesting she has
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
a position in this case.
MR . DUCOTE:
It's not a position. It's a fact. These
are factual allegations against Mrs. McCool
that should be straightforward if they exist.
MR. FLANAGAN:
I think we can ask the facts. There's
11 form a 1 ch a r g es here w i th a 11 e g at i on s . she ' s
12 here to answer questions about these formal
13 charges.
14 BY MR. DUCOTE:
15
Q
Okay . Let me ask it this way: what acts
16 or om i s s i on s do you be 1 i eve Mrs . Mccoo 1 has done i n
17 ' your court in connection with the representation of
18 clients that have violated the Rules of Professional
19 conduct?
20 MR. FLANAGAN:
21
22
23
24
25
I'm going to object. That's the same
question but a slightly different version.
MR. DUCOTE:
Not at all. It's what were they. She
gave an answer purportedly that answered that.
(504)83117 53
CERTIFIED COURT REPOR'fERS
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
20
1
2
3
4
I'm trying to find out what these things are
because I filed a motion and an exception to
the actual complaint, because I don't believe
there's notices to what these things are. This
5 is a witness who's been represented as being
6 somebody with knowledge of the facts, and
7 that's what I'm trying to find out.
8 BY MR. DUCOTE:
9 Q so my question is -- I'll ask you again.
10 what facts or what acts or omissions did Mrs . Mccoo 1
11 commit or not do in the course of representing
12 c 1 i e n t s i n yo u r co u r t t h at yo u b e 1 i e v e - - a n d , o f
13 course, this is going to be up to the tryer of fact
14 to see i f , i n fact , th e y do cons ti t u t e vi o 1 at i on s of
15 t h e Ru 1 e s of P r o f e s s i o n a 1 co n d u c t - - b u t w h i c h yo u
16 believe constitute violations of the Rules of
17 Profess i on a 1 conduct .
18
MR. FLANAGAN:
19 s am e o b j e ct i o n .
20 BY MR. DUCOTE:
21
Q
what are those facts?
22
A I don't have to answer the que stion,
23 Mr. o u cote .
24
Q
I think you do.
25
A I think I don't, Mr. Ducote.
(504)831l753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)7491753
METAIRIE. LA 70005
21
1 MR. FLANAGAN:
2 Let's move on. Let's go the formal
3 charges and ask the questions.
4
MR. DUCOTE:
5
6
7
She is listed as a person by the office of
Disciplinary counsel who has knowledge of the
relevant facts. And that's what I'm asking.
8
9
It seems to be a basic question: what are
those facts? And she doesn't want to answer.
10 MR. FLANAGAN:
11 Are you asking what does she know about
12 the form a 1 ch a r g es?
13 MR. DUCOTE:
14 I ' m as k i n g t h e q u est i on , co u n s e 1 .
15 MR. FLANAGAN:
16 I've been objecting to the ones you have
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
been asking. I hope you can get to some that
are proper.
MR. DUCOTE:
I don't think you have grounds to object.
MR. MANNING:
Mr. Ducote, I object, too, and I think
that you are harassing the Judge. She did not
file these charges. It's, with all due
respect, irrelevant what she thinks about
(504)8311753
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whether or not Mrs. McCool violated these
rules. It's what the office of Disciplinary
counsel filed and charged. The Judge's
correspondences which she referred to are in
the exhibit book that I've given to you today
and within the requested deadline, I have not
received any exhibits from you, but I've given
you mine, but they are in there, and this is
22
information that she provided to us. These are
facts or allegations, alleged facts that we
took in our investigation and did not rely on
but used to further our investigations.
so to continue to ask any witness, just
like you're prohibited from bringing in an
expert to have them answer the question about
whether or no t Mrs. McCool ha s violated the
Rules of Professional Conduct that's
improper. That's not allowed I believe it's
also improper to ask this witness if
Mr s. Mccool violated the Rule of Professional
Conduct.
If you want to ask her about a specific
fact or a specific instance, then I think
that's appropriate. Otherwise I object to the
form of question. I think it' s improper, and
(504)831 1753
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 it asks for an expert op1n1on as to the
2 ultimate conclusion to be reached by the
3 Hearing committee.
4 MR. DUCOTE:
5 I'm not asking for any expert opinion
6 whatsoever.
7 MR. MANNING:
8 I preserve my objection for the record.
9 BY MR. DUCOTE:
10
Q
well, Judge Amacker, do you have any
11 knowledge of -- 1 et me back up. Have you had
12 communications with the office of Disciplinary
13 counsel about Mrs. Mccool?
14
A Yes.
23
15
Q Did you contact the office of Disciplinary
16 co u n s e 1 f i rs t , or di d they contact you f i rs t?
17
A I contacted them first.
18
Q
Did you contact them to file a complaint
19 a g a i n st Mrs . Mccoo 1 ?
20
A No, I did not.
21
Q For what purpose did you contact the
22 office of Disciplinary counsel about Mrs. Mccool?
23
A I was aware that a complaint has been
24 filed by Judge Gambrell in Mississippi and similar
25 conduct had occurred directed to me and also to the
(504)8311753
(800)7491753
ME'l'AIRIE, LA 70005
1 Louisiana supreme court.
24
As a judge and an attorney
2 in this state, I have -- as I stated earlier -- an
3 absolute obligation with this type of conduct to
4 report it to the ODC because there was a prior
5 complaint filed. I was requested just to send in my
6 information, whatever that might be, to them and
7 that' s what happened.
8 Q who requested you to send in your
9 information?
10
A I don't recall if it was the secretary,
11 the person there, or actually on that occasion if I
12 ta l k e d to M r . Man n i n g . But when I asked how would I
13 get that information that also had occurred to me
14 and di rec t e d to me person a 11 y to them , I was to l d to
15 respond in writing to them with any attachments that
16 I t h o u g h t we r e p e rt i n e n t , s e n d t h at to t h em , w h i c h I
17 did .
18
Q
so are you saying that the information
19 that you had that compelled you to contact the
20 office of Disciplinary counsel was information that
21 constituted conduc t on the part of Mrs. McCool that
22 violated the Rules of Professi anal Conduct?
23
A I won't give you an opinion, Mr. Ducote,
24 on whether it viol ates the Rules of Professional
25 conduct. That's for someone else to do.
(504)831-1753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, I NC.
I will
(800)7 49-17 53
METAIRIE, LA 70005
25
1 tell you that there was a factual situation of which
2 you are aware. There is an accurate account of it
3 in the formal charges that have been filed by ODC.
4 what happened is commemorated in that document, and
5 as a result of that factual situation, I, as a
6 mandatory, in my opinion, reporter called ODC, asked
7 how and what format do I get in information to you.
8 There was a prior complaint filed. There was not a
9 necessity for a new complaint. simply it was sent
10 in as additional information to them.
11
Q
Now, how did you know a complaint had been
12 f i 1 e d a g a i n s t - -
13
A At some point when I first got the
14 petition that was faxed to my office by
15 Mrs. Mccool' s client and/or Mrs. Mccool, there we re
16 other names on there, other judges. one was Judge
17 Deborah Gambrell in Mississippi and the others were
18 the Justices of the Supreme court of the state of
19 Lo u i s i a n a I made a phone call to Judge Gambrell
20 because I was concerned for her safety and did not
21 know if she knew that this was on the internet,
22 which is recited in the petition.
23 I believe in that phone ca 11 she told me
24 that she had begun the process of filing a complaint
25 with the office of Di sci pl i nary counsel.
(504)831-17 53 HUFF:tvlAN & ROBINSON, INC.
I can't
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 tel 1 you if it was in that conversation or the only
2 other conver s ation I had with her which was at the
3 National Judicial College, a very brief
26
4 conversation. But at some point she told me she had
5 initiated that process. she was aware of the
6 petition, what was on the internet, and she had
7 begun the process.
8
Q Now, at the time, just so we're clear, you
9 contacted Judge Gambrell prior to her having any
10 o t h e r c o n t a c t w i t h yo u ; c o r r e c t ?
11
A That's correct.
12
Q
And at the time you contacted her, were
13 you aware that she was presiding over a case in
14 M i s s i s s i p p i t h at i n v o 1 v e d a 1 i t i g a n t w h o w a s a 1 s o
15 involved in a case in your court concerning the same
16 chi 1 d?
17
A I don't recall. I can tell you that the
18 p e t i t i o n , I ' m s u r e u po n t h e p e t i t i o n r e a c h i n g m e , i t
19 men ti one d conduct of Judge Ga m b re 11 , I be 1 i eve the
20 case name. It might have been at that point I put
21 it all together, but I had had no previous contact
22 with her, any reason to believe that we shared a
23 similar case, no.
24
Q
so would you agree that the contact you
25 had with Judge Gambrell was ex parte?
(504)831 l753 HUFFlvlAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LJ\ 70005
27
1 MR. FLANAGAN:
2 object to the extent there's a legal
3 conclusion about what is ex parte communication
4 in the context of the judges speaking in this,
5 but subject to that objection.
6
A I'm not sure in what context you mean ex
7 pa rt e , Mr. Ducote. I can tell you that there was
8 nothing substantively discussed about the case .
9 This was concerning safety co nsiderations, concerns
10 t h at I h ad f o r a f e l l ow j u d g e . she told me she knew
11 about it and was handling i t through the office the
12 Di s c i p l i n a r y co u n s e l . As fa r a s e x pa rt e , i f yo u
13 mean ex pa rte as discussing the l i ti gati on, no .
. 14 BY MR. DUCOTE:
15
Q
Now, what did you tell Judge Gambrell - -
16 l 'et me back up. Did you convey to Judge Gambrell
17
that Mrs. Mccool posed a danger to her physically?
18
A I don't recall conveying that to her,
19
Mr. Ducote.
20 Q You said you were concerned about her
21 safety . Safety -- who was the threat to her safety?
22 A The global internet that Mrs. Mccool sent
23 the petition to. All of the people that signed the
24 petition and, if you've read it, all of the comments
25 that were made were directed at the judges
(504)831 l 753
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
28
1 individually and were threatening, some of them, in
2 nature, Mr. Ducote. That's what I'm referring to.
3
Q
what facts do you have that Mrs. Mccool
4 was responsible for that?
5
A Her name was the first one on the petition
6 and circumstantially we sent a letter to her as we
7 always do returning ex parte communication of their
8 clients and let both sides, the attorneys, know. I
9 received no response from Mrs. McCool, which would
10 indicate that she did not have any knowledge or
11 wanted to explain to me why this came with her name
12 on it and her cl i en t ' s name on it . TO this day I
13 haven't received anything.
14
Q
The petition, are you saying, urged people
15 to harm judges?
16
A I don't have it here in front of me,
17 Mr. Ducote. The petition speaks for itself.
18
Q
so are you contending that or do you
19 b e l i e v e - - w i t h o u t as k i n g yo u f o r l e gal o p i n i o n o r
20 some sort of j udi ci al determination, do you believe
21 that Mrs. Mccool signing the petition violated the
22 Rules of Professional conduct?
23
24
25
A Again, I'm not going
MR. FLANAGAN :
Same objection.
(504)831l7 53 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)7491753
METAlRIE, LA 70005
29
1
A Thank you.
2 I'm not going to reach any conclusion as
3 to her violation of the Code of Professional
4 Responsibility.
5 BY MR. DUCOTE:
6
Q
what facts --
7
A If you would let me finish. That would be
8
for the committee, the hearing officers that are
9 upon you.
10 I
Q
In fact, you put a mother in jail in a
11
case that was reversed by the First Circuit for
12 b e i n g c r i t i ca l as yo u s aw i t . Do yo u r e c al l a ca s e
13 of TD v FXA, Case No. 2013 cuo453 rendered
14 January 9, 2014?
15 MR. FLANAGAN:
16 I'm going to object to that question and
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
instruct the witness not to answer. There is
no conceivable relevance to these formal
cha rges.
MR. DUCOTE:
It does. I don't think you have the
standing to instruct her not to answer ,
counsel.
MR. FLANAGAN:
I believe I do.
(504)8311753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
433 IV1ETAIRIE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
MR. MANNING:
2
I'm getting prepared to lodge an
3 objection, too. I t ' s not relevant to these
4 proceedings what the Judge did or didn't do in
5 any other case.
6 MR. DUCOTE:
7 If I can respond just so we have a
8 complete record. It may be that Judge Amacker
9 is unduly sensitive to criticism on the
W internet and that clouds her perception
11 particularly the language of the facts of this
12 c as e w h e r e a mot h e r was j a i 1 e d b e ca u s e h e r
13 daughter apparently posted things on the
14 internet critical to Judge Ama cker's
15 MR. MANNING:
16
17
18
The Judge didn't file these charges. The
office of Disciplinary counsel filed these
charges. so if Judge Amacker is or is not
19 s e n s i t i v e o r o v e r 1 y s e n s i t i v e i s n o t r e 1 e van t
20 because Judge Amacker is not a party and did
30
21 not file the charge s that we're here for today.
22 BY MR. DUCOTE:
23
Q
Have you read the complaint that Judge
24 Ga mbrell filed?
25
A I have read, I think, a one-page or
(504)8311753
CERT1FIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)749 l 753
METAJRIE, LA 70005
31
1 one - and - a - half page letter that she wrote to ODC. I
2 don't know if that's the original complaint or not.
3
Q
I'm going to show you a letter from Judge
4 Gambrell to the Louisiana office of Disciplinary
5 counsel dated December 15, 2011, purportedly from
6 Deborah Gambrell, Chancellor, court District of
7 Mississippi which has a cc to you and ask you if you
8 recognize that?
9
A I've seen at least the first two pages of
10 i t , M r . D u co t e . I'm not so sure the order granting
11 the Motion for Temporary Emergency Relief in the
12 o rd e r to s ea 1 f i l e . I don't have any independent
13 recollection of seeing those, but I have seen the
14 1 et t er . whether I rec e i v e d i t from her or i n
15 connection with these proceedings sometime in the
16 l as t t h r e e ye a r s I s aw i t , I c an n o t t e l 1 yo u .
17
Q
Now, I want to read to you from this
18 1 e t t e r w h at J u d g e Ga m b r e l l s a y s ab o u t yo u . I t s a y s ,
19 quote - - th i s i s on page 1. And I wo u 1 d just 1 i k e
20 to point out that this is what the office of
21 Disciplinary counsel has referred to as the
22 com plaint in its letter from the ODC from
23 Mr. Manning on September 30, 2011. It says , quote,
24 Also Judge Dawn Amacker of Slidell, Louisiana,
25 contacted me after she learned of the articles and
(504)831-1753
HUFFMA.N & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 the petition. she was upset as I was that a
2 practicing attorney would attempt to use social
3 media in an effort to bypass the courts. This file
4 was, quote, sealed by the Court. Attorney McCool
5 appears to be disclosing information from a sealed
6 file in violation of the court's order . Also, she
7 may not be aware that the signatories to the
8 petition she is ci rcul ati ng are par ti ci pa ting in a
32
9 conspiracy to intimidate a judicial officer which is
10 a f e l o n y i n t h e Mi s s i s s i p p i Co d e , an n o t at e d 9 7 - 9 5 5 .
11 Does this accurately reflect your
12 conversation with chancellor Gambrell?
13 MR. FLANAGAN:
14 Let me just object to the form of the
15 question. I think you prefaced it by saying,
16 " Th i s i s w h at h e s a i d ab o u t J u d g e Am a c k e r . "
17 And at least towards the end, she's citing
18 Mississippi law, so I don't think she's
19
attributing that on Judge Amacker. I just want
20 to object to the form of the question.
21 MR. DUCOTE:
22 I th i n k that ' s fa i r.
23 BY MR . DUCOTE:
24
Q
Let me just talk about this quote. "Also,
25 Judge Dawn Amacker of sl i dell, Louisiana, contacted
(504)8311753
(800)7 49 l 7 53
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 me after she learned of the articles in the
2 petition . she was upset as I was that a practicing
3 attorney would attempt to use social media in an
4 effort to bypass the court s , end quote.
5 Does that accurat ely reflect your
6 conversation with Gambrell?
7
A First of all, it's inaccurate that I'm
8 from Slidell. I'm not. The courthouse is situated
9 in covington. As far as the rest of the s tatement,
10 th i s has been two and a ha 1 f ye a rs ago . I don't
11 h ave i n d e p e n d e n t r e co 1 1 e ct i o n , M r . Du co t e , o f t h e
12 exact word s that J u d g e Ga m b re 11 and I used . It was
13 a very short conversation. I do rememb e r that .
14
Q
well, she doe s n't mention anything here
15 about t h re at s to he r s a f et y o r any of that . It
33
16 says, "An attorney used s oc ial media in an effort to
17 by pas s the co u rt s . " I s t hat some t h i n g you s a i d to
18 c h an c e 1 1 o r Ga m b r e 1 1 ?
19
A I stand by my earlier statement. I don't
20 have an exact recollection of what word s Judge
21 Gambrel 1 and I used.
22
Q
Did you have any other written
23 correspondence with chan cellor Gambrell ?
24
A Not to my knowledge, no.
25
Q
Did you discus s with Judge Gambrell
(504)831-1753
433 META.IRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
34
1 whether or not she should file a disciplinary action
2 against Mrs. Mccool?
3
A NO.
4
Q
Now, you said the reason you didn't file
5 one is because one had al ready been filed, but, in
6 fact, at the time you had the conversation with
7 chancellor Gambrell no complaint had been filed by
8 her; isn't that c orrect?
9
A At the time I had the conversation with
10 Judge G am b re 11 , I th i n k I told you earl i er I don ' t
11 r em e m b e r i f i t w a s - - I ' v e h ad two co n v e r s at i o n s
12 w i t h h e r . v e r y s h o r t . on e was t h i s o n e . Th e o t h e r
13 one was at the National Judicial college . In one of
the two conversations , she informed me that she had
15 act u a 1 1 y f i l e d o r , at l east , that wa s the i mp res s i on
16 that I had that she had actually filed had a
17 filing with the office of Di sci pl i nary counsel. It
18 m i g h t h ave b e e n o n t h e f i r s t co n v e r s at i o n . I t m i g h t
19 h av e b e e n o n t h e l a s t . I can't tell you which one
20 it was.
21
Q
If she had indeed cc'd you, then you would
22 have seen a copy of this, I assume?
23
A we c an assume t hat. I can't tell I know
24
that from my own recollection, no.
25
Q
Now, when was the conversation that you
(504)831-17 53
(800)7 49-17 53
METAIRIE, L...<\ 70005
35
1 had?
2
A Again, this has been some while ago. I
3 believe it was in 2011, but I couldn't -- I wouldn't
4 want that to be noted as a precise date. Maybe the
5 fall, the winter of 2011 and I met her there and we
6 had a very brief conversation .
7
Q what did you say to her in the
8 conversation?
9
A I don't remember exactly what I said to
10 her in the conversation, Mr. Ducote. Judge Gambrell
11 had a fellow judge. we were in different courses at
12 t h e N at i o n a 1 J u d i c i a 1 co 1 1 e g e . I was there for a
13 family law course. I believe she was there for a
14 genera 1 j u r i s di ct i on course . There was many j u d g es
15 from the across the united States that were there,
16 and someone said Judge Gambrel 1 is 1 ooki ng for you.
17 She wants to meet you. And so at some point, I saw
18 her on a break, and the breaks were literally about
19 f i v e mi n u t e s 1 o n g , i f t h e y we re t h at 1 o n g at t h e
20 Judicial college. And it was just putting a name to
21 a face sort of thing. I can't tell you the exact
22 conversation that we had.
23
Q
Just to follow up, do you remember what
24 she said to you?
25
A I really don't, Mr. Ducote.
433 ME'I'AIRIE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPOR'l'ERS
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
36
1
Q was that the last time you have ever
2
spoken to her?
3
A Yes.
4
Q Are you aware that at some point she
5
issued a rule to hold Mrs. McCool i n contempt?
6
A I'm aware of that or at least that there
7
were allegations to that effect, yes.
8
Q
How do you know that?
9
A I really don't know. This has gone on for
10 al most th re e ye a rs now , and I rec e i v e d i n format i on
11 f r om a l o t o f d i ff e r e n c e s o u r c e s i n cl u d i n g t h e s e
12 f o rm a l c h a r g e s , yo u k n ow , h ad t h i n g s i n t h em t h at
13 obviously I was unaware of that occurred in the
14 s tat e of Mi s s i s s i pp i , so I can ' t tel l you when I got
15 the i n format i on or who I got i t from .
16
Q
were you provided by the office of
17 Di sci pl i nary counsel any of Mrs . Mccool ' s responses
18 t o t h e c om p l a i n t f i l e d by J u d g e Ga m b r e l l ?
19
A I don't recall ever getting anything from
20 Di sci pl i nary counsel that Mrs. Mccool had responded
21 to any disciplinary complaint.
22
Q Have you received anything from the office
23 of Disciplinary counsel other than the complaint
24 that Judge Gambrell filed?
25
A Yes.
(504)831l753
I got the formal charges and your
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 response, I think, was attached to it when you
2 objected to vagueness or somet hing as attached to
3 the formal charges. That's all I've gotten as far
4 as comm uni ca ti on, written comm uni ca ti on, and they
5 have sent me once or twice a letter requesting
6 specific information from me to which I responded.
37
7
Q
what specific information did they request
8 from you?
9
A I can't tell you, Mr. Ducote. I don't
10 have the l et t er s here i n front of me , but they would
11 list four or fives things in the investigation of
12 t h i s mat t e r a n d I w o u l d re s po n d a c co rd i n g l y i f I h ad
13 these items in my posse ss ion or knowledge of them.
14
Q
what facts do you have that you believe
15 well, are you going to testify at the proceedings
16 a g a i n st Mrs . Mccool on February 2 7?
17
A I don't know, Mr. Ducote.
18
Q
Have you received any subpoenas to do so?
19
A No.
20
Q
Have you discussed that with Mr. Manning?
21
A No. well, I don't think I have. I can't
22 remember if we have. At some point, I knew it was a
23 possibility . I don't know if I heard that from my
24 counsel or someone, but I don't recall having any
25 conve rs a ti on with Mr . Manning about a subpoena.
(504)831-1753
(800)7 4 9-17 53
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
Q
well, what facts -- you read the formal
2 complaint, have you not?
3
A Yes.
4
Q Do you know of any facts or do you have
5 any knowledge of any facts that support the formal
6 complaint?
7 A Yes.
8 Q what are those facts?
9 A Those that are contained in the formal
10 com p 1 a i n t . I h ave n o k n ow 1 e d g e o f t h o s e fa c t s
11 insofar as they concern me. I don't have any
12 personal knowledge of those that concerned what
13 happened with Judge Gambrell. But any of those in
14 which my name is mentioned in connection with
15 certain factual situations that occurred, I have
16 kn owl edge of those facts.
17
Q okay. Now, which of those facts do you
18 believe constitute a violation of the Rules of
19 P r o f e s s i o n a 1 co n d u ct ?
20 MR. MANNING:
21 Objection.
22 MR. FLANAGAN:
23 we're back where we started.
24 MR. MANNING:
25
I stated the objection before. Again,
38
(504)831-17 53
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 she's a fact witness. She's not here to state
2 an opinion on what is or what is not a
3 violation of Rules of Professional conduct.
4 MR. DUCOTE:
5 I guess we'll have to file a Rule to
6 compel on that.
7 MR. MANNING:
8 It's improper to ask any witness to state
9 their opinion on whether the respondent has
10 violated the Rules of Professional conduct.
11 MR. DUCOTE:
12 That's not what I'm asking.
13 MR. MANNING:
14 That is what you're asking over and over
15 again.
16 BY MR. DUCOTE:
17 Q Do you know what this statement means,
18 q u o t e , " A p r a c t i c i n g at to r n e y w o u 1 d at t em pt to u s e
19 soc i a 1 med i a i n an effort to bypass the courts , end
20 quote. what does that mean?
21 A where are you reading this from,
22 Mr. Ducote?
23 Q I'm reading this from Judge Gambrel 1 's
24 com plaint.
2 5
A Do I know what that means?
39
(504)831l753
433 ME'l'AlRIE ROAD, #220
HUFF!vIAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
40
1
Q
Yes.
2
A I'm not so sure of the context yo u're
3 ask ing me that in. I believe I responded to earlier
4 I don't have any specific recollection of having
5 t hat specific -- those words used in my conversation
6 with J udge Gambre ll. It would be mere speculation
7 for me to tell you what that means.
8
Q
well, i s it your position that Mrs. Mccool
9 has attempted to use social media in an effort to
10 by p a s s t h e c o u rt s ?
11
A I don't have a position in this,
12 M r . o u c o t e .
13
Q
14
A
15
Q
Do you have any knowledge of her doing it?
of her doing what?
of her attempting to use social media 1n
16 an effort to bypass the courts?
17
A I ca n't comment on the ultimate co nc lusion
18 of whet he r or not s he has done thi s in an effo rt to
19 by pa s s t h e c o u rt s . I do know that she ha s engaged
20 1n the us e of soc ial media exactly as the comme nt s
21 are co nt ai ned in the formal charges. I don't know
22 what to tell yo u. I cannot reach a ny conclusions
23 about why she did it or what was her purpose 1n
24 do i n g i t , Mr. o u cote .
25
Q
well, what does the term - - doe s this term
(504)831-1753
(800)7 49-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 have any meaning to you -- what's your
2 understanding, if you have one, of the phrase
3 "Attempt to use social media in an effort to bypass
4 the courts"?
5
6
7
A
MR. FLANAGAN:
object to the form.
I don't have an interpretation of that .
8 I've told you I don't have any independent
9 recollection of those exact words being exchanged
W between me and Judge Gambrell; therefore, I can't
11 have or would not speculate on what the
12 i n t e r p r et at i o n o f t h at i s , M r . D u cot e .
13 BY MR. DUCOTE:
41
14
Q
well, if Judge Gambrell says regarding you
15 that, quote, she was upset as I was that a
16 practicing attorney would attempt to use social
17 media in an effort to bypass the court, end quote.
18 Are you saying that you don't know what she's
19 ta 1 k i n g ab o u t ?
20
A I'm saying I don't recall specific words
21 to that effect. Quite often, I find that parties
22 paraphrase, and I don't know that any of those
23 specific words were used, Mr. Ducote, and I wi 11 not
24 spec u 1 ate on what they mean .
25
Q
Did Mrs. Mccool use the social media in an
(504)831-1753
(800)7 49-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
42
1 effort to bypass your court?
2
A I believe I've answered that question. I
3
cannot
4 Q I haven't asked that question.
5
A If you will let me finish, Mr. Ducote. I
6 believe I've answered that question. To the latter
7 part of it, I cannot comment on what her motivations
8 were. I can't tell you why she did what she did. I
9 know -- what I know has been given to ooc, has been
10 placed in the formal charges. That ' s all I can tell
11 you about it, Mr. Ducote. I have no idea why
12 M r s . Mccoo 1 h as d o n e w h at s h e ' s d o n e .
13 Q we 11 , when you s ay what she did, what
14
knowledge do you have of what she did? What did she
15
do?
16
A I know that I got a petition with
17
Mrs. McCool 's name signed No. 1 on the petition
18 which purportedly was sent out on the internet, a
19 p e t i t i o n - - I d o n ' t h ave t h e e x a c t p et i t i o n h e r e i n
20 f r on t of me . If you have it there, you can provide
21 it to me and I can go through the various paragraphs
22 there, but I do know Judge Gambrell has mentioned in
23 her rulings in sealed c losed hearings, I am
24 mentioned in my rulings in sealed closed hearing,
25 the Supreme Court is mentioned and, again,
(504)831l753
433 METAlRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAlRIE, LA 70005
43
1 paraphrasing these are not exact words but the
2 petition wa s requesting that people contact us in an
3 obvious effort to get us to change our opinions ,
4 gave identifying information out about the judges,
5 their phone numbers, where their offices were, and
6 the petition had comments ne xt to many names
7 directed to the judges. That's what I know about
8 that.
9
Q so the petition a s ked people to contact
10 yo u a n d s a y w h at ?
11
A Mr. Ducote, I'm at a disadvantage because
12 I d o n ' t h ave t h e p e t i t i o n h e r e i n f r o n t o f me . I f
13 you want to give it to me, I'll read it to you.
14
Q
15
This might be ODCllB?
MR. FLANAGAN:
16
Is this llllB or lOA . That's marked. It
17 says 11 B for the record .
18 BY M R . DU C 0 T E :
19
Q
That's marked llB in the book. I as s ume
20 that these wi 11 keep the s ame ex hi bit numbers
21 throughout the proceedings, but this is 1 of 1 that
22 the office of Di sci pl i nary counsel provided me in
23 their book of ex hi bi ts.
24
so, Judge Amacker, is that the petition
25 you're referring to?
(504)831 1753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
433 META.IRIE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
44
1
A It appears to be.
2 Q so the body of the petition itself says,
3 "Louisiana supreme Court Judge Dawn Amacker and
4 Judge Deborah Gambrell, quote, we the undersigned
5 insist that you ensure that the two little girls who
6 were subject of case Number 2011-14457 pending in
7 the 22nd JDC, St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, and
8 case Number 2006-136GT, pending in the chancery
9 Court of Marion county, Mississippi, are afforded
10 al l l e g al p r o t e c t i o n s i n c l u d i n g e vi d e n t i a r y h e a r i n g
11 to e n s u r e t h at t h e y a r e p r o t e ct e d f r om ab u s e . "
12
Now, is there anything in that language
13 that you find offensive as a judge?
14 MR. FLANAGAN:
15 Do you want to see it again?
16 THE WITNESS:
17
Yes. I'm not sure what you mean by
18
offensive, Mr. Ducote. It is not my job to
19 determine whether or not statements that
20 attorneys make in ex parte communication to me
21 as a judge are offensive. Are you asking am I
22 personally offended or professionally?
23 BY MR. DUCOTE:
24
Q I'll rephrase the question. First of all,
25 how did that come into your possession? when did
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
45
1 you first see that petition?
2
A well, this doesn ' t have the date on it.
3 Actually
4
Q or in what context? was it online or was
5 it something mailed to your office or what?
6
A There is another page to this because
7 there actually is identifying information that shows
8 that this comes from or purportedly comes from your
9 client's client. so on the copy that I received
10 m a y b e i t ' s o n o n e o f t h e s e p age s . I don't know
11 w he re th i s one comes from , but at the top i t shows a
12 fax n um b e r an d i t h a s Rave n Mau r e r Bo yd o n i t , I
13 believe. so I don't know where this copy comes from
14 or if there's a page that's with it, but it
15 purported to come from a litigant in a sealed
16 adoption proceeding and/or custody proceeding that
17
was pending in my court. when did I get it? In
18
answer to that, again, this one does not have the
19
date on it. The other one does. On the date that
20
it showed it was faxed from her to us, it came by
21
fax to family court's fax machine. Generally my
22 secretary handles most ex parte proceedings that
23 come in by not giving them to me, any so rt of letter
24 of communi ca ti on. These are sent back to the
25 attorneys, and they are given in admonition in the
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 letter not to send ex parte communication to the
2 court.
3 In this case, they do 1 ook at these. My
4 secretary does and sometimes the staff attorney. I
5 can't recall who looked at this one, but generally
6 speaking everything that comes into family court is
7 reviewed to see if there is a threat or there is a
8 reason to bring on an emergency basis this to the
9 attention of the judge. This is what my secretary
10 did. And that is how I received the information
11 ab o u t t h e c om mu n i c at i o n .
12
Q
So the first you saw this was via a fax?
13 A That's correct.
14
Q
To your office?
15
A correct .
16
Q
Now, do you make any distinction if this
17
had been something simply posted online that would
18 n o t h ave b e e n fax e d to yo u r off i c e ? Do yo u s e e a
19 di ff e re n c e the re , o r i s that the same i n you r eyes?
20 MR. FLANAGAN:
21 I'm going to object to the form of the
46
22 question. see a difference in what context? I
23 th i n k it ' s u n c 1 ear.
24 BY MR. DUCOTE:
25
Q
You said an ex parte communication. Do
(504)8311753
(800)7491753
ME'I'AIRIE, LA 70005
1 you believe that if somebody post something online
2 even though is says to you that that constitutes an
3 ex parte communication instead of something that's
4 faxed to you?
5
A It can be.
6
Q
So you think something posted online can
47
7 constitute an ex parte communication with the court?
8
A I believe that it could.
9
Q
Do you disagree -- I'm sorry. can I see
10 the exhibit again? Do you have any facts to
11 indicate that Mrs. McCool was, in any way,
12 r e s po n s i b l e f o r t h i s b e i n g fax e d to yo u r o ff i c e ?
13
A The only fax I have are those that are
14 noted in the formal charges. I believe they
15 referred to the respondent having filed or submitted
16 an affidavit in which certain omissions were made.
17 The only other facts I would have are circumstantial
18 in nature and those are those that I told you
19 ea r l i e r t h at we d i d s e n d a l e t t e r to M r s . Mc coo l an d
20 to the opp o s i n g counsel and I can ' t rec a 11 who that
21 is right now. And she was given a copy of the
22 communi ca ti on and the letter indicated that this had
23 come into our office and this was an ex pa rte
24 comm uni ca ti on that would not be accepted. I'm
25 paraphrasing .
(504)831-1753
I don't know exactly what the letter
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
48
1 says, but that's the general one. And I never heard
2 anything from Mrs. McCool to dispute the fact that
3 this has been sent by her or her client.
4
Q well, in the letter did you say this was
5 sent by you or your client or just by your client?
6
A I don't have the letter here in front of
7 me. I couldn't tell you, Mr. Ducote.
8 Q If it was sent by the client without
9 Mrs. Mccool' s knowledge or direction or
10 a c qui es c enc e , do you see a di st i n ct i on between
11 culpability on her part?
12
A That would not be for me to make a
13 determination. By her name appearing as No. 1 on
14 the pet i ti on , g e n e r al l y s peak i n g i f that type of
15 comm uni cat i on i s sent to an at to r n e y , a j u d g e w o u l d
16 expect a response w hi ch e i the r says , "someone ha s
17 done this and it wasn't me, Judge, and I'm going to
18 f i n d o u t " o r , " J u d g e , I ' m s o r r y . I didn't reali ze
19 th i s was a vi o l at i on . It won't happen again."
20 You would expect -- aga in, thi s is just
21 based generally s peaking on five years of being a
22 judge that if the type of letter is sent to coun se l
23 saying this has come into our office, it's
24 inappropriate communication, that there would be a
25 re spo nse if inde ed they had no kn owl edge.
(504)831-17 53
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
Q Let's s ee what thi s petition says. Now,
2 do you think it would be improper for you to be
3 asked to, quote, afford two little girls all legal
4 protection? There's nothing wrong with that?
5
6
7
8
MR . FLANAGAN:
Let me obje c t to that. The que s tion is
inappropriate as to what she thinks is
inappropriate. Again, s he' s not the charging
9 body nor the decision maker on this matter.
10 MR . DU C 0 TE :
11 I don't think you have s tanding to make
49
12
these objections. I know you're making a ll the
13 objections here, but
14 MR. MANNING:
15 state your question again, pl eas e.
16 BY MR. DU COTE :
17
Q
Judge Amacker, do you think it' s improper
18 f o r yo u t o b e as k e d to a ff o rd two 1 i t t 1 e g i r 1 s a 1 1
19 1 e g a 1 p r o t e ct i o n s ? Not h i n g w r o n g w i t h t h at ; r i g h t ?
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. FLANAGAN:
same objection.
MR. MANNING:
It' s a misl e ading question in that it' s
not placed into any context. "All legal
protections" under what circumstances? And I
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 think it's irrelevant.
2 MR. DUCOTE:
3 This petition seems to be the corpus
4 delicti, apparently, of the complaint.
5 MR. MANNING:
6 You're certainly able and have shown that
7 to form your own questions and follow the
8
questions with the charges. But if you noted
9 the charges accuse Mrs. Mccool of using social
10 media to solicit others to make direct contact
11 with judges in cases pending before them, and
12
13
14
15
it is more than just the petition. There are
many others , if you care to go through them,
that say, Article by Mrs. McCool. Here is the
information. Here is what you can do. Sign
16 t h e p et i t i o n a n d yo u c a n c a l l t h e j u d g e an d
17
here is the judge's number. So the charges
18
19
don't allege Mrs. McCool to have made an ex
parte communication. They allege that she
20 violated 8.4 A by soliciting others to do what
21 she co uld not do her se lf.
22 MR. DUCOTE:
23 I'm glad to finally hear what the
50
24
25
specifics are, and I guess we'll deal with that
in response to any discovery.
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
51
1 MR. MANNING:
2 I'm pretty sure the formal charges are
3 specific as determined by the Hearing committee
4 chair.
5 BY MR . DUCOTE:
6
Q
So you would agree, would you not, that
7 s omething posted on -- first posted on the internet
8 that asks you to afford the two little girl s all
9 legal protections in c luding a full evidentiary
10 he a ring to ensure t hat they were prot ect e d from
11 abuse is something you would find that you would be
12 doing anyway; right ?
13
MR. MANNING:
14
Again, I r a ise the same objection to the
15 question. subject to that.
16 BY MR. DUCOTE:
17
Q
I s it s a fe t o say that in conc e pt that you
18 s upport that you would be doing those thing s?
19 MR. FLANAGAN:
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm going to object again. we di sagree
about my standing. we'll address that later.
My understanding of these formal charges is not
that arguments are being made dir e ctly to a
judge for evidenc e or fairness or du e proce s s
but that's someone is allegedly trying to get
(504)831-1753
(800)7 49-1753
MET AIRIE, LA 70005
52
1 third parties to make contact with the court to
2 urge for a particular result.
3 BY MR. DUCOTE:
4
Q
Let's do this. You would agree, Judge
5 Amacker, that whatever this petition asks for is the
6 same rel i e-f that Mrs. McCool' s pleading asks for in
7 your court, including her writ and her appeal to the
8 First Circuit?
9
MR. FLANAGAN:
10
Objection. Foundation.
11
A You want to lay a foundation, Mr. Ducote.
12 BY MR. DUCOTE:
13 Q Do you not recall or was there anything in
14 here I'll show you ODC llB again and see if
15 the re ' s any th i n g i n h e re , i n the body of th e
16 p e t i t i o n i t s e l f , t h at was s om et h i n g t h at w a s n ' t
17 being asked for in your court?
18
A First of a 11 , I don't have the transcript
19
of what occurred in the court. I don't have the
20
pleadings. Those remained sealed. Records, they
21
are now not in my division. They're i n Judge
22
Devereux's. I would not have access to those. I
23 can't comment on anything in connection with the
24 pl ea di n gs , ex h i bi ts , o r t rans c r i pt s that a re
25 contained in the adoption or the custody proceedings
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
53
1 that were filed in the 22nd JDC, Mr . Ducote.
2
Q
Do you contend or do yo u have any facts or
3 is it your -- have you reported to the office of
4 Di sci pl i nary counsel that the petition itself
s violates the seal of the records in your court?
6 MR. FLANAGAN:
7 object to the form.
8
A can you rephrase the question, Mr. Ducote?
9 BY MR. DUCOTE:
10
Q
I think it's clear.
11
MR. FLANAGAN:
12
13 one .
You gave her a couple of choices in that
Do you think A, B, or c .
14 BY MR. DUCOTE:
15
Q
Does the petition on its face violate the
16 s ea l of th e rec o rd s i n you r co u rt?
17
A Again, I can't comment to that. I don't
18 h ave t h e c as e s s t i l l i n f r o n t o f me . I cannot
19 comment upon what are sealed closed proceedings that
20 are now in Judge Devereux' s court . I stand by what
21 my response is as a witness to ODC contained in
22 them, and the formal charges are accurate as a
23 reflection of what occurred insofar as I'm
24 concerned .
25
Q Did you take any steps to cite Mrs. Mccool
(504)8311753 HUFFl\IIAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 for contempt for anything she did in your court in
2 connection with anything that is alleged in the
3 formal complaint?
4
A I don't remember, Mr. Ducote, but to my
5 recollection, no.
54
6 Q Now, I'm going to show you Exhibit ooc 12,
7 which is in the book of exhibits provided by
8 Mr. Manning today and purports to be a letter from
9 you dated March 28, 2012, to Mr. Manning and ask you
10 i f t h at i s i n d e e d w h at t h at i s ?
11
A It appears to be.
12
Q And do you know how it came to be that you
13 wrote that letter?
14
A I can't tell you that. I do know that I
15 had received one or two communications during the
16 c ourse of these three years from Mr. Manning in
17 which he requested additional information from me as
18 a w i t n e s s . This may have been in response to that.
19 I don't know.
20
Q
Now, did you -- you were recused from the
21 case involving Raven Maurer, M- a - u- r - e - r, were you
22 not?
23
A And by "you were recused," meaning
24 voluntarily?
25
Q well, you're no longer on the case. That
(504)831- 1753
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
55
1 went to Judge Devereux; correct?
2
A That's correct.
3
Q
was that in response by -- you were
4 recusing yourself or another judge ordering you to
5 recuse? Do you know?
6 A Again, I can't remember precisely if I saw
7 a standby. whatever the motion in the order says on
8 the recusal in that particular case.
9 Q Do you remember whether or not Mrs. Mccool
10 had filed a motion to recuse you?
11
A I don't specifically recall.
12
Q well, do you know whether or not in
13 response to your conversation with Judge Gambrell,
14 w hi ch was - - whatever i t was w hi ch i s ref 1 e ct e d i n
15 the complaint that Judge Gambrell filed, whether you
16 voluntarily recused yourself on the basis of your
17 having that conversation with Judge Gambrell? If
18 t h at q u e s t i o n ma k e s an y s e n s e , an d may b e i t do e s n ' t .
19 MR. FLANAGAN:
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm going to pose an objection. Any
questions about why the Judge did something are
privileged under Article 519 of the code of
Evidence.
MR. DUCOTE:
I'm not asking her why. I'm asking her
(504)831 1753 HUFFl'vlAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 when.
2 MR. FLANAGAN:
3 If i t ' s just a matter of when?
4 BY MR. DUCOTE:
5
Q
Let me ask you this: How long after your
6 conversation -- I'll ask it this way: For how long
7 after you had the conversation with Judge Gambrell
8 that you continued to preside over the case?
9
A I don't remember, Mr. Ducote.
10
Q
Did you immediately -- or did you after
11 speaki ng with Judge Gambrell after any period of
12 time after you spoke to Judge Gambrell self recuse
13 on the case?
14 MR. FLANAGAN:
15 It's been asked and a nswered.
16
MR. DUCOTE:
17
No.
18
MR. FLANAGAN:
19 she said she didn't know.
20
A That was my answer, Mr. Ducote.
21 BY MR. DUCOTE:
22
Q
23
A
24
25
so you don't recall?
I don't recall.
MR. MANNING:
I'm sorry. Mr. Ducote, was that with
56
(504)831l753
433 ME'I'AIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7 49 l 7 53
1 regard to a specific case or in general?
2
MR. DUCOTE:
3 The case, the Raven Maurer case.
4 BY MR. DUCOTE:
5
Q
Do you recall whether or not upon
6 receiving the complaint filed by Judge Gambrell and
7 seeing the reference to communication s that you and
8 Judge Gambrell had that it was at that ti me that
9 Mrs. McCool filed the motion to recuse you ?
10
A I have no idea.
57
11 Q Now, Mrs. McCool has filed several motions
12 to r e c u s e yo u i n ca s e s t h at s h e h as b e e n i n , an d yo u
13 have , as I appreciate it, on your own motion to
14 recuse d yours el f i n cases she ' s been i n vol v e d i n ;
15 correct?
16
A It's a compound question. If the first
17 part of it is ha s she filed motions to recuse me in
18 my d i v i s i o n f r om c as e s , ye s .
19
Q
And have you on your own without her
20 filing a mo ti on, on your own mo ti on recused
21 yourself?
22
A Yes .
23
Q
Now, in any of the recusal motions that
24 Mrs. McCool ha s filed in your division, do you know
25 of any facts in those motions that are
(504)831-1753
433 1\1ETAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LI\ 70005
58
1 misrepresented or inaccurate or misleading in any
2 way?
3 MR. FLANAGAN:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Let me object. The formal charges address
three recusal motions.
MR. DUCOTE:
I understand, counsel.
MR. FLANAGAN:
Let me make my objection.
MR. DUCOTE:
It's not your position to talk about the
formal charges. You're representing the
witness.
MR. FLANAGAN:
You can make your statement when I'm
finished, but I am going to finish my
objection. okay. Three: Keister, Cullen, and
Russel. so I'll allow you to ask questions
about those, but to the extent that you
endeavor to question a sitting judge about
other matters involving other parties, I'm not
going to allow that. So there are three that
are referenced in this document, which is the
governing document, and I'll allow questions
about those.
(504)831- 1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 BY MR. DUCOTE:
2 Q okay. Let's t a ke those, Kiester, cull en
3 and
4 MR. DUCOTE:
5 what's the third one?
6 MR. FLANAGAN:
7 Russel.
8 BY MR. DUCOTE:
9
Q
Are there fals e statements that
10 M r s . M cc o o l mad e i n t h o s e r e c u s a l mot i o n s ?
11
A I don't have tho s e in front of me,
12 M r . D u c o t e .
13
Q
Let's go to the formal charges.
14 Did you ever have any discussions with
15 Judge Gambrell about her issuing or potentially
16 is s uing a warrant for Mrs. Mccool' s arrest?
59
17
A I believe you asked me that earlier, and I
18 believe my answer was I don't have any independent
19 r e co l l e ct i o n o f t h at .
20
Q
In the formal complaint it says on page 16
21 on June 5, 2012, Kiester v Kiester, "Judge Amacker
22 s igned an order stating to the court hereby
23 voluntarily recusing herself due to the possibility
24 that the judge may be called as a witness in the
25 proceedings referenced by counsel and out of a
(504)83117 53
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 abundance of a caution and to avoid the appearance
2 of impropriety, the matter shall be referred to a
3 another judge in the district court for trial
4 through the random process of assignment in
s accordance with the provisions of the code of civil
6 Procedure Article 253.1." okay. Any disagreement
7 with that so far?
8
9
10
A
Q
A
Any disagreement with what?
with your signing an order saying that?
I don't have the order here in front of
60
11 me, but it sounds 1 i ke probably that that's what the
12 o r d e r s a i d .
13 Q And then the next paragraph, page 16 of
14 the formal com plaint, it says, "on June 28, 2012,
15 respondent filed a motion to recuse Judge Amacker in
16 t h e matt e r at s co t t Ed w a rd c u 1 1 e n v . K r i s t i a n n Ma r i e
17 Prob ts t cu 11 en when she fa 1 s e 1 y stated , 'The court
18 h as v o 1 u n t a r i 1 y and e x p r e s s 1 y ad m i t t e d i t s e x t r em e
19 b i as i n co n f 1 i ct i n r e c u s i n g i t s e 1 f i n two o t h e r
20 cases which grounds are equally applicable in the
21 case at bar.'" Is it your position -- do you agree
22 with this t hat that statement that I just read to
23 you from Mrs. McCool' s motion to recuse you in the
24 cu 11 en case i s fa 1 s e?
25
A Do I ag ree with the statement that that
(504)831-1753
433 METAlRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
61
1 paragraph is false? Is that what you are saying?
2
Q
Yes.
3
A I can tell you that I have no knowledge of
4 ever having voluntarily and expressly admitted
5 extreme bias a nd conflict in recusing myself in two
6 other cases as of June 28, 2012, when Mrs. Mccool
7 filed this motion .
8 Q okay. And then you s igned an order
9 stating , "The court hereby vol untari 1 y recuses
10 i t s e 1 f t o t h e po s s i b i 1 i t y t h at t h e j u d g e may b e
11 called a witness in proceedings for which count
12 movers of party and out of an abundance of caution
13 and to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Thi s
14 matte r s ho u 1 d be ref e r red to j u d g e of Di vi s i on K . "
15 And then i n the Russe 1 c ase , it was the
16 same 1 anguage, Mrs. McCool said , "The court had
17 voluntarily and expressly admitted its extreme bias
18 i n c o n f 1 i c t i n r e c u s i n g i t s e 1 f i n s eve r a 1 o t h e r
19 cases which grounds are equally applicable in the
20 case at bar . "
21
Now, when you signed the recusals in the
22 Kiester case and the Cullen cas e, is it your
23 position that that was not on the basis of e xtreme
24 bi as and conflict?
25
A I don't have a position.
433 METAlRIE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
I will restate
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
62
1 what I said earlier. The language that I had
2 voluntarily and expressly admitted extreme bias and
3 conflict in recusing myself in two other cases, that
4 is a false statement.
5 Q Did you recuse yourself in the Cullen case
6
after she filed a motion to recuse you?
7
A Yes.
8
Q
And did you recuse yourself --
9
A I take that back. I voluntarily recused
10
myself. I don't know if it was after the motion she
11
filed or not, Mr. Ducote. Just because someone
12 files a motion on certain grounds doesn't mean that
13 the order reflects that it was granted on the basis
14 of what i s cont a i n e d i n the mot i on .
15
Q
Okay.
16
MR. MANNING:
17
can she look at her orders since they're
18
here for us to look at. Here is the one from
19 the Kiester matter . Is ODC 13B as in boy.
20 (Hands document.)
21 BY MR. DUCOTE:
22
Q so those are the orders that you signed in
23 both the Russel case and the Cullen case?
24
A That is the Kiester case.
25
Q
And then you signed the same order,
(504)831 1753
433 lVIBTAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
63
1 basically the same language in Cullen and Russel;
2 correct?
3
A I believe so.
4
Q
Did you take any steps to cite Mrs. McCool
5 for any violations of Article 863 of the Code of
6 civil Procedure based on the allegations that she
7 made in her motions to recuse you in the Cullen case
8 and the Russel case?
9 A I don't recall that I did.
10 Q Th e R u s s e 1 c a s e yo u s et t h at f o r a
11 hearing, right, you referred that to another judge;
12 co r r e c t ? Do yo u re c a 1 1 ?
13 A I don't recall, Mr. Ducote.
14
Q
And you also you never filed a
15 complaint against Mrs. McCool with office of
16 Disciplinary Counsel based on the pleadings that you
17 filed in these recusals that are mentioned on pages
18 16 a n d 1 7 ; co r r e ct?
19
A I have never filed a complaint with the
20 office of Di sci pl i nary counsel i nvol vi ng
21 Mrs. Mccool, Mr. Ducote.
22
Q Now, I believe you earlier testified that
23 the reason is because Judge Gambrell had already
24 gotten that underway, but, in fact, Judge Gambrell
25 would have not filed anything or have any concern
(504)831-1753
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 with what Mrs. McCool filed recusal cases in your
2 court; correct?
3 A I'm sorry you have to repeat.
4 Q Judge Gambrell would not be filing
5 complaints against Mrs . McCool based on pleadings
6 that she filed in your court to try to get you to
7 recuse
8
A I don't know that at all. As a matter of
9 fact, I think I recall from the formal charges or
10 f r om may b e h e r 1 et t e r o n e of t h e t h i n g s t h at we ' v e
11 talked about here that she specifically states
12 that's misstatements were made in the Louisiana
13 proceeding about the Mi ssi ssi ppi proceedings. so
the an s wer as far as I'm conce r ned would be, yes,
15 she may have the ability depending on what
16 statements were made in the Louisiana ca s es if they
17 were misstatements about what had happened in
18 Mi s s i s s i pp i that co u 1 d we 11 have been a cause or
19 pa rt of h e r comp 1 a i n t .
20
Q
Now you -- do you agree that if you know
21 of an attorney violating the Rules of Professional
64
22 condu c t you have an obligation to report them to the
23 office of Disciplinary counsel ?
24
25
A
Q
(5Q1)83 l -I 7 53
No, I don't agree with that statement.
when you were first contacted by
HUFFIV1AN & ROBI NSON. INC.
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 Mr. Manning concerning Mrs. McCool 1 n the course of
2 this i nvesti gati on, was he, to your kn owl edge,
3 already aware of these allegations in pages 16 and
4 17 of the formal charges or is this information you
5 gave him for the first ti me?
6
A I don't recall, Mr. Ducote. As I recall
7 Mr. Manning -- well, first of all, I can tell you
8 this: I have never had any conversation with
9 Mr. Manning in which we discussed the substance.
10 The only conversations we've had have been very
11 brief. I've never met him until today. Had to do
12 with procedurally what I needed to file and when in
13 the case, and that's what I've done.
65
14
Q
Now, you're familiar with the April Curren
15 c as e ; c o r r e ct ?
16
A The name is familiar to me.
17
Q
That was the case that your husband's law
18 firm was defending Mandeville Police officer who was
19 i n v o 1 vi n g a s u i t b r o u g h t a g a i n s t t h em i n f e d e r al
20 court on behalf of a child whose case you were
21 try i n g i n your court . Do you recall that?
22
23
24
25
MR. FLANAGAN:
I'm going to object to this line of
questioning. I don't think it has any
conceivable relevance to these charges.
(504)831-1753
HUFFMAN & ROB1 NSON, INC.
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
66
MR. DUCOTE:
well, I think part of this con c erns some
allegations of something being faxed improperly
to the court, and I know that there are
allegations involving -- in the federal c ourt
case involving faxes coming from Judge
Amacker's chambers to her husband' s law firm
involved in a case where there was no
disclosure that her husband's firm was
representing the defendants in this case that
she was adjudicating
THE WITNESS:
Let me stop you right here, Mr . Ducote.
That's a juvenile case . The record is s ealed.
I'm going to ask that anything be s tricken that
you have asked that infringes upon that
juvenile prohibition . I'm not going to allow
on thi s record or any other record -- that is a
cas e that is juvenile case in my division of
some years ago. You cannot ask me questions or
through your question place on the record
anything that violates that confidentiality in
that juvenile case.
MR. FLANAGAN:
I didn't know it was a juvenile case. I
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
move to strike and instruct the witness not to
answer any further questions about this current
matter.
MR. MANNING:
I, to some extent, agree with some things
Mr. Ducote has said earlier about I need to
also be lodging objections. I have the
standing to lodge objections that does not
diminish the role of Mr. Flanagan as the
witness's attorney here today. But so that the
record is clear I was waiting beyond you just
asking her if she recalled that case for some
question, but since we've gone beyond that and
there have been statements by you about a case,
I'll go ahead and object to the reference to
any other case or the Judge's conduct in any
other case or her actions or inactions or
decisions or the actions or inactions of others
in any other case. They are just not relevant
to Mrs. McCool's actions in the formal charges
that we 're here to discuss. And so I object to
the relevance of those and to the extent there
has been any statement by counsel that wo uld
have infringed upon a sealed record in a
juvenile matter. I would also move to strike
(504)831-1753
(800)7 49-17 53
METAJRlE, LA 70005
68
1 those comments from the transcript.
2 BY MR. DUCOTE:
3
Q
Have you been recused in cases other than
4 cases that Mrs. Mccool has been counsel?
5 MR. FLANAGAN:
6 I'm going to object. It has nothing to do
7 with these formal charges, other recusals,
8 other cases. we'll be here for days. I think
9 that's completely improper.
10 MR. DUCOTE:
11 I don't know if we'll be here for days on
12 r e c u s a 1 s .
13 BY MR. DUCOTE:
14 Q Aga in, to the extent that there are
15 allegations of sealed confidential record s being
16 i mp roper 1 y u ti 1 i zed , have you ever faxed
17 confi denti a 1 court records to your husband's 1 aw
18 firm?
19 MR. MANNING:
20
I object. I object to the relevance of
21 that.
22 MR . FLANAGAN:
23 Same objection. It has nothing to do with
24 the formal charges.
25 MR . MANNING:
(504)831-1753
. -
HlJFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
69
1 And the Judge is not charged with any
2 misconduct here and questions that may be
3 intending to try to expose some perceived
4 conduct by the Judge are wholly inappropriate.
5 BY MR. DUCOTE:
6 Q Judge Amacker, I want to go back to what
7 you say Mrs. Mccool did that was improper concerning
8 the internet. Do you see any difference between
9 what Mrs. McCool did as reflected in the formal
10 c h a r g e s i f , i n fact , s h e d i d a n y o f t h at com pa r e d t o
11 what you j ai 1 ed the mother in the TD v FXA case
12 concerning use of the internet to criticize you and
13 your decisions?
14 MR. MANNING:
15 Object again to the relevance of that
16 q u e s t i o n .
17 BY MR. DUCOTE:
18
Q
As I pointed out in my answer that a lot
of these things are protected free speech in First
20 Circuit case of TD v FXA 2013 cuo453 - -
21
A Let me stop you right here, Mr. Ducote.
22 That case is sti 11 pending, and the bottom 1 i ne is I
23 cannot comment nor can Mrs. Mc Cool as a judicial
24 candidate for office and you would be her agent, you
2 5 cannot ask me questions. There can be no comment
(504)831-1753
433 lVfETAlRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
70
1 about a case that is still pending in my division or
2 any other division. I will not answer questions
3 about that case or any other pending case,
4 Mr. Ducote.
5 MR. DUCOTE:
6 I guess I'll deal with this at the hearing
7 perhaps.
8 BY MR. DUCOTE:
9 Q Do you recall the January 22 , 2013, letter
10 s e n t to M r . Man n i n g , w h i c h h as b e e n ma r k e d as o D c 13
11 and ask you if you recognize that?
12
A
13
Q
14
A
15
Q
16
A
17
Q
I do.
okay. And that's the letter you wrote?
If you can let me read the whole thing.
sure.
Yes, I'm familiar with this.
Now, in this 1 ette r you say, quote, my
18 s t a ff at to r n e y Am b e r Mi t c h e 1 1 r e c e i v e d an o n y mo u s
19 v o i c e ma i 1 i n t h e 1 at e s um m e r o f 2 0 11 , a 1 e rt i n g h e r
20 to a website and stating that, quote, fax about a
21 case in our division are in a website along with
22 contact information directing persons to go c ontact
23 the Judge and her staff regarding this case. Due to
24 safety concerns you've relayed this information to
2 5 me and I viewed the website in question.
(504)8311753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, L re.
433 wIBTAlRlE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
At least
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 two individuals unrelated to the case contacted me
2 personally or left messages conveying that
3 disturbing petitions were directed to me are on the
4 internet and the individual s were concerned and
5 wanted me to be aware of this.
6 That's the end of the quote from this
7 letter. Now, what was disturbing about the
8 petitions that were directed to you? Did they
9 threaten your safety?
71
10
A Mr . Ducote , they threaten the independence
11 and the integrity of the j udi ci ary. That is what i s
12 disturbing to me about those communications.
13
Q
what was the language in the petitions
14 that th re ate n e d t h e i n de p e n den c e and i n t e g r i t y of
15 j u di c i a r y?
16
A The language that we just went over
17 earlier where the petition asked people to contact
18 t h e i n d i vi d u a 1 j u d g e s i n a n e ff o rt t o g et t h em to
19 ch an g e the i r mi n d i n connect i on w i th cert a i n cases .
20 The language in there in which confidential, sealed
21 proceedings concerning two minor children who
22 allegedly were sexually abused that , that
23 confidential, seal ed , closed information i s in the
24 petition . Those would be two things that I find
25 very disturbing. The third thing is the comments
(504)831 l 753
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
72
1 that are made directed to and about the judges based
2 on the allegations in the petition which are very
3 disturbing and concerning, particularly to family
4 court judges who deal with very sensitive family
5 court matters and are subject to high emotions from
6 people, and there are definitely safety concerns
7 that arise when you get these type of communications
8 directed to the public who do not have full
9 knowledge of what has occurred in these proceedings.
10
Q
well, did anybody threaten you personally,
11 physically?
12
A In connection with these cases?
13
Q
Yes, ma'am.
14
A Online, yes .
15
Q
who did?
16
A There have been many comments made,
17 Mr. Ducote, many of which are taken down as soon as
18 t h e y we re mad e , b e ca u s e t h e y a r e t h r eat e n i n g i n
19 nature and if you know Facebook and other s ites,
20 you cannot keep a site up if comments deemed as
21 threaten i n g rem a i n on the sites . so there have been
22 many comments made. As far as particular comments,
23 if you look right no w probably on some of the sites,
24 some of these people make comments that I or Judge
25 Devereux are satanic. we are evil people.
we need
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
73
1 to be stopped. we need to be federally indicted or
2 criminally charged. These are very threatening
3 comments, yes , they are to sitting judges. And I
4 see them as an effort to influence and intimidate me
s as a judge.
6
Q so did Mrs. McCool make any of these
7 comments?
8
A I can't tell yo u s pecifically but my
9 recollection is that in the 1 east s he has these
10 1 o c at e d o n h e r Fa c e boo k s i t e s , v a r i o u s s i t e s , an d
11 has 1 inks to these. Now whether she individually
12 made them o r not , I can ' t t e 11 you r i g ht now ,
13 Mr. Ducote.
14
Q
so, for example, if s omebody says, "Judge
15 Amacker should be prose c uted," do you take that as a
16 p e r s o n a 1 t h r e at ?
17
A well, fir st of all, for an example, I
18 didn't say that's exactly what it said. I don't
19 w a n t to s p e c u 1 at e o n w h e t h e r o r n o t an y t h i n g t h at
20 has n ' t been s a i d i s a p e r s on a 1 th r e at . I gave you
21 specific examples that have been on these si t es that
22 Mrs. Mc cool is a party to and 1 inks to her sites.
23 That's what I was referring.
24
Q
What language did you find to be most
25 re flect ive of a personal threat against you?
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE,LA 70005
74
1
A what language? By whom?
2
Q By anybody that you said. This was on the
3 internet?
4 A Mr. Ducote, there's so much I can't even
5 begin. Ev en the office of Disciplinary counsel, I
6 can't spend e v ery day of my life transmitting to
7 th e m the various comments that are made . The se are
8 in the hundreds at this point in time. Maybe
9 thousand s , Mr. Ducote, on the various sites,
10 we b s i t e , Fa c e b o o k p a g e s , " P r o s e c u t e J u d g e Dawn
11 Amacker. Just say no to Judge Amacker in 2014 . "
12 s h awn Am a c k e r , w h i c h i s an i m p e r s o n at i o n of me , a
13 Facebook page that had to be taken down in the last
14 two or three weeks in which my picture wa s placed on
15 a Face book s i t e and Mrs . Mccool l i k e d i t on her
16 pa g e a n d h ad a l i n k to i t f r om h e r pa g e , h e r b e i n g
17 fully a wa re, she has to know that I am not named
18 s h awn Am a c k e r an d i n w h i c h d i s p a r a g i n g l i n k s we r e
19 co n n e ct e d to m e . Fa c ebook has taken this down as
20 an imper s on at ion , Mr. Ducote . I do find that
21 di s tu rbi ng , and I do find that a threat to my
22 safety, yes, I do.
23
Q So to get back to my que s tion. what
24 language? You s aid there are hundreds of thousands
25 so there must be something --
(800)749-1753
METAJRIE, LA 70005
1
A I did not say that, Mr. Ducote. I said,
2 "Hundreds perhaps thousands."
3
Q so can you name maybe one or two that are
4 actually threatening you in some way other than the
5 ones you mentioned or if those are the threats - -
6
A I can't name you specifically right now,
7 Mr. Ducote, and as I've said the more threatening
8 ones have been taken down.
9
Q For example, Mrs. Mccool actually had
10 J u d g e Ga m b re 11 i s s u e a war rant f o r he r a r rest i n
11 Mi ssi ssi ppi which she withdrew after Mrs. McCool
12 f i l e d a j u d i c i a r y com p l a i n t a g a i n s t h e r . was there
75
13 anything that was that you felt as threatening to
14 your person al safety as a warrant i s sued by a judge
15 who had no jurisdiction over Mrs. Mccool for her
16 a r r e s t ? An y t h i n g t h at was - -
17 A You' re speaking about a confidential
18 judiciary complaint in the state of Mississippi? Is
19 that what you're referring to? I'm asking. Is that
20 what you ' re refer r i n g to?
21
Q
Yes.
22
A And you're asking me, what, in response to
23 that?
24
Q
I'm asking you if there was any threat
25 that was made against you that was as real or even
(504)8311753
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 potentially real as a warrant for Mrs. McCool 's
2 arrest issued by Judge Gambrell?
3
A I can't answer that question.
76
4
Q Now, one of the things in the complaint is
5 on page 14 it says, "on the web site HTTP
6 sheeplessinamerica.blogspot.com on August 25, 2011.
7 Respondent posted a blog article entitled "Justice
8 for and ," when she discussed the
9 underlying case and stated, "Horrified. call the
10 j u d g es and 1 et them know . "
11 Is it your position that it is improper
12 f o r a me m b e r o f t h e p u b 1 i c t o co n t a ct yo u r o ff i c e
13 and say I'm horrified at a decision you made?
14 MR. FLANAGAN:
15 Object to the form .
16
A You want to rephrase your question,
17 M r . o u c o t e .
18 BY M R DU C 0 TE :
19
Q
Not really. I think it's pretty clear .
20 MR. MANNING:
21 could you restate the question, please?
22 MR. DUCOTE:
23 sure.
24 BY MR. DUCOTE:
25
Q
Do you think it's improper or an ex parte
(504)831 1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
77
1 communication or somehow inappropriate for a member
2 of the public who disagrees with a decision you made
3 to contact your office and s ay, "I'm horrified with
4 what you did in this case"?
5 MR. FLANAGAN:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I'm going to object to the for m. I think
it's a mischaracteri z ation because it doesn't
say a member of the public did that.
th e respondent did that .
But subject to t he objection.
MR. DUCOTE:
It s ays
It doesn't say t he r e spondent contacted
the office.
A You're asking me to speculate.
15 BY MR. DUCOTE:
16
Q No. I'm asking you to say if you consider
17 that something that a member of the public can't do
18 o r s h o u l d n ' t d o o r i s i n a p p r o p r i at e o r - -
19
A That would not be for me to s a y . I can
20 tell you th a t ex part e communication to a judge when
21 there is pending litigation in which you seek to
22 change th e ir opinion or bully, inti mi dat e, or harass
23 them would be s omething th a t would require, in my
24 opinion, notice to the Office of Di sci pl i na ry
25 counsel about the conduct if an attorney i s
(504)831-1753
433 IvIETAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)7491753
METAJRIE, LA 70005
78
1 involved.
2
Q so did Mrs. McCool intimidate, bully, or
3 harass you?
4
A I can tell you that purportedly there are
5 communications on the internet and that have been
6 sent to me in particular this petition in which her
7 name is on there. That, if indeed these come from
8 Mrs. Mccool and you know I have nothing to say about
9 that, but if indeed they come from her and they
10 p u r po rt t o , t h e y c o u 1 d b e s e e n as a n e ff o r t to
11 inti mi date, influence, bul 1 y, and change the opinion
12 of a j u d g e w h i c h d o e s , i n my o p i n i o n , p u t i n
13 jeopardy the independ e nce and the integrity of the
14 j u di c i a 1 a re a .
15 Q Di d you ever contact 1 aw enforceme nt about:
16 an y o f t h i s ?
17
A I have not contacted law enforcement:,
18 M r . o u cot e .
19
Q rs it your contention that if you seal
20 records in a case that: if anybody t:al ks about: the
21 case in any way that that: somehow violates the seal
22 of the records?
23 MR. FLANAGAN:
24 object to the fo rm.
25
(504)831 1753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)74917 53
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 BY MR. DUCOTE:
2
Q For example, if there's a case involving
3 John Doe and Mary Doe and they have a child named
4 Christian Doe and you seal that record and somebody
5 who has knowledge of the case says that Judge
6 Amacker gave custody of christen Doe to John Doe,
7 that that somehow violates the sealing of the
8 records?
9
A I'm not going to speculate on that,
79
10 M r . D u cot e . Th i s o b vi o u s 1 y - - a n d yo u a r e aw a r e yo u
11 have made an issue in some cases that are pending or
12 may s t i 1 1 b e p e n d i n g b e f o re t h e co u r t .
13 speculate on that.
14
Q
we 11 - -
I will not
15
A Let me finish my explanation. The vast
16 majority of the cases that are sealed and perhaps
17 al 1 -- I haven't 1 ooked at al 1 of them, but al 1 of
18 t h e c as e s t h at w o u 1 d b e at i s s u e w i t h M r s . Mccoo 1
19 t h at a re s e a 1 e d a r e s e a 1 e d b y 1 aw n o t s e a 1 e d b y me .
20 They're sealed because there are adoption records.
21 This 1s by law. You can disagree with that or
22 Mrs. McCool can or not, but that is the 1 aw.
23 Also, the juvenile cases are sealed by
24 1 aw. In many of the cases, the attorneys, they
25 request because of the allegations which we get
(504)831 1753
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 tremendously serious allegations of violence and
2 abuse particularly those protected towards children
3 and they ask for r ecords to be sealed. The court
4 considers it and if there is just cause, those
5 records are sealed. I just want to make clear when
80
6 you're talking about me sealing records, the various
7 possibilities of why and when a record is sealed in
8 family court.
9
Q
But in the same light a judge can also
10 s o rt o f i m p 1 y to 1 i t i g a n t s t h at i f t h e y d o n ' t s e a 1
11 the record something is wrong with them because they
12 want this stuff all over the place and that may pose
13 to risk to them of their own c ustodial status. That
14 can a 1 so happen ?
15
16
A
Q
I won't spec ulate on that, Mr. Ducote.
Do you have any knowledge about
17 Mrs . Mccoo 1 act u a 11 y ta k i n g court documents that are
18 s u b j e ct to s ea 1 a n d s om e h ow c i r c u 1 at i n g t h e
19 documents themselves as opposed to discussing facts
20 that may be contained or referenced somewhere in a
21 document that is sea 1 ed?
22 A I can't tell you off the top of my head,
23 you know, that I have any particular kn owl edge of
24 her taking documents out of sea 1 ed records. I know
25 there are references to documents from sealed
(504)831-1753
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
81
1 records that she makes, ye s.
2 Q And is it your belief that that's the same
3 thing if you mention something that somehow is
4 mentioned in a sealed document that that's the same
5 offense, for lack of a better term, as revealing
6 documents in itself?
7 MR. FLANAGAN:
8
I'm going to object. I think that's been
9 asked and answered. I think it also asks for a
10 1 e g a 1 co n c 1 u s i o n .
11 BY MR. DUCOTE:
12 Q
13
A
14
Q
Do you have an answer for that?
No. There wa s an objection .
I understand there was an objection, but I
15 don't that precludes you from answering.
16
A well , I'm not going to answer it.
17
Q
Have you expressed any position to the
18 office of Disciplinary counsel as to whether or not
19 M r s . M cc o o 1 s h o u 1 d b e t h e s u b j e c t o f f o rm a 1
20 di sci p 1 i nary action?
21
A I would not suggest to the office of
22 Di sci pl i nary counsel that they should fi 1 e formal
23 charges against an attorney. That is their
24 de c i s i on .
25
Q
Have they ever asked you, anybody in the
(504)831-17 53
433 NlETAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 office of Disciplinary counsel, whether or not you
2 thought Mrs. McCool should be somehow disciplined
3 for her actions in your court?
4
A No. They don't ask my opinions on those
5 things, Mr . Ducote.
6
7
8
Q
A
Q
Have you ever given them your opinion?
No. I answered that.
Do you have an opinion as to whether
9 Mrs. Mccool should be di sci pl i ned?
10 MR. MANNING:
11
I object to that.
12
MR. DUCOTE:
13 This goes to bias.
14
MR. MANNING:
15 It calls for her to speculate. It calls
16
for her to render an opinion, again, on one of
82
17 the ultimate conclusions and recommendations to
18 be made by the Hearing Committee and the court
19 as w h et h e r o r n o t M r s . M c co o 1 s h o u 1 d b e
20 s an ct i one d for her conduct .
21 MR. DUCOTE:
22
23
24
25
I think I can inquire about bias. what
her opinion is about, whether there should or
should not be disciplinary proceedings against
Mrs. Mccool, I think -- especially given the
(504)8311753
4331\!IETAIRIE ROAD, #220
HUFFJ\IIAN & ROBINSON, INC.
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
83
1 facts that hav e been offered that --
2 MR. MANNING:
3 I maintain my objection especially s ince
4 the Judge has already answered the question
5 that she has never suggested to us or offered
6 her opinion as to whether or not charges should
7 be filed nor have we ever asked her for her
8 opinion.
9 MR. DUCOTE:
10 That's a different question as to whether
11 or not she has an opinion or harbor s an
12 opinion.
13 BY MR. DUCOTE:
14
Q
so that's what I'm asking: Do you have in
15 your mind an opinion as to whether or not
16 Mrs . Mccoo 1 sh o u 1 d be di sci p 1 i n e d for her conduct i n
17 your court or on the internet or wherever you think
18 s h e ' s d o n e s om et h i n g ?
19
A Mr. Ducote, if I can answer. Just as I
20 try a case and all of the pieces of the puz z le have
21 to come together before I reach an opinion, I am not
22 the tryer of fact in this case. I am not the
23 Hearing committee. It would be improper for me to
24 reach a con cl usi on on whether or not she is -- she
25 has violated the code of Professional
(504)8311753
(800)7491753
1 Res pon s ibility.
I can t e ll you that a s a judge the
2 fact that this has gone on for three years and has
3 dr agge d on in my opinion without a resolution and
4 the se things remain on the internet and the se
5 matters unresolved is ex tremely fru strating to a
6 judge, I would believe any judge who i s involved in
7 this. And, yes, I do want to see a co nclusion and
8 closure on this, so that we can move on to the
9 important matters that we have in family court that
10 i n v o 1 v e fa mi 1 i e s an d c h i 1 d r e n .
84
11 But I would not presume to tell ooc or any
12 o t h e r j u d g e o r h e a r i n g o ff i c i a 1 w h at t h e i r u 1 t i mate
13 conclusion should be. I just do believe in do want
14 q u i c k c 1 o s u re o n t h e i s s u e s t h at r em a i n , r em a i n - -
15 as a matter of fact prob a bly have escalated si nce
16 t h e o r i g i n a 1 c om p 1 a i n t s h av e b e e n mad e . So, yes, I
17 do wish for a nd hope for a swift resolution to these
18 matt e r s an d d o n o t a po 1 o g i z e f o r t h at .
19
Q
And appreciate that but that was n't the
20 q u es ti on as k e d . The que st ion is: Do you have an
21 opinion -- and I know you're not the tryer of fact.
22 I'm just asking for a personal opinion in your own
23 mind whether you desire that she been disciplined
24 for the conduct that you think she engaged in?
25 MR. MANNING:
433 METAIR.IE ROAD, #220 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS
(800)7 49 l 7 53
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
object to the relevancy of that question.
MR. DUCOTE:
It goes to bias. I can explore her bias.
If she has no facts but has belief that
something bad should happen to Mrs. McCool,
then that would be something that is an
appropriate subject of inquiry .
MR. MANNING:
she's not sitting as a tryer fact in this
case. Even if she had a bias sitting here
11 today, it has no bearing on the outcome of the
12 facts and the evidence that wi 11 be presented
13 to the Hearing committee who will make the
14 decision and recommendation about whether or
15
not Mrs . Mccool should be sanctioned. So,
16 again, the relevancy of that question doesn't
17 lend itself to any issue of bias that would
18 h e l p u s i n a n y way i n t h e s e p r o c e e d i n g s .
19 MR. DUCOTE:
20 Just in response, a witness can always be
21 questioned about bi as. If, in fact -- and
22 we've heard and I've asked repeatedly about
23
24
25
facts and gotten her answers. If, in fact,
that's the factual knowledge she has and is
going to be testifying in some way or another,
85
(504)831-1753
433 l\llETAJRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
ME'fAJRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I suppose, if she has as an opinion that she
should be somehow disciplined without facts to
back it up, then that's bias and I can ask
about it. I'm not asking her to decide the
86
case. I'm just asking her just as if this were
a criminal matter and you had a witness that
says "I believe that person ought to go to
jail."
"what did they do?"
"Well, I'm not really sure, but they
should go to jail."
That would be a proper question. That's
13 essentially what I'm asking by analogy.
14 MR . MANNING:
15 My objection has been prese rved for the
16 re co rd .
17 BY MR. DUCOTE:
18
19
Q
A
Do you have a personal opinion about that?
I'm not going to answer the question bas ed
20
21
22
23
24
25
on the objections. I will say this, Mr. Ducote, I
have an interest in seeing a resolution to the
conduct that ha s been brought to the attention of
the ODC . I definitely have an opinion that that
conduct should stop. That is the opinion that I
have in this case. I have a n opinion that this
(504)8311753 HUFFMAN & ROBINSON, I NC.
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1 should have been stopped years ago, Mr. Ducote.
2 That is the opinion that I have. And that is where
3 I hope we' re headed, that the conduct which
4 continues to this day ends. That's the opinion I
5 have.
6
Q so let's take that conduct. what conduct
7 that has been done by Mrs. McCool needs to be
8 stopped?
87
9 A I stand by the conduct that is detailed in
10 the letters that I have responded to the office of
11 Di sci pl i nary counsel on the facts in this case. A 11
12 of those without going back through all of those
13 again, Mr. Ducote, all of those facts would be the
14 th i n gs that need to stop .
15
Q
That might be -- do you know how many
16 letters you wrote to the Office of Disciplinary
17 counsel?
18
A I do not.
19
Q
I showed you ooc 13. That's the
20 January 22, 2013, 1 etter. That would be one. And I
21 think you sti 11 have ODC 12, which is March 28,
22 2012, 1 etter.
23 THE WITNESS:
24 can we take a break?
25
(Recess taken, 3: 11; Resumed 3:18.)
(504)831 l7 53
(800)749 1753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
2
3
4
5
MR. DUCOTE:
I don't think I have any other questions.
MR . MANNING:
I have no questions, Judge. wel 1, I have
lots of question, but I'm reserving my
6 questions for the hearing in this matter.
7 MR. FLANAGAN:
8 Do you want to read and s ign?
9 THE WITNESS:
10 I ' 1 1 d e f e r to yo u .
11 MR. FLANAGAN:
12 L et ' s d o t h at .
13 Read and sign.
14 (Whereupon the Deposition concluded at 3:20. )
15
* * * * * * *
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
88
(504)831-1753
4331\IBTAIRIE ROAD, #220
(800)749-1753
META.IRIE, LA 70005
1
WITNESS' CERTIFICATE
2
3
4 I, HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER, the undersigned, do
5 hereby certify that I have read the foregoing
6 deposition and it contains a true and correct
7 transcript of the testimony given by me:
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
( ) Without corrections.
( ) With corrections as reflected on
errata sheet(s) prepared by me and
made a part hereof.
HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER
Date
89
(504)831l753
(800)749 l 753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
1
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
2
3 I, BROOK KERRIGAN, Certified court Reporter , in and
4 for the State of Louisiana, do hereby certify that
90
5 HONORABLE DAWN AMACKER, after having been duly sworn
6 by me upon authority of R.S. 37:2554, did testify as
7 hereinbefore set forth in the foregoing 89 pages;
8 that this testimony was reported by me in the
9 stenotype reporting method, was prepared and
10 t r a n s c r i b e d by m e o r u n d e r my p e r s o n a 1 d i r e c t i o n a n d
11 supervision, and is a true and correct transcript to
12 the best of my ability and understanding; that the
13 transcript or by rules of the board; that I have
14 acted i n comp 1 i an c e w i th the pro hi bi ti on on
15 co n t r act u a 1 re 1 at i o n s h i p s , as d e f i n e d by L o u i s i a n a
16 code of c i vi 1 Pro c e du re Art i c 1 e 14 3 4 and i n r u 1 es
17 and adv i so r y op i n i on s of the board ; that I am not
18 r e 1 at e d t o co u n s e 1 o r to t h e pa rt i e s h e r e i n , n o r am
19 I otherwise interested in the outcome of this
20 matter.
21
22
23
24
25
(504)831 l753

BROOK KERRIGAN, RPR, CCR
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER
(800)7491753
METAIRIE, LA 70005
-

2014-01-22 Amacker Depo - Redacted

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

2014-01-22 Amacker Depo - Redacted

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen