Mark Geragos

for ineffective assistance, it's not a high bar to be thought of as competent.

And basically, judges say, could this have been a tactical decision?

Could this lawyer, is there a way to spin whatever decision the client is complaining about that the lawyer had a reason to do it tactically?

If they did, the judges are dismissive of it.

Well, in Arthur's point, I make it a habit of having the judge do an inquiry just so that you don't go down this road when the prosecution rests and have the judge do it on the record.

And in the instance, as I mentioned before to Arthur's point,

I actually will take the client into chambers, have it transcribed if they're taking the stand over my objection.

I've only done it a couple of times.

But I think of the one where a client did it after I thought I had tried the best defense case within the prosecutions you could ever do.

And he did it over my vehement objection.

And, you know, day one, he did well.

Day two, he disintegrated.

So...

Look, if I was prognosticating and I did prognosticate, then truth be told, talk to Brian about it.

I didn't ever think they were going to get trouble or punitive damages.

I expected only because there is part of what was built into the settlement agreement was a no appeal.

So the judge basically could act with impunity and he didn't have to worry about the circuit reversing him.

The strict language of the statute would seem to suggest that you have to award fees, but there's still yet another battle.

Even though the order says case closed, they're going to submit their fees request and costs, and then the judge is going to whittle it down.

Brian's team is going to file something that says, no, this was not approved.