If you are looking for an informative discussion about the Lauren Stevens case (which we reported on earlier here), I recommend ordering a copy of the ABA’s teleconference "After United States v. Lauren Stevens - The Potential for Criminal liability during Government investigations - What an in-house counsel needs to know," which was held earlier today. The panelists include The Honorable Roger W. Titus, the federal judge who presided over the Stevens case (and who dismissed the action mid-trial on a Rule 29 motion); Assistant United States Attorney Sara Bloom of the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts, who prosecuted the action; and Bill Hassler, a member of Stevens’ defense team. During the teleconference, a couple of interesting facts came up. First, the Stevens jurors applauded when Judge Titus informed them in private that he had dismissed the case and indicated that they would have gone the same way had the case gotten to them. Second, when asked whether it was true that the U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland refused to sign the Stevens indictment, no panelist wished to comment, but all panelists agreed that the Maryland U.S. Attorney did not sign either of the two indictments against Stevens. For further commentary about the Stevens case, click here and here.
Register Now As you are not an existing subscriber please register for your free daily legal newsfeed service.Register
If you have any questions about the service please contact email@example.com or call Lexology Customer Services on +44 20 7234 0606.
A CLE about the Lauren Stevens case
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please contact Andrew Teague at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Director, Legal Services
Cisco Systems, Inc