January 26, 2023
Newsweek – Rachel Fiset on Whether Prosecutors will Struggle to Establish Alex Murdaugh Motive
https://www.newsweek.com/alex-murdaugh-motive-trial-court-case-latest-attorney-prosecution-1776763
Criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset, a co-founder and managing partner of Los Angeles-based Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, spoke to Newsweek about the ongoing court case.
Fiset told Newsweek: “The prosecution opened their case today by laying out some of their crucial evidence and garnering sympathy for the victims who had no defensive wounds ‘as if they didn’t see a threat coming from their attacker.’
“The prosecution pointed out that Alex Murdaugh could be heard on a video his son Paul sent a friend right before the murders, which presumably places Murdaugh at the scene of the crime around the time of the murders.
“The evidence will also include a raincoat found at Alex Murdaugh’s parents’ house with large traces of gunpowder on it.
Fiset also predicted how the court case could play out over the next few weeks.
“The defense will attempt to poke holes in the prosecution’s evidence while depicting the Murdaughs as a loving family.
“They will portray Alex Murdaugh as a devoted father and husband who was overcome with grief by the murder of his wife and son.”
January 25, 2023
Daily Mail – Rachel Fiset on how Prosecutors will try to prove Brian Walshe Murdered his wife Ana without ever Finding her Body
Rachel Fiset, a managing partner at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, joins “DailyMail” to discuss how the prosecution will try to prove Brian Walshe murdered his wife without finding her body.
January 25, 2023
Newsweek – Rachel Fiset on Whether Donald Trump will Be Indicted, Georgia Grand Jury
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-georgia-crime-grand-jury-2020-election-1776525
Criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner ZFZ Law, said that if the special grand jury report is not made public, the information it contains could be “highly significant” to Trump, his campaign and Willis’ decision making.
“No matter what it says, the Trump campaign will immediately begin to spin the information in a way that suggests there were no crimes committed,” Fiset told Newsweek.
January 23, 2023
Mirror UK – Rachel Fiset on Alec Baldwin’s Four Biggest Mistakes as he Slams Rust Manslaughter Charge
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/us-celebrity-news/alec-baldwins-four-biggest-mistakes-29007474
Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, said these public statements could be used against him.
“Generally speaking, when a possible defendant is under investigation, public statements about that investigation only serve to raise potential bias against the defendant,” Fiset said.
The lawyer added that these public statements could be used “against him later to reduce his credibility”.
January 23, 2023
The Washington Post – Rachel Fiset Discusses Alec Baldwin’s ‘Rust’ Comments which may Hurt him
Baldwin’s public attempts to cast blame elsewhere may have backfired legally, according to Rachel Fiset, a managing partner at the California firm Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo.
“The deflection of blame that was constantly coming out of his mouth, even as he struggled to deal with this accident — because I think everybody believes that was an accident — probably just rubbed [the prosecutors] the wrong way, because what prosecutors want to see is remorse,” Fiset said. “They want to see that somebody has taken a thoughtful, measured approach to something as tragic as this and that it would never happen again.”
January 23, 2023
NewsNation – Attorney breaks down jury selection process in Alex Murdaugh trial | NewsNation Live
The trial of disgraced South Carolina attorney Alex Murdaugh is set to begin Monday. Rachel Fiset, an attorney, joined NewsNation to break down the jury selection process in the double-murder trial.
January 20, 2023
BBC World News – Rachel Fiset Analyzes “Rust” Fatal Shooting Charges Against Alec Baldwin
Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset, the cofounder of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, joined BBC World News to discuss the involuntary manslaughter charge against Alec Baldwin and what his defense will likely be.
January 20, 2023
Reuters – Rachel Fiset on Baldwin Facing Manslaughter Charge Over Film-set Shooting
Actor Alec Baldwin faces involuntary manslaughter charges carrying prison time for the fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins during the 2021 filming of the movie ‘Rust’ in New Mexico.
January 20, 2023
Newsweek – Rachel Fiset on Brian Walshe Likely to Change Plea as Defense ‘Too Weak’
https://www.newsweek.com/brian-walshe-likely-plead-guilty-defense-weak-attorney-rachel-fiset-1774982
Criminal Defense attorney Rachel Fiset, managing partner of Los Angeles-based Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, spoke to Newsweek and reflected on the case.
She noted the recent reports on Brian Walshe that indicated that someone Googled topics related to disposing of a body on his son’s iPad.
These searches were revealed by the prosecution during Brian Walshe’s arraignment on Wednesday.
Some of the Google searches allegedly made included: “How to stop a body from decomposing,” “How long does DNA last,” “Dismemberment,” “the best ways to dispose of a body,” and how to clean blood from wooden floor.”
Speaking on this development, Fiset said: “Brian may have used his son’s iPad to make the gruesome Google searches because he thought it wouldn’t be searched, but if prosecutors can prove he had access to it, and his fingerprints were on it, then it is most likely he made the searches, and not one of his 2-, 4-, or 6-year-old sons.
“While this is circumstantial evidence, it is very damning. The reason investigators take computers is to find evidence that looks exactly like this.
“To get around the hearsay of the searches, forensic experts will need to authenticate the searches, and prosecutors will use the searches as party admissions from Brian that he committed the crime.
“They’ll have to prove that this is reliable evidence and show that he couldn’t have meant something else, or that it was a misspelling.
She also discussed what strategy Brian Walshe’s defense attorneys may use.
She continued: “Brian’s defense attorneys will try to argue that everything is circumstantial. That investigators don’t have the body, can’t show the body, and don’t have videos of Brian committing the crime.
“But, the cameras are starting to place him at the scene, and when you combine that surveillance footage with the evidence they do have, I don’t see a lot going in Brian’s favor in this case right now.
“At some point, I think he will plead guilty, because his case will be too weak to fight this.”
January 20, 2023
CBS News – Legal expert explains the involuntary manslaughter charge Alec Baldwin is facing
Actor Alec Baldwin will be charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the deadly 2021 shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the New Mexico set of the movie “Rust,” prosecutors announced Thursday. Attorney Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset and Zalduendo LLP, breaks down the details of the case.
January 19, 2023
Yahoo Entertainment – Rachel Fiset Quoted as ‘A Bit Surprised’ at Baldwin Manslaughter Charges
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/legal-analyst-bit-surprised-baldwin-234639938.htm
https://www.oleantimesherald.com/legal-analyst-a-bit-surprised-at-baldwin-charges/video_4dab6255-99fc-5b3b-8666-4025acbd08b4.html
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/legal-analyst-a-bit-surprised-at-baldwin-charges/video/3ccf6e123fc880cb0fc99287c5c8798a
https://lufkindailynews.com/ap_video/legal-analyst-a-bit-surprised-at-baldwin-charges/video_2ea87fb9-6632-5cec-a715-070e2020c260.html
Los Angeles-based legal expert Rachel Fiset says she’s “a bit surprised” at the involuntary manslaughter charges brought against actor Alec Baldwin for the killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins while filming “Rust.” However, she believes the case will go to trial with Baldwin hoping to clear his name.
January 19, 2023
People – Rachel Fiset on the Case Against Bryan Kohberger Idaho Murders
https://people.com/crime/inside-case-against-bryan-kohberger-legal-experts-idaho-murders/
Criminal defense attorney and co-founder of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP ,Rachel Fiset, told PEOPLE in a statement that she believes the defense could still have a strong case, depending on the test results from the items seized at Kohberger’s home.
“The prosecution has still only presented a circumstantial case and we don’t know the test results of everything that investigators have taken,” she said. “Those test results on stains and animal fibers may add up to a big nothing.”
January 19, 2023
CBS Los Angles | KCAL News – Rachel Fiset on the Alec Baldwin “Rust” Shooting Charges
Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset, the cofounder of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, analyzes the charges against Alec Baldwin for involuntary manslaughter.
January 19, 2023
NewsNation – Alec Baldwin charged with manslaughter in fatal “Rust” shooting
Rachel Fiset joins Marni Hughes to discuss the charges filed against Alec Baldwin in the fatal 2021 shooting on the set of his movie “Rust,” that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounded director Joel Souza.
January 17, 2023
NewsNation Live – Murdaugh trial starts on Monday
Jury selection in the Alex Murdaugh trial for the deaths of his wife and son begins Monday. Rachel Fiset breaks down what you can expect from this trial’s proceedings.
January 12, 2023
NewsNation Rush Hour – Rachel Fiset on Kohberger “Righ Move” to Waive Speedy Trial
Idaho murder suspect Bryan Kohberger waived his right to a speedy preliminary hearing, which an Idaho judge set for June 26. Rachel Fiset, managing partner at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, and Gary Brucato, a forensic psychologist, weigh in on the decision. Fiset said it was the “right move” by the defense team to delay proceedings because it gives them more time to prepare their case.
January 3, 2023
The Sunday Times – Michael Zweiback on Whether Sam Bankman-Fried’s Girlfriend will Help Send him to Jail
Michael Zweiback, a white-collar lawyer, said: “He’s living in a pretty nice environment for someone in his position right now — but two years from now, that probably won’t be the case.”
Zweiback said: “If you look at what happened in the Madoff case, the trustee was empowered to go and find the money. They did a very effective job at hunting down as much as they possibly could to ensure that Madoff and his family were destitute. I fully expect that this is what will happen in this case.”
January 3, 2023
Newsweek – Rachel Fiset on Kari Lake Running Out of Options to Overturn Election
Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset told Newsweek that “a route forward for Lake [is] virtually impossible.”
December 28, 2022
Spectrum News 1 – Michael Zweiback discusses charges against FTX found Sam Bankman-Fried
December 23, 2022
Good Morning America – Closing arguments in Megan Thee Stallion shooting case wrap up
December 23, 2022 – Michael Zweiback weighs in on the disappearance of a key witness in the trial involving three-time Grammy winner, Megan Thee Stallion, and fellow rapper Tory Lanez, who prosecutors say shot at her feet after a party in the summer of 2020.t Watch the story here: https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/video/closing-arguments-megan-thee-stallion-shooting-case-wrap-95744377
December 22, 2022
CoinDesk TV | White collar criminal defense expert Michael Zweiback speaks on Sam Bankman-Fried news
December 20, 2022
AP – L.A. Jury Finds Harvey Weinstein Guilty of Rape
Rachel Fiset speaks to the AP about the verdict in Harvey Weinstein’s Los Angeles trial.
December 20, 2022
KNX News – Rachel Fiset on the Weinstein Verdict
December 20, 2022
CBS News – Harvey Weinstein found guilty of rape and sexual assault in Los Angeles trial, but acquitted on some charges
Disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein was found guilty Monday of rape and sexual assault in Los Angeles, though the jury acquitted him on some counts. He is already serving time in New York on similar charges. Attorney Rachel Fiset joins CBS News’ John Dickerson to discuss this breaking story.
December 14, 2022
Bloomberg – Michael Zweiback on Bankman-Fried’s Arrest in Bahamas which sets up US Extradition Fight
Bankman-Fried could ultimate decide to return to the US, said Michael Zweiback, a Los Angeles-based criminal defense lawyer with extradition experience. He said many Americans choose to return rather than sit in a foreign jail. Though Bankman-Fried was living in a luxury penthouse in the Bahamas, there’s no guarantee he would be released on bail during the extradition process, Zweiback said.
“He can waive extradition and of course he will be placed in handcuffs and put on board a plane with an escort from the US Marshals Service and brought to La Guardia or JFK Airport and brought straight to the SDNY courthouse.” Zweiback said, referring to the Manhattan federal court.
“He can sign extradition paperwork tomorrow and be there within a week.”
December 13, 2022
CNBC – Michael Zweiback on Sam Bankman-Fried Charges
CNBC’s Kate Rooney and Michael Zweiback, criminal defense attorney at ZFZ Law and former federal prosecutor, join ‘Power Lunch’ to discuss the indictment against Sam Bankman-Fried, the timeline of extradition, and the battle between Bahamas courts and U.S courts over FTX’s bankruptcy.
December 12, 2022
The Street – Michael Zweiback on FTX Collapse: Bankman-Fried Wants to Avoid Arrest on U.S. Soil
“He’s in the Bahamas because he doesn’t want to be arrested, which will happen the minute he sets foot on U.S. soil,” said White-collar criminal defense attorney Michael Zweiback, co-founder of Los Angeles-based Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP. “This is why he has created an artificial environment, saying he’s cooperating but doing so through a computer screen. It’s a false, fictional world.”
Zweiback indicated that the only way Bankman-Fried would return to U.S. soil is through an order of extradition in the Bahamas.
But he warned that that “would take 18 months to 3 years. The U.S. has to proceed in making the request, with the charges they’re going to proceed on were he to be prosecuted and tried in the U.S., so they can’t simply amend the indictment after he has an order of extradition.”
December 6, 2022
Vulture – Rachel Fiset on the Biggest Questions Ahead of the Tory Lanez–Megan Thee Stallion Trial
https://www.vulture.com/article/megan-thee-stallion-tory-lanez-trial-shooting-questions.html
“It happens frequently that people change their story. Some of it is shock, and in talking to investigators, people get very nervous, and often they’ll not fully think through what they’re saying,” said Rachel Fiset, an L.A. criminal-defense attorney and C-founder of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP. “So you’ll have small misrepresentations in a case like this, where there’s a relationship involved”; sometimes one person might be trying to protect a person they’re close with — even if they’ve been victimized by them.
December 2, 2022
CBS News – How is Harvey Weinstein’s Los Angeles trial different from New York prosecution?
Closing arguments are underway in the Harvey Weinstein sexual misconduct trial in Los Angeles. CBS News anchors Elaine Quijano and Errol Barnett spoke with Rachel Fiset, a co-founder and managing partner of the law firm Zweiback, Fiset and Zalduendo, about the case.
December 1, 2022
NewsNation – Analyst breaks down the Michael Vaughan case | NewsNation Live
Attorney Rachel Fiset explains what police are likely to be looking for in the case of missing boy Michael Vaughan, including the charges against Sarah Wondra who has been arrested for failing to report a death.
December 1, 2022
Newsweek – Rachel Fiset on Donald Trump Losing His Free Pass Over Presidential Lawsuits
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-absolute-immunity-lawsuit-president-1763488
Following Sullivan’s ruling, attorney Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo law firm, has suggested that the former president could be at risk of being found liable in the defamation lawsuit if another judge agrees his comments are not protected by presidential immunity.
“Trump is continually attempting to hide behind the immunity offered to presidents acting in their official duties as president. In Trump’s very unusual presidency, however, he attempted acts that arguably exceed the boundaries of his official duties,” Fiset told Newsweek.
“For instance, seeking to overturn an election illegally and disenfranchise voters for his own gain can be found to go beyond official duties and cross into acts that are ‘purely political’ and therefore subject to liability as this ruling supports.
“Likewise, as defamation could be found to be outside the boundaries of ‘official duties,’ Trump risks liability in Ms. Carroll’s suit against him as well,” Fiset added.
November 23, 2022
Nicki Swift – Michael Zweiback on Todd And Julie Chrisley’s Disastrous Legal Strategy and Stiff Sentences
Michael Zweiback — a partner and co-founder of the Los Angeles-based law firm, Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo — told Nicki Swift exclusively that reality stars Todd and Julie Chrisley arguably played their cards wrong. Zweiback explained, “These are very stiff sentences, and I’m sure the Chrisleys were anticipating something much lower. They never took responsibility for the crimes that were alleged. They blamed them on other people.”
As Zweiback elaborated, owning up to the charges is meaningful in more ways than one. He commented, “The judge has to consider whether this is someone who is going to do this again, and they’re more inclined to believe the person won’t do it again if they acknowledge their bad deeds.” Zweiback also expressed that the Chrisleys’ lifestyle — at least as it was portrayed on television — was not reality, and he believes the couple is “going to be broke” financially going forward. “I expect a huge restitutionary judgment. In tax cases, there are also tax penalties for fraud that are imposed as well, because there is both a civil and criminal component so I expect the restitution and tax penalty is going to be extremely significant, and the banks are going to go after whatever assets remain,” he said.
Finally, on the topic of the judge not staggering the sentences, as was done for Joe and Theresa Giudice, per Bravo, Zweiback stated, “Had they both pleaded guilty, it probably would have been a very different outcome. Their strategy completely backfired on them and failed in every respect.”
November 23, 2022
The Sun – Rachel Fiset on Kim Kardashian Potentially Winning Full Custody of Kids in Divorce from Kanye West
https://www.the-sun.com/entertainment/6733128/kim-kardashian-win-full-custody-kids-divorce-kanye/
Rachel Fiset, managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, also gave her expert opinion on the situation.
“After Kanye skipped this deposition, they’ve given him one more date to appear. If he doesn’t, he may face sanctions during their upcoming trial, such as a fine or a monetary award to Ms. Kardashian, and/or he may have the facts which they were trying to uncover during the deposition change into admissions against him,” she said.
“Avoiding a deposition in litigation is treated seriously by the judge, particularly when it is a repeated offense.
“If he is trying to avoid giving information that would hurt his case by skipping a deposition, a judge might automatically determine that the bad information is a fact inside of the trial, because he was uncooperative.
“In severe instances, it can be contempt, which can either be civil or criminal as determined by the judge.
“Overall, this can hurt his case. In the most severe instance, the judge can rule against him and he could get a lesser custody award and a less favorable monetary disposition.
“But more likely, the judge will simply determine that the facts Kim Kardashian alleges are true, and not give him the chance to defend himself.”
November 23, 2022
NewsNation – Attorney: Man who drove into LA sheriff’s cadets fell asleep | Rush Hour
Lawyers for the driver who hit a group of sheriff’s cadets in Los Angeles say the crash was not intentional, disputing an account by the Los Angeles County sheriff. Attorneys for 22-year-old Nicholas Gutierrez say he fell asleep at the wheel while on his way to work, NewsNation affiliate KTLA reported. Legal analyst Rachel Fiset of Zweiback, Fiset and Zalduendo LLP says it’s possible the sheriff spoke too soon about the crash being intentional.
November 19, 2022
KNX News On Demand – Rachel Fiset on How Important the Special Counsel is When it Comes to Investigating Donald Trump
November 18, 2022
Fox Business – Rachel Fiset Analyzes Elizabeth Holmes Sentencing & FTX
November 18, 2022
November 8, 2022
KNX In-Depth – Rachel Fiset on Justice Department Action if Trump Runs for President
There are reports that Mr. Trump could announce another presidential run as early as tonight. We go In Depth into how the Justice Department could react.
October 28, 2022
Nicki Swift – Rachel Fiset on Tory Lanez’s House Arrest Exposing Red Flags Ahead Of Megan Thee Stallion Trial
https://www.nickiswift.com/1074943/lawyers-agree-tory-lanezs-house-arrest-exposes-his-red-flags-ahead-of-megan-thee-stallion-trial-exclusive/?utm_campaign=clip
[Rachel] Fiset noted that the house arrest order may not make it to the jury, but it does indicate that the judge seems to buy the prosecution’s noncompliance argument. “That could help the prosecution in requests that are completely up to the judge — pretrial orders and things like that,” Fiset said. She added, “Once a judge finds a defendant noncompliant, they may give more weight to the prosecution’s arguments.”
October 26, 2022
New York Post – Rachel Fiset on the Likeliness Kanye West will have a Hard Time Finding New Divorce Lawyer
https://nypost.com/2022/10/25/kanye-west-could-struggle-to-find-new-divorce-lawyer-experts/
Lawyer Rachel Fiset added that a firm might not want to align themselves with the comments that West made because it could drive away Jewish people they represent.
“An attorney needs to do a financial analysis of who they represent,” Fiset said. “They may lose clients as a result of representing Kanye.”
October 25, 2022
Newsweek – Donald Trump Breaks Silence on Steve Bannon: ‘Fighting for His Country’
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-steve-bannon-contempt-congress-1754151
Criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset said Bannon’s appeal process will be be lengthy, suggesting the Trump ally could be playing a “stalling game” in the hope that a new president may ultimately officer him a pardon.
“I do get the feeling the judge was trying to walk a line between the prosecutors’ request and Bannon’s request, and at the same time send a message going forward for future congressional hearings relating to Jan. 6 and other issues regarding Trump’s presidency,” Fiset told Newsweek.
“The judge is sending a clear message that he doesn’t buy Bannon’s claims that he was protected under executive privilege when he had not been an official advisor to Trump for years prior to January 6.”
October 24, 2022
NewsNation – ‘He has done himself no favors’: Attorney on Waukesha parade attack suspect | Rush Hour
“He has done himself no favors,” Criminal defense attorney Rachel Fiset said weighing in on the trial of the Wisconsin man accused of killing six people and injuring dozens when he allegedly drove his SUV through a Christmas parade last year.
October 21, 2022
CBS News – Jury finds Kevin Spacey not liable in sex abuse trial
A New York City jury Thursday found Kevin Spacey not liable for battery in his sexual abuse trial. Actor Anthony Rapp had claimed the Academy Award winner was sexually inappropriate toward him when he was 14. Jurors decided that Rapp did not prove his allegations. Legal analyst Rachel Fiset joined John Dickerson to discuss the verdict.
October 14, 2022
NY Daily News – Rachel Fiset on Nikolas Cruz Avoiding Death Penalty After Jury Recommends Life in Prison
“That is a huge defense win for Cruz’s heinous acts. The defense — while heavily criticized for its actions — stopped while they were ahead and it clearly affected the jury in the best way possible for their young client,” said Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer Rachel Fiset, co-founder of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP.
October 7, 2022
KNXAM – Hunter Biden faces possible criminal charges
October 5, 2022
CBS News – Indictments in Flint case deemed invalid
Seven defendants who were facing federal charges related to the Flint, Michigan, water crisis, have had those charges dropped. Rachel Fiset, co-founder and senior partner at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, LLC, breaks down the legal arguments being made for and against the defendants and the potential for them to face future legal action.
October 4, 2022
What Does The Federal False Claims Act Forbid?
The federal False Claims Act (FCA) makes it illegal to knowingly defraud the federal government in a variety of scenarios, including submitting inflated and/or otherwise fraudulent Medicaid/Medicare claims, providing substandard goods or services to the U.S. military, and customs fraud.
Billions of dollars have been recovered for the federal government over the many decades of the FCA’s existence through successful FCA lawsuits. Notably, FCA lawsuits are typically initiated by private individuals with knowledge of illegal activity, and, if successful, said private individuals are eligible to receive a financial reward of between 15-30% of the total financial penalties imposed on an FCA defendant.
What Constitutes A Violation Of The False Claims Act?
In proving an FCA claim, a whistleblower plaintiff (and/or the government) must allege facts relating to one of the following eight scenarios involving an individual or entity that:
- Knowingly presents or causes to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;
- Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim;
- Conspires to commit a violation of the FCA;
- Has possession, custody, or control of public property or money used or to be used by the state or by any political subdivision and knowingly delivers or causes to be delivered less than all of that property;
- Is authorized to make or deliver a document certifying receipt of property used or to be used by the state or by any political subdivision and knowingly makes or delivers a receipt that falsely represents the property used or to be used;
- Knowingly buys, or receives as a pledge of an obligation or debt, public property from any person who lawfully may not sell or pledge the property;
- Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the state or to any political subdivision, or knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids, or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the state or to any political subdivision; OR
- Is a beneficiary of an inadvertent submission of a false claim, subsequently discovers the falsity of the claim, and fails to disclose the false claim to the state or the political subdivision within a reasonable time after discovery of the false claim.
Any number of situations might qualify as grounds for a successful FCA claim, but often such a situation involves an individual or entity receiving federal government funds or reimbursements for goods or services that were not provided, not necessary, not what they purport to be, or of inferior quality.
Below are several recent examples of allegations in successful FCA lawsuits:
- A defense supplier misled the government about its cybersecurity practices to gain missile defense and rocket engine contracts
- A software company misled the government in fraudulently obtaining multiple PPP loans
- A medical service provider misled the government with respect to its security procedures for patient records
- A specialized footwear company billed the government for what purported to be custom-designed medical goods but which were generically created
- A pharmaceutical company paid kickbacks to doctors and pharmacies to promote its prescription drugs while also promoting the drugs it knew “were unsafe, ineffective, and medically unnecessary, and that often led to abuse and diversion”
Can I File an FCA Claim if I Had a Role in the Violation?
It is often the case that a person with some connection to an FCA violation comes forward as the whistleblower to expose the fraudulent activity and collect a whistleblower reward. After all, it is typical for those involved in fraudulent activity to attempt to limit the number of people who are aware of the crime to those who are necessary to conduct the illegal activity, and thus it is common for a person who may have had some direct or indirect role in said activity to come forward as a whistleblower (although to be clear, nearly anyone with sufficient knowledge of said illegal activity can act as a whistleblower, even if they are a complete outsider to the business).
The text of the FCA makes clear that a person who had a role in the FCA fraud – even a person who initiated the fraud – may act as a whistleblower in an FCA suit, although the financial reward that person receives may be reduced as a result. Notably, a person who has already been convicted of the underlying activity may not pursue a whistleblower claim. Furthermore, if the government has already initiated a legal proceeding regarding the underlying activity – or if the whistleblower is bringing information to the government that is already available through public sources (unless the whistleblower was the source) – a person may not obtain a financial reward. Thus, it is important to act quickly to avoid these types of scenarios.
Contact a False Claims Attorney
If you believe you have a knowledge of fraud that may form the basis of a successful FCA claim, you are highly encouraged to work with experienced FCA counsel to discuss and prepare your claim in a completely confidential environment.
By working with an experienced FCA attorney in pursuing your whistleblower claim, you can improve your chances of successfully obtaining a significant whistleblower reward, while also working proactively to protect yourself from retaliation. Because there are statutes of limitations issues related to FCA claims – and because typically only the first whistleblower to come forward with knowledge of illegal FCA violations is eligible to obtain a reward – it is important to work quickly in moving forward on pursuing a whistleblower reward with the assistance of an experienced FCA attorney.
October 3, 2022
September 27, 2022
Understanding The Silenced No More Act
What Is The Silenced No More Act?
For many years, confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses have been common in employment-related agreements, including, among other things, employment contracts signed at the commencement of employment along with termination or severance agreements concluding such employment. Typically, these clauses worked to limit what the employee or former employee could say with respect to working conditions and conduct observed or experienced during the course of their employment.
However, in more recent years, these types of clauses have come under increasing scrutiny, particularly in the wake of revelations about abuses of power in the form of sexual harassment and other sexual misconduct in the workplace, which often went unreported at least in part due to use of non-disparagement and confidentiality clauses.
California state law implemented in 2022, however, addresses some of the perceived imbalances between employers and employees related to such controversial clauses by limiting the ability of employers to employ or enforce them. The “Silenced No More Act”, implemented on January 1, 2022, as California Senate Bill 331, prevents employers from placing certain restrictions on employees relating to harassment, discrimination, and retaliation conduct that is prohibited by California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), California’s primary civil rights law relating to employment.
What Does the Silenced No More Act Prohibit?
Pursuant to the Silenced No More Act, employers are prohibited from entering into certain contracts with employees that prevent the employee from discussing illegal acts in the workplace relating to prohibited sexual assault, sexual harassment, workplace discrimination, workplace discrimination, or retaliation against an employee.
According to the Silenced No More Act legislative record, “FEHA makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer, in exchange for a raise or bonus, or as a condition of employment or continued employment, to require an employee to sign a nondisparagement agreement or other document that purports to deny the employee the right to disclose information about unlawful acts in the workplace, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment or discrimination.”
The legislative record goes on to clarify that the Silenced No More Act prohibits an employer from requiring an employee to sign a nondisparagement agreement or other document to the extent it has the purpose or effect of denying the employee the right to disclose information about those acts. Under this new law, it is, therefore, an “unlawful employment practice for an employer or former employer to include in any agreement related to an employee’s separation from employment any provision that prohibits the disclosure of information about unlawful acts in the workplace.”
Specifically, pursuant to the express language of the Silenced No More Act, a nondisparagement or other contractual provision that restricts an employee’s ability to disclose information related to conditions in the workplace shall include, in substantial form, the following language: “Nothing in this agreement prevents you from discussing or disclosing information about unlawful acts in the workplace, such as harassment or discrimination or any other conduct that you have reason to believe is unlawful.”
The law does not apply to confidentiality clauses relating to information regarding legal acts in the workplace, for example, a clause preventing an employee from discussing certain business strategies and other trade secrets relating to the employer’s business.
Notably, the law makes an exception for negotiated settlement agreements related to resolving pending litigation, for example, litigation pursued by an employee against a former employer relating to acts in the workplace where the employer enters into a settlement agreement with the employee involving financial compensation to the employee and an obligation on the part of the employee not to discuss the underlying acts at issue.
Key Takeaways From the Silenced No More Act for Whistleblowers
Whistleblowers who come forward with knowledge of illegal acts by an employer – whether a current or former employer – play a key role in preventing unfair competition, consumer fraud, and fraud perpetrated on taxpayers, among other things.
Furthermore, under certain state and federal whistleblower statutes – including the federal False Claims Act (FCA), the California False Claims Act (CFCA), and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the SEC Whistleblower statute) – individuals who come forward with actionable evidence of illegal acts by a current or former employer may be eligible for a significant financial reward for their efforts in doing so.
Those individuals who are considering becoming whistleblowers can often feel concerned about potential negative consequences of doing so, such as termination of employment or being held liable for violating a confidentiality clause or non-disparagement claim signed with an employer. What the Silenced No More Act makes clear is that when whistleblowers come forward with evidence of the types of illegal conduct that form the basis of the aforementioned statutes – which relate to illegal conduct such as Medicare and Medicaid fraud, customs fraud, military and defense procurement fraud, contractor fraud, and securities law violations, among other things – cannot be prevented from doing so by an employment agreement, severance agreement, or termination agreement.
September 20, 2022
NewsNation – What’s next after Adnan Syed’s conviction tossed? | Rush Hour
A Baltimore judge on Monday ordered the release of Adnan Syed after overturning Syed’s conviction for the 1999 murder of high school student Hae Min Lee, a case that was chronicled in the hit podcast “Serial.” Prosecutors have 30 days to decide whether to retry him, and attorney Rachel Fiset said prosecutors are likely working “very diligently” to determine what to do next. Rush Hour is a no fluff, no filler newscast hosted by Nichole Berlie that taps into a nationwide network of thousands of journalists to get you up-to-the-minute news from across the country.
September 20, 2022
Understanding the Federal False Claims Act and the California False Claims Act
What Is The False Claims Act
The federal False Claims Act – or FCA as it is commonly known – is a law originally enacted during the Civil War as a way of preventing unscrupulous private suppliers to the Union Army from defrauding the federal government by providing inferior goods. The FCA was notable in providing a mechanism by which individual whistleblowers with knowledge of fraudulent activity targeting the federal government (and therefore U.S. taxpayers) could bring a lawsuit to recover damages, a portion of which would be received by the private whistleblower personally.
Over the last century and a half, FCA litigation has become commonplace, and each year many whistleblowers with knowledge of such fraudulent activity – most often in the form of Medicare and Medicaid fraud, customs fraud, and military procurement fraud – successfully pursue FCA lawsuits, with many individual whistleblowers collecting multi-million dollar rewards for doing so in the process.
A number of states have followed suit in enacting their own state law versions of the FCA, and California was indeed the first state to enact a state-level FCA statute by which individuals with knowledge of fraud perpetrated against California taxpayers can bring a successful California FCA claim to both fight taxpayer fraud and collect a sizable financial reward for their work.
What Is The California False Claims Act
California’s False Claims Act (CFCA) was enacted into law in 1987 as a way of combating fraud perpetrated against local and state entities. Initially, there was little litigation based on the CFCA, but numerous CFCA claims have been brought in recent years.
Typically a person with knowledge of fraud will work with experienced CFCA counsel to develop the facts necessary for their claim and then file a suit. A CFCA complaint is then drafted and provided to the California state Attorney General’s Office. State prosecutors will then determine whether to join the CFCA complaint. Regardless of whether the state joins the lawsuit, the CFCA complaint may continue against the alleged offenders. Penalties for a successful CFCA lawsuit include three times the amount of damages suffered by the state government in addition to fines.
Financial Compensation for CFCA Whistleblowers
Like its federal counterpart, the CFCA provides significant financial incentives for whistleblowers with knowledge of fraud targeting the state government, and which are actually more generous by percentage than those provided by the FCA. Under the CFCA, a whistleblower who pursues a successful claim can receive as a financial reward anywhere between 15% to 33% of the financial penalties and fines levied against a defendant where the state government is a party to the litigation, and between 25% and 50% of such penalties and fines when the state government does not choose to join the litigation.
Since the enactment of the CFCA, over $2 billion has been levied against CFCA defendants, thus the financial rewards available to those who pursue a successful CFCA claim can be significant.
Foundations of a CFCA Claim
The elements of a successful CFCA claim are similar to those under the FCA. In proving a CFCA claim, a whistleblower plaintiff (and/or the state government) must allege facts relating to one of the following eight scenarios involving an individual or entity that:
- Knowingly presents or causes to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;
- Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim;
- Conspires to commit a violation of the CFCA;
- Has possession, custody, or control of public property or money used or to be used by the state or by any political subdivision and knowingly delivers or causes to be delivered less than all of that property;
- Is authorized to make or deliver a document certifying receipt of property used or to be used by the state or by any political subdivision and knowingly makes or delivers a receipt that falsely represents the property used or to be used;
- Knowingly buys, or receives as a pledge of an obligation or debt, public property from any person who lawfully may not sell or pledge the property;
- Knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the state or to any political subdivision, or knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids, or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the state or to any political subdivision; OR
- Is a beneficiary of an inadvertent submission of a false claim, subsequently discovers the falsity of the claim, and fails to disclose the false claim to the state or the political subdivision within a reasonable time after discovery of the false claim.
Any number of situations might qualify as grounds for a successful CFCA claim, but often such a situation involves an individual or entity receiving state government funds or reimbursements for goods or services that were not provided, not necessary, not what they purport to be, or of inferior quality.
Who Can File A Claim Under the CFCA?
Often, employees and managers of a business engaged in fraud targeting the state government bring CFCA claims, but anyone with knowledge of the underlying fraud who is able to provide sufficient evidence to begin the process of initiating a lawsuit may be eligible to do so, even in some cases where the plaintiff had some participation in the fraud itself.
Potential CFCA whistleblowers should be aware of the applicable statute of limitations, which requires that a suit be filed either within 6 years of the underlying fraudulent activity, or 3 years after the plaintiff became aware of the activity (or reasonably should have become aware of the activity), whichever comes first.
If you believe you have a knowledge of fraud that may form the basis of a successful CFCA claim, you are highly encouraged to work with experienced CFCA counsel to discuss and prepare your claim in a completely confidential environment.
September 15, 2022
NewsNation – Defense rests unexpectedly in Parkland school shooter case | Rush Hour
Attorneys for Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz suddenly rested their case Wednesday after calling only a fraction of their expected witnesses. Rachel Fiset, managing partner at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, said the defense team was likely trying to stop while they believed they were ahead.
September 13, 2022
When Is Title IX Applicable?
When people hear the words “Title IX” (aka “Title 9”), they may immediately think of high school and college sports.
September 6, 2022
Securities Fraud In California
Securities Fraud: Not Just for Wall Street Traders
The term securities fraud may bring to mind a certain type of conduct that happens in Wall Street banks and investment firms, far from the day-to-day work of entrepreneurs and small businesses in the big cities and small towns of California. Unfortunately, many people who are engaged in what they consider the regular work of owning and operating businesses that seem to have nothing to do with matters such as the initial public offerings or derivative swaps which make up the world of major financial centers can find themselves the subject of state and federal investigations into securities fraud.
Such investigations – which may be pursued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Market Integrity and Major Fraud Unit of the Department of Justice, or the Securities Unit of the Corporate Fraud Section of the California Attorney General’s Office, or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), among others – can involve severe civil and sometimes criminal penalties for those involved.
Individuals and entities who find themselves the subjects of a securities fraud investigation – which of course might include traders and investment bankers, but also entrepreneurs, promoters, and sales persons who may not have considered themselves to be in the “securities” business at all – are encouraged to work with experienced white collar defense counsel at the earliest sign of an enforcement action or investigation.
What Are Securities?
Most people understand that the type of stock that is traded on a major stock exchange such as the NYSE is a security. But in addition to stocks, other financial instruments such as bonds generally qualify as a security.
Moving beyond such traditional investment instruments, however, knowing what is and is not a security is not always crystal clear. For example, some types of cryptocurrency might be considered a security by relevant government authorities, while others may not. With respect to businesses which may not have publicly traded stocks on a major stock exchange, certain types of investments related to the business such as a promissory note or a limited partnership interest might also be considered a security.
Why is this important? Because if a financial interest is indeed a security, there are numerous state and federal regulations that obligate those offering such securities must comply with, and certain penalties for behavior which might otherwise not be objectionable (such as disclosing certain information related to the business – or not disclosing certain information – without complying with specific requirements) which can land a person in trouble with securities regulators, again even where the investigation target in question may not have considered themselves to be in the business of securities.
Types of Securities Fraud
Commonly investigated types of securities fraud include the following, among others:
- Selling unregistered or unqualified securities. Although not every security is required to be registered with relevant state and federal authorities, selling unregistered securities to investors who do not qualify to purchase such securities (e.g., persons who are considered accredited investors) may be considered securities fraud.
- Insider trading. Certain persons who have knowledge of the interior workings of a publicly-traded business that is not public knowledge may be liable for insider trading, and even those persons who learn of such “inside knowledge” through improper sources may be liable as well.
- Improper disclosures and failure to disclose. Those entities offering securities, whether as an issuer of the security (e.g. a business issuing ownership shares in the business), or those entities participating in the sale of securities may face securities fraud liability for making inaccurate disclosures, or even in failing to disclose certain information relevant to the business. As an extreme example, a company that attracts stock investors by indicating that it has several operating factories in Mexico, when no such business operations exist, would likely face exposure for securities fraud.
- Market manipulation. Traders and company insiders who attempt to improperly manipulate markets to benefit themselves, such as spreading untrue rumors to devalue a company’s stock or engaging in a “pump and dump” scheme to artificially inflate a stock’s price before selling it in the improperly inflated market are frequent subjects of securities fraud investigation.
Penalties
Penalties for securities fraud include state and federal civil penalties such as steep fines and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains. Additionally, an individual or entity may be banned from participating in certain financial activities for a period of time and may face severe reputational risk within the financial industry and/or their specific industry. Finally, in some cases white collar securities fraud defendants can face jail and prison time.
Seeking A White Collar Defense Attorney
If you believe you may be subject to a securities fraud investigation or other adverse action, or are concerned about future exposure whether related to your own conduct or the conduct of those with whom you are in business, it is important to employ skilled legal counsel to address these concerns.
The time to seek experienced counsel from a skilled white collar defense attorney is at the first signs of a potential government investigation, enforcement action or prosecution. Often, the first steps in responding to a potential government proceeding are the most critical in setting the course for an ultimate outcome that defends one’s interests, reputation, and, in some cases, freedom. Contact our office to speak with an experienced white collar defense attorney regarding your situation today.
September 1, 2022
El Nuevo Dia – Julio Herrera Velutini: Federal Judge orders held on a $1 million secured bond
After turning himself in on Wednesday at Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) offices in San Juan, banker Julio Herrera Velutini pleaded not guilty to charges related to the corruption case against former governor Wanda Vázquez Garced. Attorney Michael Zweiback joined him in Puerto Rico.
August 18, 2022
CBS News – Major media companies push for release of Mar-a-Lago affidavit
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/major-media-companies-push-for-release-of-mar-a-lago-affidavit/#x
A federal judge is holding a hearing in Florida on Thursday to discuss the affidavit supporting the search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago. Many of the nation’s largest media outlets, including CBS News, are arguing for its release. CBS News legal contributor Jessica Levinson and Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner of law firm Zweiback, Fiset and Zalduendo, gave their legal perspectives on the hearing.
August 18, 2022
ZFC Law LLP Announces Name Change and New Partner Jeanine Zalduendo
Zweiback, Fiset & Coleman LLP is proud to announce, effective August 18, 2022, our firm will now be known as Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP, or ZFZ Law. This exciting change comes as our new partner, Jeanine Zalduendo, joins the practice.
Specializing in complex and high-stakes commercial litigation, Jeanine comes to ZFZ Law from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. After graduating Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Chicago and earning her J.D. at Harvard Law School, she has led a successful and wide-ranging career litigating varied complex cases at all stages, including through trial and appeal. Jeanine has considerable expertise defending defamation and related torts, successfully defeating such claims against several high-profile clients, including Elon Musk in a groundbreaking defamation case arising out of statements made on Twitter. Jeanine was a key part of the trial team that obtained a complete jury verdict in Mr. Musk’s favor defeating plaintiff’s $190 million damages claim. She has also successfully represented Mr. Musk in numerous other First Amendment matters. Other representative clients in varied commercial litigation have included SoftBank Vision Fund, Tesla, Qualcomm, and Samsung, among others.
“Jeanine is an elite lawyer with outstanding results in high stakes trials — and she is one of my best friends,” says Rachel Fiset, Managing Partner at ZFZ. “Our firm is filled with outstanding attorneys with whom I love to practice law and she is a perfect fit. I feel incredibly lucky to start this next chapter with her by our side.”
“I am thrilled to have joined ZFZ”, says Jeanine. “I was already aware of the Firm’s stellar track record, and aggressive and unflinching approach to cases, but it has been inspiring to experience it firsthand as a member of the team. As a Cuban-American, our Firm’s dedication to diversity and female leadership was also a significant consideration for me. I am excited to be a part of its continued growth and leadership in those ways.”
About Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo
ZFZ Law is a premier majority women-owned law firm comprised of elite attorneys with a wide-ranging client base, including Fortune 500 companies, emerging growth companies, public entities and individuals. ZFZ lawyers include former top-ranking leaders in the Department of Justice, former federal law clerks and attorneys from the nation’s preeminent “Big Law” firms.
ZFZ achieves remarkable results for its clients in complex litigation, government investigations, and criminal defense while also providing highly sought-after advice in areas relating to privacy breach, cybersecurity, and compliance. ZFZ is a proud member of the National Association of Minority and Women-Owned Law Firms (NAMWOLF).
August 15, 2022
CourtTV – Vanessa Bryant Files Invasion of Privacy Civil Lawsuit
Attorney Rachel Fiset discusses Vanessa Bryant’s lawsuit against Los Angeles County, which alleges first responders took and shared photos of her husband Kobe Bryant’s dead body after his fatal helicopter crash in 2020, which also killed the couple’s daughter, Gianna.
August 11, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Attorney breaks down search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home
Defense attorney Rachel Fiset joins NewsNation “Prime” to analyze the FBI raid of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate and Trump’s invoking of the 5th amendment in a separate New York court case.
August 10, 2022
CBS News – “Very unprecedented”: Legal expert on the impact of FBI’s Mar-a-Lago search
The FBI searched former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort Monday as part of an investigation into a possible mishandling of classified documents. CBS News’ Lana Zak speaks with attorney Rachel Fiset, a co-founder and managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset and Coleman, to discuss the potential legal ramifications.
August 8, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Alex Jones ordered to pay $45.2M more to Sandy Hook parents
July 27, 2022
Newsy Tonight – Breaking down the legal challenges facing former President Donald Trump
July 22, 2022
CBS News – Temporary restraining order lifted against Ricky Martin
Attorney Rachel Fiset speaks on the temporary restraining order filed earlier this month against pop star Ricky Martin, as well as what it means now that the order has been dropped.
July 20, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Charges dropped in bodega stabbing
Defense attorney Rachel Fiset joins the show to discuss the decision by the Manhattan district attorney to drop charges against a bodega worker who stabbed and killed a man who attacked him.
July 19, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Longtime suspect and his father stand trial in Kristin Smart case
A trial is underway in connection to the disappearance of Kristin Smart. It’s a case that captivated the country ever since the young college freshman mysteriously vanished in 1996. Her body has never been found, but prosecutors think they know who killed her.
July 18, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Legal expert explains self-defense laws
Defense lawyer Rachel Fiset joins NewsNation “Prime” to explain self-defense laws and how they differ across states. Some states, like Florida, have “stand your ground laws,” while others have “retreat” laws.
July 13, 2022
CBS News – January 6 committee accuses Trump of possible witness tampering
The House committee investigating Jan. 6 says evidence shows former president Donald Trump attempted to contact one of its cooperating witnesses. CBS News chief election and campaign specialist Robert Costa and Rachel Fiset, co-founder and managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset and Coleman LLP, discuss the allegations.
July 12, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Bodega stabbing “looks like self defense:” Analyst
Rachel Fiset, an attorney with Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, says the New York bodega worker facing a murder charge has a strong argument for self-defense based on the video released so far.
July 12, 2022
Yahoo News – Rachel Fiset on Juror Discrepancy in Johnny Depp and Amber Heard
by Taryn Rider | July 11, 2022
Johnny Depp responded to Amber Heard‘s attempt to toss the verdict and $10.35 million judgment from their defamation trial. In Monday’s filing obtained by Yahoo Entertainment, Depp’s legal team declares “the verdict was well supported by the overwhelming evidence, consistent with the law, and should not be set aside.”
Heard’s lawyers laid out multiple reasons the verdict should be dismissed, including a discrepancy over juror 15. They say the 52-year-old man, who shares the same last name as his father and lives in the same household, wrongly reported to court when his older father was summoned. Heard’s lawyers are asking for a mistrial. They also argue the judgment is “inconsistent and irreconcilable” with the jury concluding each star defamed the other. The jury sided with Depp on all three of his defamation claims against Heard while ruling in favor of one of three of her counterclaims.
Depp’s team rejects Heard’s “frivolous” arguments and claim the actress’s team was well aware of the juror discrepancy before trial.
“Following a six-week jury trial, a jury of Ms. Heard’s peers rendered a verdict against her in virtually all respects. Though understandably displeased with the outcome of trial, Ms. Heard has identified no legitimate basis to set aside in any respect the jury’s decision. Virginia law is clear that a verdict is not to be set aside unless it is ‘plainly wrong or without evidence to support it,'” Depp’s lawyers say.
Legal experts seem to side with Depp.
“The law in Virginia does not support Amber’s claim that she was denied due process because of the issue with juror 15. Her team had the opportunity to question the juror or to raise this issue at that time with the judge. Heard’s team accepted this jury panel with the information that they had then and there is no new information that come out since. They had the list of jurors that identified the juror information and birthdate. This motion is a grasp, not a real possibility,” legal analyst Emily D. Baker tells Yahoo Entertainment.
Attorney Rachel Fiset, managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, agrees assuming nothing else comes out about the juror.
“Heard’s claims that the juror incorrectly served on the jury, without more, is unlikely to provide the basis for a new trial,” she tells Yahoo. “If, however, the facts bear out that the incorrect juror was also hiding other evidence that influenced the verdict in this case — she may have a shot at a new trial.”
Heard’s motions are to be expected and it’s unlikely the verdict will be tossed.
“Trial judges normally do not disturb jury verdicts absent proof that an error occurred at trial and that error changed the outcome of trial,” says defamation lawyer Jeff Lewis. “Heard has also argued that the verdict was legally inconsistent and should be set aside because the jury awarded some relief to both sides. But as Depp pointed out, the core of the case: whether Depp ever abused Heard, was resolved by the jury completely in Depp’s favor. The jury’s finding against Depp did not relate to that core issue but instead on a side issue: whether Depp’s lawyer falsely stated that Heard dummied up a crime scene and falsified evidence. Depp argues that those jury findings are reconcilable and there is no basis to set the verdict aside.”
Lewis adds, “These types of post-trial motions are commonly made as a precursor to an appeal but in practice are very rarely granted. These motions will likely be denied but they are a good indication of the types of arguments that Heard will repeat to the appellate court.”
Heard’s lawyer previously said her client cannot pay the millions owed to Depp. The Aquaman 2 actress purportedly rejected one last chance to settle and will likely appeal if her motions for a mistrial are denied.
June 29, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Accused gunman could testify on behalf of parents
June 28, 2022 – Are they throwing their son under the bus to save themselves? The parents of the 15-year-old charged with a shooting rampage at a Michigan high school could call on their son to testify in their case.
June 13, 2022
Fox 11 News – Rachel Fiset comments on a Controversial New Pet Adoption Policy
THOUSAND OAKS, Calif. – June 13, 2002 – by Gina Silva
At Shelter Hope Pet Shop in Thousand Oaks, the angry, threatening calls keep on coming in.
“Get the hell out of our country psychopath,” said a man who didn’t leave his name. The emails in the thousands are also jamming the inbox. All because owner Kim Sill is asking this question on the pet adoption application: “How do you feel about gun control?”
Sill says, “I don’t think it’s a bad thing to ask people how they feel about gun control. I think it’s good to know how your neighbors feel.”
The trouble began when Kim sent out a newsletter supporting gun control and announced her private rescue shelter would stop adopting-out animals to anyone opposing gun restrictions.
“I believe that you should be 25 years old before you should have the right to buy a gun, I believe that a mental health check is necessary,” she said. Sill says responsible gun owners wouldn’t necessarily have a problem adopting a pet at her shop but NRA members are not allowed.
“We’re a dog rescue, we’re a non-profit, we get to choose who gets these dogs,” says Sill.
Trial Attorney Rachel Fiset says Sill is not breaking the law by refusing to allow NRA members to adopt her rescues.
“NRA members are not a protected class, she’s not discriminating on race, religion or gender and this is something she’s allowed to do under the law and this is her way of speaking out,” says Fiset.
The reason Sill feels so strongly about gun control, is because her sister Michelle was shot and killed. Plus, Sill briefly met the man who committed the mass shooting at The Borderline Bar and Grill.
“A few months before he killed all those people at The Borderline Bar and Grill he came here for some community service hours,” Sill said. “It ended up not working out because he was not willing to follow the rules.”
Despite all the nasty messages, Sill says she’s not backing down. She says, “When the thing happened with Uvalde, I said ‘Ok, if I can do one tiny thing in my little world of animal rescue, it will be to say how I feel and this is how I feel. Do something!’”
June 13, 2022
NewsNation Prime – Murder Case Goes To Trial 26 Years After Girl Vanishes
June 13, 2002 – Twelve jurors and eight alternates will be chosen for the murder trial of Kristin Smart — some 26 years after her disappearance. But as a classmate and his father stand trial for her murder starting at the top of July, a change of venue and a strict gag order have been put in place. Rachel Fiset comments on the difficulties of trying a case with little to no evidence.
June 9, 2022
NewsNation – Rachel Fiset on Simone Biles Suing FBI for $1B
June 9, 2022 – Former Olympic gymnasts, including gold medalist Simone Biles, are among dozens of assault victims who are seeking more than $1 billion from the FBI for failing to stop sports doctor Larry Nassar, lawyers said Wednesday.
June 4, 2022
Spectrum News – Rachel Fiset on Final Verdicts in the Johnny Depp Trial
June 2, 2022
A Current Affair – Johnny Depp and Amber Heard: Who’s the real winner? Rachel Fiset weighs in
https://www.facebook.com/ACurrentAffair9/
June 2, 2022
It’s the verdict that has divided the world. Johnny Depp and Amber Heard’s defamation case has wide-ranging implications, so who’s the real winner. Rachel Fiset weighs in on the verdict.
June 2, 2022
ABC 7 – Rachel Fiset on Witnesses and First Degree Murder Charge for Man Accused of Nipsey Hussle Murder
Criminal attorney Rachel Fiset said the COVID pandemic delay could possibly complicate the case.
https://abc7.com/nipsey-hussle-murder-trial-eric-holder-los-angeles-county-la-of/11919782/
June 2, 2022 By Rob Hayes
LOS ANGELES (KABC) — The murder trial of the man accused of gunning down rapper Nipsey Hussle has begun in Los Angeles after a more than a three-year delay due to the pandemic.
Jury selection started Thursday morning in Eric Holder’s trial.
He’s been charged with first degree murder, two counts of attempted murder and several other charges in connection to the shooting death of Hussle in March 2019.
Hussle, whose real name is Airmiess Asghedom, was shot and killed outside of his clothing store at Slauson Avenue and Crenshaw Boulevard just minutes after speaking with Holder.
Criminal attorney Rachel Fiset said the pandemic delay could possibly complicate the case.
“Witnesses may forget things, witnesses’ memories become hazy, people move away, that’s generally the issues with a longer trial,” Fiset told Eyewitness News on Thursday.
Fiset said a three-year wait for trial isn’t unusual, though, and may have given both sides more time to better prepare their case.
But she adds that the first degree murder charge against Holder will require prosecutors to convince the jury that the shooting was premeditated.
“I believe there was a six-minute delay between [Holder] talking, leaving and coming back,” said Fiset. “That could be considered the premeditation for a first degree murder charge.”
The rapper’s death was a serious blow to the South Los Angeles community, where Hussle grew up and where he was well-respected, not only as an artist, but as a businessman and philanthropist.
After his death, fans packed a celebration of life event held at Staples Center.
Holder was once considered to be a friend of Hussle’s.
Investigators said he used two handguns to shoot the rapper at least 10 times.
He was rushed to a hospital where he died a short time later.
Two other men were also wounded in the shooting. Holder was arrested in Bellflower two days later.
Jury selection recessed Thursday morning and is slated to start up again on Monday, June 6.
The trial is expected to last about a month. If convicted, Holder faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.
June 1, 2022
June 1, 2022
CBCNN Live – Rachel Fiset on Verdict in Amber Heard and Johnny Depp Defamation Trial
June 1, 2022 – A jury in Virginia awarded Johnny Depp $15 million in damages and his ex-wife Amber Heard was awarded $2 million in their dueling libel lawsuits.
May 31, 2022
Yahoo News – Rachel Fiset on No Verdict Yet in Johnny Depp-Amber Heard Trial
May 31, 2022
Deliberations will enter a third day in Johnny Depp and Amber Heard‘s multimillion-dollar defamation case as no verdict was reached after eight hours on Tuesday. The jury, comprising five men and two women, were given 37-pages of instructions while weighing Depp’s $50 million defamation claim and Heard’s counterclaim of $100 million. Experts aren’t surprised there is no verdict just yet.
“Court watchers have made up their mind and some cannot understand why the jury has not immediately returned a verdict for their favored party. That’s not the way it works,” celebrity lawyer Chris Melcher, partner of Walzer Melcher, tells Yahoo Entertainment.
“The jurors spent six weeks listening to conflicting evidence. They must weigh that evidence and decide who told the truth. Then they must figure out what the jury instructions mean, which are statements of law that are easily understood by lawyers but no one of the jury is a lawyer,” he continues. “The verdict must be unanimous under Virginia law, which means all seven of the jurors must agree on the answers to a series of questions. Getting seven people to agree on anything is difficult. This will take time to do it right.”
Attorney Rachel Fiset, managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, agrees it’s too soon to tell overall if this is a positive or negative sign for Depp.
“Since the trial was over six weeks and the various elements and damages are fairly complex, the deliberation time thus far does not quite give us a window into what they are thinking,” she says.
Depp is suing Heard for a 2018 op-ed she wrote for the Washington Post about being the survivor of abuse. Although she never named Depp, the article was published two years after she publicly accused the Pirates of the Caribbean star of domestic violence. Depp claims three specific portions of the article are defamatory. One is the headline of the online op-ed: “Amber Heard: I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”
The only question the Virginia jury has asked so far pertained to the headline. On Tuesday, jurors asked the judge whether they need to weigh that statement alone, or in context of everything else written in the op-ed. Depp’s legion of fans online are trying to decipher if that could give a hint as to how the jury may rule. Here is how the experts Yahoo spoke to break it down.
“Johnny Depp claims that specific portions of her 2018 op-ed are false. Those passages were identified for the jury and they must decide whether each statement is false. One of the alleged defamatory statements is the headline of Amber’s op-ed article,” Melcher shares. “The jury asked whether they must find that the headline is a false statement about Johnny or whether they must consider the whole article is false. The judge answered that they are only asked, in this instance, whether the headline is false. This indicates that the jury is taking their job seriously. They cannot answer the questions on the form unless they are clear about what is being asked.”
Melcher cautions, “Juries are unpredictable. Trying to decipher who they might be leaning toward by their questions, or facial expressions during trial, is like reading tea leaves.”
However, Fiset believes the jury’s question could give some insight as to how they are deliberating about this specific claim of defamation — and it could be a good sign for Depp.
“This signals that the jury is likely deliberating whether she was a victim of ‘sexual violence’ not just domestic abuse. ‘Sexual violence’ may be viewed by the jury as something separate and apart than other abuse and they may be digging into the specificity of that allegation — and whether it is true,” she explains. “I would say the specific allegations that this question implies the jury is considering is a good sign for Depp and his legal team.”
Heard countersued Depp for defamation over statements his attorney, Adam Waldman, made to the press in 2020. Waldman called the actress’s abuse claims a hoax. There are four possible outcomes as the media spectacle comes to a close.
“The jury could find Amber Heard liable for defamation on all or some of Depp’s three claims. Johnny Depp could be found liable for one or all of Amber Heard’s claims of defamation,” legal analyst Emily D. Baker told Yahoo. “The jury could find neither party liable for defamation. The jury could be unable to reach a decision and hang.”
For his part, Depp relished his time away from the courthouse. Over the holiday weekend, he joined friend Jeff Beck onstage and performed during concerts in England on Sunday and Monday.
May 28, 2022
CBS News – Rachel Fiset on Depp Trial As Jury Starts Deliberations
May 28, 2022
Jurors started their deliberations Friday in the civil libel trial between actors Johnny Depp and his ex-wife Amber Heard, following six weeks of courtroom drama that peeled back the curtain on the stars’ troubled marriage.
Depp is suing Heard for $50 million in Virginia’s Fairfax County Circuit Court over a December 2018 op-ed she wrote in The Washington Post describing herself as “a public figure representing domestic abuse.”
Judge Penney Azcarate gave the jury its instructions Friday morning, ahead of the start of closing arguments from Depp and Heard’s attorneys. When the jury deliberates, it will have to focus not only on whether there was abuse but also whether Heard’s op-ed piece can be considered legally defamatory.
The article itself focuses mostly on policy questions of domestic violence, but Depp’s lawyer pointed to two passages in the article, as well as an online headline that they say defamed Depp, even though the article never mentioned his name.
“She didn’t mention his name. She didn’t have to,” said Depp lawyer Benjamin Chew. “Everyone knew exactly who and what Ms. Heard was talking about.”
Watch Rachel Fiset at https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/johnny-depp-amber-heard-lawsuit-jury-deliberations-start/
May 20, 2022
Yahoo News – Rachel Fiset on Amber Heard Being ‘Consistent’ on the Stand
May 20, 2022 –
Amber Heard spent four days on the stand in her defamation trial, testifying in detail about more than 10 instances of alleged abuse at the hands of Johnny Depp. The Aquaman star spent most of her time appealing to the jury directly, breaking down as she recounted allegations of sexual assault. Depp, who didn’t look at the actress once, had been “winning” in the court of public opinion prior to the actress’s testimony. But which star is making the best case in court? Legal experts weigh in on where things stand heading into the trial’s final week.
“I think Heard had a fairly consistent message and did not crumble during a very tough cross-examination,” attorney Rachel Fiset, managing partner of Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo, tells Yahoo Entertainment. “In her direct, Heard set the stage for how she fell in love with Johnny and then recounted how their relationship devolved into volatility and abuse throughout its course. For the most part, she sounded sincere in her love for him — and distraught as to the decline.”
However, Fiset believes Heard “may have downplayed her role in the volatility of the relationship too much” given the actress admits to physically abusing Depp on audiotapes played to the court. Fiset also notes that Heard is just that — an actress.
“She looked a bit rehearsed and she focused on her audience — the jury — which could rub the jury the wrong way because it looks a bit contrived and at times she came across as overdoing it,” she explains.
Read the entire article at YahooNews.com
May 16, 2022
Court TV – Rachel Fiset Comments on Amber Heard’s Latest Testimony in the Johnny Depp Defamation Trial
May 16, 2022 – Rachel Fiset & Former Prosecutor, Josh Ritter, discuss Amber Heard’s latest testimony in the Johnny Depp defamation trial.
May 6, 2022
Business Insider – White-collar crime: Non-violent crimes committed for financial gain
May 6, 2022
The FBI estimates that white-collar crimes cost its victims $300 billion each year. Rachel Fiset comments on how technological advancements in the finance world, such as decentralized finance (DeFi) and the adoption of cryptocurrency, has made fighting white-collar crime more expensive and increasingly difficult. Read the full article BusinessInsider.com
May 5, 2022
ABC News – Amber Heard Takes the Stand
Watch the full story here.
May 5, 2022
Bloomberg Law – Rachel Fiset on McKinsey’s ‘Ghoulish’ Opioid Sales Advice
May 5, 2022 – Documents showing McKinsey & Company encouraged Purdue Pharma to pay out thousands in rebates per opioid overdose raise ethical red flags for the global consulting firm, but advice without implementation falls short of breaking the law, attorneys say.
Cash prizes and “unrivaled recognition” were among the perks McKinsey suggested to Purdue salespeople as part of a strategy to ramp up prescriptions for the highly addictive pain medication OxyContin, according to internal documents highlighted as part a congressional investigation. Attorneys say such actions may simply amount to callous advice without proof of a conspiracy or that they directly contributed to opioid deaths.
…
In 2017, over 71,000 people were predicted to have died from an overdose in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In documents dated December same year, McKinsey laid out the “stronger than ever” headwinds swirling around Purdue. It detailed a plan for providing rebates to pharmacy benefit managers—liaisons between drug companies and health insurers that run patients’ prescription benefits—”based on actual incidence” of overdoses or opioid use disorder related to OxyContin.
But “even though the recommendation looks fairly gross on its face,” McKinsey was “tasked with fleshing out what could be, they are not enacting anything, they are in an advisory capacity,” said Rachel Fiset, a health-care lawyer at Zweiback, Fiset & Zalduendo LLP.
“It feels incredibly unethical,” Fiset said. But “it’s not illegal. It is an analysis of how [Purdue] could get their drugs sold.”
…
When it comes to litigation, attorneys have cast their net far and wide in trying to hold actors accountable for America’s opioid crisis.
But while McKinsey’s conduct has caused alarm, it’s ultimately the pharmaceutical companies doling out the opioids, attorneys say.
“Someone may try to loop them into a civil suit, but ultimately it is not McKinsey that is disseminating the drugs,” Fiset said.
Read the entire article at bloomberglaw.com
To contact the reporter on this story: Ian Lopez in Washington at ilopez@bloomberglaw.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Alexis Kramer at akramer@bloomberglaw.com
April 30, 2022
NewsNation Prime- Rachel Fiset on Santa Fe Sheriff’s Controversial Release of ‘Rust’ Evidence
April 30, 2022
Rachel Fiset on why the Santa Fe Sheriff released a ‘mountain of evidence’ relating to the ‘Rust’ investigation.
April 29, 2022
NewsNation – Olivia Wilde served custody papers while on stage
J.J. BullockPosted: APR 28, 2022 / 08:29 PM CDT | Updated: APR 28, 2022 / 08:31 PM CDTjavascript:false
(NewsNation) — Hollywood star Olivia Wilde, known for co-starring in the Tron movies, was served custody papers in her split with Ted Lasso star Jason Sudeikis — while on stage at CinemaCon in Las Vegas.
Wilde was on stage talking about her new movie “Don’t Worry Darling” when a confidential envelope was placed in front of her. Security did not attempt to stop the person from going on stage.
“This is for me right?” Wilde said. “Very mysterious. I am going to open it now because it feels like a script… O.K. got it, thank you.”
Inside the envelope were custody papers for her two children with Sudeikis.
“To protect the integrity of our studio partners and the talent, we will reevaluate our security protocols,” CinemaCon head Mitch Neuhauser told Variety. “We will act accordingly because it’s the right thing to do. We want to do the safe, proper thing.”
Attorney Rachel Fiset said Thursday on NewsNation’s “Prime” that the question of the incident isn’t exactly about the legality of being served on stage, but whether or not the person who delivered the papers was trespassing.
“Was it legal to serve her on stage? Yes,” Fiset said. “Service sometimes may require personal service and that is why they were trying to track her down, I guess, and they went to pretty great lengths to do this.”
Fiset said this type of thing often is arranged to happen lawyer to lawyer … if the lawyers are on speaking terms.
Other times, she said, the service can be done in person, “for affect.”
Sudeikis said in a statement he would never condone Wilde being served in that manner.
The two were engaged for seven years and had two children together. Wilde is reportedly romantically involved with her “Don’t Worry Darling” co-star Harry Styles, according to Entertainment Weekly.
Sudeikis is now dating his “Ted Lasso” co-star Keeley Hazell.
Wilde, 38, began her climb to fame appearing on the television show “House” and in Disney’s Tron movies.
Sudeikis, 46, got his start as a writer and cast member for “Saturday Night Live” which he was on from 2005-2013. He then starred in movies such as “We’re the Millers” and now is the lead in Apple’s hit show “Ted Lasso.”
April 26, 2022
NewsNation – Rachel Fiset on Latest Developments in Rust Shooting Investigation
April 25, 2022 – Newly released body camera footage from the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office shows the aftermath of the deadly “Rust” movie set shooting involving Alec Baldwin. Criminal Defense Attorney Rachel Fiset helps break down it down on “NewsNation Prime.” “This is a really interesting development, and it’s not all the time that sheriff’s offices would do this. In fact, they generally release the information as part of the discovery process once a charge has been made. So the fact that they’re releasing the information prior to charges is an interesting move,” Fiset said.
April 20, 2022
Los Angeles Times – Rachel Fiset on Johnny Depp’s Defamation Trial
Read the entire article at https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2022-04-20/johnny-depp-testimony-fingertip-trial-amber-heard-defamation
April 20, 2022
Rachel Fiset says, “Attorneys usually seek more control over their witnesses…But Depp’s attorneys are giving him the freedom to say what he wants…He has provided so much information that it opens him up to a lot of leading questions that may make him look less credible.”
April 20, 2022
Court TV Live – Rachel Fiset on Johnny Depp’s Testimony in Defamation Trial
April 20, 2022 – Rachel Fiset weighs in on whether Actor Johnny Depp’s testimony was convincing in his defense against fourteen different accusations of abuse by Amber Heard. In his testimony, Depp scoffed at the notion that his constant quarrels with ex-wife Amber Heard would ever prompt him to hit her, and instead portrayed Heard as an abusive partner who threw bottles at him, faked domestic violence and became so volatile that Depp would retreat into the bathroom to hide. (Part 2 of 2)
