But another thing I did in that last motion is that I baited Moran a bit by pointing out that we had not heard from his attorneys in all this, and I alleged “upon information and belief” that they were not responding because they knew that their client was engaged in criminal conduct and could not assist him, but on the other hand they could not expose him to liability, so they were saying nothing. And I knew damn well that was the reason because I had written Jim D’Anza that letter. And that prompts this response from Moran on or about January 8, 2010:
Now, there’s a couple of interesting things about this response. The first is there on page 5, where Moran raises this strange issue about whether I’m sort of acting ultra-vires, like without my client’s authorization. I was very puzzled by this “argument”, if you want to call it that, but subsequent events that have just taken place very recently – after I started writing about all this stuff on the blog here – indicate that this was some kind of rumor floating around the Rochester legal community. Probably started by Moran himself. Or maybe at the Appellate Division. I don’t really know because until a couple of weeks ago the only thing I had ever seen or heard raising this issue was that strange paragraph in Moran’s 2010 response. But maybe more on that later.
The second interesting thing is right at the end, where Moran takes the bait and states:
“Mr. Regan’s continuous and baseless speculation regarding your affirmant’s previously retained counsel is offensive and completely ignores the obvious truth that your affirmant could simply not continue to justify the expenditure of Livingston county taxpayer funds responding to Mr. Regan’s never-ending parade of unmeritorious motions.”
Leaving aside that I had only mentioned Mr. Moran’s attorneys once, so this is hardly “continuous”, this whole thing is obviously incorrect, because Underberg & Kessler cannot fail to respond in litigation just because their client doesn’t want to pay them. If payment was an issue they would have to move to withdraw, not just stop responding. Nobody does that, and certainly not Underberg & Kessler. So even Moran should know that this is a misrepresentation, and a deliberate misrepresentation is a lie to the court, in this case to the Appellate Division, which disciplines attorneys supposedly although quite obviously prosecutors are exempt from discipline but shhhh, this is a secret.
But on the other hand if he doesn’t know that he’s misrepresenting the truth here that raises other issues, like his fitness. Or competency.
And the latter issues – fitness and competency – are also kind of indicated by Moran’s content impoverished submissions, that are otherwise notable only for their overuse of hyperbole. It’s a little like raving on paper when you’re supposed to be arguing. It’s a sign of mental instability – unless you’re just doing it on a blog.