When I was a young scribe covering federal court cases I took note of the various attorney personalities and how they went about their business zealously representing respective clients.
Some had strong analytical skills, others unrelenting perseverance, some thoroughly empathetic to client needs, others a flair for showmanship.
I had always wondered what they all had in common. I asked a seasoned attorney and he replied playfully: “Lennie, a lawyer is someone you hire to lie for you.”
On Friday a jury deliberated quickly to validate the government’s case that former State Senator Dennis Bradley had manipulated Connecticut’s campaign finance program to win a large pot of public money in his successful run for state senate in 2018.
In some ways the trial came down to the battle of the liars that judge and jury had to sort out. Bradley’s performative lawyer Darnell Crosland, both in attire and attitude, called several government witnesses liars including yours truly under federal subpoena called by the government to confirm under oath a very narrow piece of information, an article I wrote and published in late February 2018 advancing Bradley’s planned March 15, 2018 announcement at Dolphin’s Cove in the East.
It ended up being quite a theatrical party of booze, band, DJ, food that Bradley had financed against election law rules and also claimed it was a law firm event when clearly a political event.
Despite my narrow testimony, Crosland under cross examination jumped on me like I was a creature from parts unknown implying that the story was all a fabrication.
I explained that I’ve never lied to a fed, never lied under oath and I’m not starting now.
Fast forward a few days and right out of the box, in his closing statement to the jury Assistant U.S. Attorney David Novick declared:
Crosland tried to undercut the government’s position. He lampooned the government’s emphasis on Bradley’s party by festooning the lectern with a heart-shaped balloon, tinsel, tissue paper bunting, and a disco ball.
Quite the fantastical legal strategy to impress the jury, eh?
On rebuttal Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Francis urged the jury to focus on the evidence not the lawyer’s theatrics.
Crosland, predisposed to making many things about race, has a peculiar style that’s even got him into hot water including in 2019 charged with witness bribery and tampering.
Calling it a lynching, Crosland navigated a successful defense of the charges without losing his law license.
Curiously it was in and around the time I could see Bradley in imminent legal danger of possibly losing his law license, and liberty, caught in the crosshairs of state and federal investigations. He was now an incumbent state senator and we had become friendly. He’s engaging, charismatic, gifted public speaker, even chameleonic. He has a diverse ability to be just about anything he wants to be.
Sometimes, that can lead to irrational justification.
We met for dinner at Joseph’s Steakhouse in Downtown Bridgeport. Bradley has a practice that runs the gamut of immigration law and criminal defense. But when you’re going against the feds you need a seasoned pro who can help you navigate the thorny process.
I explained that he had much more than a public relations problem, he had huge legal exposure and needed representation. I recommended a top firm in Hartford and he made the call. They did not come to a representation agreement but at least he was searching for guidance. Soon after, Covid hit and everything stopped including a large slow down of court action.
Bradley would not be charged until May 2021, but I was pleased to see they he had retained a world-class lawyer to represent him in James Glasser who would not be bashful about sharing the facts of life. I’m not privy to whatever conversation they had but Glasser’s the type of guy who can size up things, mitigate the damage, craft a plea deal with much less prison exposure, a discussion with the state to minimize loss of legal license so that the whole thing is behind him in a year or two.
Ultimately, however, Bradley wanted to pursue a trial.
On the verge of trial December 2021, another delay occurred on the day of jury selection. The government introduced a new piece of video evidence, a longer capture of Bradley’s Dolphin’s Cove announcement. Glasser protested and Judge Victor Bolden did not allow the longer version into evidence.
The government went to the court of appeals where it dragged out and eventually prevailed. Judge Bolden was reversed and the longer version could be played at trial (which the government did play). Along the way, however, I learned Glasser was no longer representing Bradley. Don’t know what happed. Sometimes it’s over money, sometimes it’s a legal strategy dispute.
Bradley went through another lawyer until he connected with Crosland. Bradley is appealing his conviction. He’s likely to be sentenced sometime this summer. Judge Bolden is sympathetic to first-time, non-violent offenders. Bradley will have mountain ranges of clients, friends, political allies who will write to the judge extolling his virtues.
Bradley is receiving a lot of love in the comments section of the OIB Facebook page.
People like comeback stories and Bradley is certainly young enough to make that happen.
Too soon to know how this will play out long term.
