Bridge case defendants, law firm head to court over texts

NEWARK, N.J. – A trial in the George Washington Bridge lane-closing case is months away at minimum, and already there has been enough mudslinging and accusations of nefarious conduct to rival the current presidential campaign for pure entertainment value.

In a departure from the norm, a non-party to the indictment filed by the U.S. attorney’s office is at the centre of the action.

Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, the law firm that has billed New Jersey taxpayers more than $10 million for representing Republican Gov. Chris Christie’s office, is fighting a subpoena by defendants Bill Baroni and Bridget Kelly, former Christie allies who each face nine criminal counts.

The two sides are scheduled to argue in front of a judge on Thursday. Here’s what to expect:

___

WHERE’S THE PHONE?

Of all the documents and materials sought in the subpoena, Christie’s phone has garnered the most attention, primarily because its whereabouts are a mystery.

Christie has claimed he “gave it to the government” some time ago and wasn’t sure where it was; the U.S. attorney’s office said it never had the phone, and Gibson Dunn wrote in a court filing it “returned” the phone after reviewing its contents in response to a government subpoena. Christie declined to answer a question about it last week.

A top Christie aide has said she exchanged texts with the governor during testimony by officials from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the bridge’s operator, before a New Jersey legislative committee probing the closures.

The aide, Regina Egea, has said she deleted the texts. In a court filing this week, Gibson Dunn said the texts contained “nothing inherently damaging or suspect.”

Baroni, a former Port Authority executive, is accused of concocting a story for the committee a few weeks earlier about the lane closures being part of a traffic study to cover up their alleged intent: to punish a local Democratic mayor for not endorsing Christie.

___

STICKS AND STONES

Attorneys for Baroni and Kelly have accused Gibson Dunn of destroying notes pertinent to the case, deliberately refusing to turn over documents it was obligated to produce and ignoring potentially damaging evidence to people in Christie’s office other than Kelly.

Gibson Dunn has called the allegations “scurrilous”, “appalling,” ”egregious” and “defamatory” in court filings, and wrote this week the defendants’ tactics “reek of desperation.”

___

THE ARGUMENTS

Kelly’s attorney claims the U.S. attorney’s office effectively “deputized” Gibson Dunn by, for example, letting the firm retrieve text messages related to the lane closures and deciding which ones were relevant.

Kelly and Baroni argue the texts and other correspondence not yet produced are crucial to their defence. Their attorneys invoked the Watergate scandal to justify their subpoena of Christie’s cellphone records.

The law firm contends it produced all materials required by the U.S. attorney’s office’s subpoena, and argues Baroni’s and Kelly’s subpoena seeks additional materials far in excess of what the judge in the case authorized.

___

THE FALLOUT

Since details about the lane closures began to emerge in the fall of 2013, the scandal has rarely been out of the news for long. It dogged Christie’s failed bid for the Republican presidential nomination but apparently hasn’t hurt his standing with presumptive nominee Donald Trump. Trump is vetting Christie as a potential running mate, according to people with direct knowledge of the vetting process who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the situation publicly.

In December, Trump told supporters in South Carolina that Christie “totally knew about” the lane closures, something Christie has adamantly denied.

___

Associated Press writer Steve Peoples contributed to this story.