Gloria Allred may have done herself in this time around.
Earlier today, we reported that her client, Roy Moore accuser Beverly Young, went on national television last night and outright made a bombshell admission – she forged the inscription in the now-infamous yearbook she’s using as “proof” she and Moore had a relationship. Allred was with Young when she first revealed the yearbook, and has stood by her client’s claims the inscription was written by Moore himself, which is going to be a huge problem for her.
— Sean Brown (@Patriot_Beaver) November 15, 2017
Breitbart News reported that if Allred knew the signature was a forgery, she could be in serious hot water in her home state of California, where it’s against the state bar’s ethics regulations to submit false evidence.
The California State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, in Rule 5-120 (“Trial Publicity”), states (emphasis added):
(A) A member who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the member knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.
Whether an extrajudicial statement violates rule 5-120 depends on many factors, including: (1) whether the extrajudicial statement presents information clearly inadmissible as evidence in the matter for the purpose of proving or disproving a material fact in issue; (2) whether the extrajudicial statement presents information the member knows is false, deceptive, or the use of which would violate Business and Professions Code section 6068(d); (3) whether the extrajudicial statement violates a lawful “gag” order, or protective order, statute, rule of court, or special rule of confidentiality (for example, in juvenile, domestic, mental disability, and certain criminal proceedings); and (4) the timing of the statement.
The rule arguably applies to Nelson’s accusations against Moore. Allred’s refusal to submit the yearbook to an independent expert suggests that she may have known there was something wrong with the evidence that she and Nelson presented as proof of a relationship with Moore. Or, if Allred is given the benefit of the doubt, the moment she suspected that something might be wrong with the yearbook, she should have made that clear immediately.
That’s not good for Allred, who’s already facing two ethics probes in California. But worse yet, Allred, along with Young, are looking at facing legal trouble in Alabama under the state’s statutes prohibiting the use of forged documents with the intent to defraud others.
According to CriminalDefenseLawyer.com, Alabama law states the following about forged documents [emphasis mine]:
A person commits the crime of forgery in Alabama by making, completing, or altering a written instrument (or a written document, trademark, signature, or other symbol of value of identification) with the intent to defraud.
Making, completing, and altering. Forgery can be committed by creating, adding to, or altering a document. For example, signing another person’s signature to a contract can be forgery, as could deleting important paragraphs from a will, or creating a fake state identification card.
Intent to defraud. A person has an intent to defraud if he or she intends to deceive or trick. However, signing a love letter from a pop star to a friend as a joke is unlikely to result in criminal charges, because the intent is to amuse, not to deceive. But, signing the same pop star’s name to a poster with the intent to sell the poster on Ebay as an autograph is illegal, because the forger intends to trick whomever buys the poster into believing the autograph is real.
The bad news doesn’t end there, either. Not only is it a crime to present forged documents, but it’s a crime to possess them as well.
Further, under Alabama election law, these two cretins are likely guilty of election fraud because they used forged documents in an attempt to sway the voters of Alabama, as the following statute outlines:
Any person who, by bribery or offering to bribe, or by any other corrupt means, attempts to influence any elector in giving his or her vote, deter the elector from giving the same, or disturb or hinder the elector in the free exercise of the right of suffrage, at any election, shall be guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C misdemeanor.
So there you have it. If someone were to pursue these liars, they would both in a world of legal trouble.
For the sake of law and order, let’s hope someone does exactly that.