DS News - Digital Archives

» VISIT US ONLINE @ DSNEWS.COM JUDICIAL REVIEW BEST PRACTICES INDUSTRY INSIGHT cause for either, according to Trafford's lawyers. "In fact," they wrote, "the evidence presented established the exact opposite: Lawrence testified that she had authority to sign Trafford's name, and she actually told the prosecutors that because she had such authorization, her conduct did not constitute 'forgery.'" According to our source, "One thing that doesn't seem to come out" in any of the reports on Lawrence's suicide is that Assistant Chief Deputy AG Kelleher "was trying to kind of bully his way into getting … a confession [and] that Lawrence was just distraught. He basically threatened to put her in jail for document signing." The legal brief filed last April by Trafford's attorneys also calls attention to "bullying" by the attorney general's staff. "[P]rosecutors persisted in their erroneous understanding of the law and actually bullied Lawrence into accepting their incorrect definition of the crime," ultimately relying on "baseless" allegations of forgery, the defendant's lawyers wrote. As someone who says he's endured more than his fair share of bullying, Rheingold essentially dismisses anyone who rues feeling bullied. "As a consumer advocate, I've been bullied by banks for many years and have absolutely no sympathy for a bank that's claiming an attorney general's bullying them. They got away with a lot in the last decade and, finally, they're being held accountable. I'm not going to shed crocodile tears for them," Rheingold said. At the same time, Rheingold did express sympathy over Lawrence's death. "That's sad," he said. "How do you respond to that? Most human beings, when they work for a company, think they're doing good. I'm not questioning any individuals. I think a lot of people just got caught up in it." It wasn't until eight months after filing the brief that claimed the attorney general's staff "bullied" key witnesses and bent legal definitions to win its indictments that Trafford's legal team unearthed the type of prosecutorial behavior and misconduct that not only makes the argument for a dismissal, but some say calls for the disbarment of the AG's lead prosecutor … and perhaps the attorney general herself. In researching the case, defendants' counsel happened upon a media report referencing foreclosure proceedings on Kelleher's personal residence and exposing a clear conflict of interest in the prosecution of Trafford and Sheppard. In September 2011, Kelleher received an NOD on his personal residence identifying LPS as the processor of the foreclosure documents. According to the legal briefing filed November 26, 2012, the attorney general's chief investigator was sent to Lawrence's home just two days after Kelleher was served with the NOD, and Lawrence "was threatened with arrest if she did not assist in the AG's attempt to make a case against Trafford," defendant's counsel wrote. Kelleher proceeded to build his case against Trafford and Sheppard and, as lead prosecutor, presented the case to the grand jury for indictment—all the while in the midst of foreclosure proceedings in which Trafford and Sheppard's employer was named. POINT— COUNTERPOINT sands of foreclosure documents but was charged with only one count in exchange for her testimony. Lawrence didn't show up for her sentencing and was found later that morning, dead in her Las Vegas apartment. Her death was ruled a suicide; the Clark County coroner's office reported finding three different types of prescription medicine in her bloodstream. Lawrence faced up to a year behind bars and a fine of up to $2,000 for the single charge against her. The attorney general's office said she was one of four LPS notaries cooperating with prosecutors in the case against Trafford and Sheppard in exchange for lesser sentences. But according to attorneys with the firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP, which represented Trafford, Lawrence's testimony didn't support the attorney general's case and even the charge against her of notarizing the signature of a person not in her presence was unfounded. Steven Miller, managing editor of the Nevada Journal, covered the AG's case against Trafford and Sheppard extensively, and in an article dated April 16, 2012, he cites statements from state officials and Assembly members who stress that a gross misdemeanor charge is only applicable if the notary public "willfully notarizes that document" without the person present. Miller references Deputy Secretary of State Renee Parker who, back when the Assembly was considering the statute in May 2005, explained, "[W]e do have situations where you are known to the notary, they can notarize your signature if they have been notarizing it for years. Section 1 is a person who is not in the presence of the notary public or unknown to the notary public. So in the circumstance of the notary public who has never notarized your signature, they would be committing a gross misdemeanor. In circumstances of someone you are known to, they would not be." Lawrence had known and worked for Trafford for years. In a brief filed with the court on April 9, 2012, the attorneys for Trafford also asserted, "As a matter of law," Masto's charges of "forgery" require the attorney general to "prove that Lawrence (1) did not have authorization to sign the NODs [notices of default], and (2) acted with criminal intent to defraud." The attorney general presented no evidence to the grand jury establishing probable 57

• Cover