Mike Postle Case Update: Veronica Brill Defense Attorney Marc Randazza Provides Statement on HONR Network Involvement

4 months ago
Mike Postle Case Update: Veronica Brill Defense Attorney Marc Randazza Provides Statement on HONR Network Involvement
10:02
24 Mar

In the wake of yesterday’s publication of statements offered by the HONR Network’s Director of Public Relations and Policy, Alexandrea Merrell, concerning its involvement with the $330 million libel lawsuit filed by alleged poker cheat Mike Postle, a prominent defense attorney has offered his own countering statement.

Marc J. Randazza, the attorney for lead defendant Veronica Brill, offered his own take on the HONR Network’s immersion into the case.

“Thought you should know that Merrell lied to you,” Randazza’s direct message via social media began.

While who’s been lying and who hasn’t is largely a matter for the courts, this writer believes that having given a platform for one side, the other side deserves an opportunity to comment as well.


Randazza, who agreed to have his statements be fully on the record, took immediate issue with Merrell’s claim that her group wasn’t offering something approximating legal advice to Postle. Randazza said:

“Merrell acted in a way consistent with being ‘Counsel’ to Postle on calls with my firm. If you would like to have a second source for that, you can confirm with my associate. You might also want to talk to Witteles' counsel, who had a similar experience. When my associate got on the phone with Postle, Merrell was the one doing the talking - and arguing for a 90 to 180 day extension of time in the case. It seemed more that she was driving the bus than Postle. She even argued with my associate that we would lose credibility with the judge and seem unreasonable if we did not agree to their proposed 90-180 day delay in the case. When he reported that to me, I called - and she did the same -- arguing and telling me that they were ‘determining what content was actionable’ -- you know, the *practice of law* - Postle couldn't even get a word in with Merrell on the line.”
This writer has yet to be able to confirm Randazza’s claims regarding other counsel’s impressions of Merrell’s work. Meanwhile, in the hearing, Postle actually sought a 90- to 120-day second extension, but received a much shorter 33-day continuance instead.


Randazza continued by addressing references to an infamous Connecticut case involving Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, in which Randazza was not given permission to appear.

“Merrill (and [HuffingtonPost]) also lied that I was ‘fired’ by Alex Jones. I continue to represent him and Infowars in multiple matters. Where there are difficult defamation cases or other matters involving the First Amendment, I'm on the short list of who you call. I do not discriminate on what other people think of my clients. The First Amendment is there for everyone, or it winds up being there for no one.”
Randazza also took issue with a statement made by Postle in his motion for a second continuance, in which he described his first attorney, Steven Lowe, as being inexperienced in online defamation cases. In December, Lowe sought to be removed from his role as Postle’s counsel, citing Postle’s lack of communication and asserting at least one violation of their attorney-client agreement.

Randazza said:

“Any claim by Postle that Steve Lowe is ‘inexperienced’ in this kind of case is ludicrous. Steve is a very well respected attorney - and quite honestly, I would have no reservations about hiring him myself, if I needed an attorney. In fact, I signed up for a CLE that he's going to be teaching - *because I think there is much to be learned from him.* But, Postle expects the world and the court to believe that he needed a better lawyer? Rubbish. The rules of ethics constrain Mr. Lowe from defending himself from this bullshit that he was somehow not competent to handle this case. I wish he were permitted to tell his side of the story, but since he can't, I will gladly defend his honor. He's a hell of a lawyer, and Postle's statements the contrary don't pass the smell test. Postle's claims about why the attorney-client relationship ended do not seem plausible to me, nor to anyone else. If there is one thing that I wish were covered more accurately in this case it is this - I wish someone would really tell the truth about Steve. He's a great lawyer. If he and Postle have divergent stories about why the relationship broke down, I would believe Steve.”

Randazza offered little as to whether he was being tracked or targeted by the HONR Network due to his relationship to InfoWars’ Alex Jones, but noted that “it does seem funny that HONR reached out to Postle,” when so many other cases of alleged or actual online defamation could have drawn their interest as well.

The next hearing in the case is scheduled for April 20th, when anti-SLAPP motions filed on behalf of defendants Veronica Brill and Todd Witteles are likely to be heard. By then, the world will likely also have learned whether Postle has retained replacement counsel or will continue to attempt to argue his claims himself.


If you missed anything connected to the case over the past year, our extensive coverage of the Postlegate scandal can be viewed below:


Articles 74

Veteran poker and gambling writer/editor Haley Hintze has provided content throughout the gambling world for nearly 20 years. Widely known for her work on online poker's insider-cheating scandals in the late 2000s, she's been a two-time Global Poker Awards finalist and a prior finalist for Women in ...Read more

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a new comment

No Comments found.