(The Center Square) – The special prosecutor pursuing a criminal case against Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill has accused Murrill and her attorneys of mounting a retaliatory campaign to harass and intimidate her, asking an Orleans Parish judge to throw out a subpoena seeking her communications and telephone records.
Special Prosecutor Laurie White, a retired Orleans Parish Criminal District Court judge, filed a motion to quash the subpoena, calling it an improper “fishing expedition” that violates a stay issued by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
“The Defendant’s SDT, on its face, glaringly reeks of one, and only one, purpose-to harass and intimidate S.P. Laurie White in retaliation for the Indictment against Defendant,” White wrote.
The subpoena duces tecum – a court order requiring someone to produce specified records – seeks communications between White and Orleans Parish District Attorney Jason Williams’ office, including emails and telephone records.
White argued the request is overly broad, does not identify particular documents and is designed to search for evidence supporting allegations Murrill and her attorneys have already made against White, the trial court and the grand jury proceedings.
The Louisiana Supreme Court stayed the prosecution July 2 and returned the case to the district court to allow Murrill to file defensive pleadings, including motions to quash the indictments. The court also permitted motions seeking the recusal of White or the trial judge and responses to filings made by Murrill.
White argued the order did not authorize Murrill to conduct discovery.
“The Louisiana Supreme Court’s opinion clearly authorizes the Defendant to file specific motions,” White wrote. “It does not authorize the Defendant to conduct discovery, much less go on a fishing expedition.”
White also said the trial court approved the subpoena without holding a contradictory hearing or giving her sufficient time to respond.
The filing escalates an increasingly personal dispute surrounding the criminal case. White accused Murrill’s attorneys of unnecessarily publishing her home address in an earlier pleading, making the address of a former judge and current prosecutor in a politically charged case publicly available.
Murrill has alleged that political actors improperly influenced an Orleans Parish grand jury to interfere with her work as attorney general. Her attorneys have also accused White of having a conflict of interest because the Attorney General’s Office, through appointed counsel, is representing White in an unrelated civil lawsuit.
Murrill’s emergency filing further alleged that White called a high-ranking employee of the Attorney General’s Office on July 1, discussed her representation and disclosed confidential grand jury information. It also suggested people outside the grand jury may have engaged in improper communications intended to manipulate the proceedings.
White’s motion does not directly resolve those allegations. Instead, she argued that Murrill and her lawyers should already possess evidence supporting the accusations they presented to the Supreme Court.
“As Louisiana’s Top Prosecutor and an attorney, Defendant would not have made the grave allegations of fact to the Louisiana Supreme Court against Special Counsel Laurie White or the District Court unless she and her attorneys possess supporting evidence,” White wrote.
If Murrill’s attorneys already have that evidence, White argued, they should be able to identify the particular records they need rather than demanding broad categories of communications.
“If Defendant and her counsel do not possess, or at least can specifically identify, the evidence to support her overwhelmingly detrimental accusations of fact,” White wrote, “the Defendant and her attorneys should not have made them to the Louisiana Supreme Court or any Court.”
Justice William Crain McCallum separately described the allegations contained in Murrill’s emergency filing as “troubling.”
“At worst, they are indicative of invidious motives; at best, they suggest incompetence,” McCallum wrote in a concurring opinion quoted in White’s motion. He said that if the allegations prove even partially accurate, proceedings before the Judiciary Commission and Office of Disciplinary Counsel may become necessary.
White is asking the district court to quash the subpoena in its entirety.
