Even Government Prosecutors Think They Bullied Monica Lewinsky

Richard Ellis/ZUMAPRESS

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Federal prosecutors are generally barred from speaking with people who have already hired lawyers. This restriction, as the Washington Post notes today, “is to prevent ordinary people from being taken advantage of by prosecutors and their superior knowledge of the law.”

Back in 1998, Monica Lewinsky had a lawyer: Frank Carter, who was representing her in the Paula Jones case. Nevertheless, Ken Starr’s prosecutors ambushed her in the Pentagon food court anyway:

More than 100 pages long, the “Report of the Special Counsel Concerning Allegations of Professional Misconduct By the Office of Independent Counsel in Connection with the Encounter With Monica Lewinsky” provides a highly detailed account of Lewinsky’s first encounter with Starr’s lawyers, based on documents and interviews with those involved.

….When first approached at the food court and told that she was the subject of a criminal investigation, Lewinsky immediately told an FBI agent to “go f— yourself” and then told him to speak to her attorney, according to the report.

She agreed to go with the agents to a room at the adjoining Ritz-Carlton only after she was told that she would learn more about the situation without an attorney present. For hours, according to the report, Lewinsky tried “in various ways” to consult with, speak to or visit Frank Carter, a lawyer she had hired to assist her when she was deposed in the Paula Jones sexual-harassment case against Clinton. The report says Lewinsky spent those hours “crying, sobbing, regaining her composure, screaming.” One prosecutor told investigators that Lewinsky’s demeanor had an “unsettling effect on his own state of mind.”

Lewinsky was told repeatedly that she could speak with whomever she wished but was then warned that her cooperation would become less valuable if she consulted with anyone, including Carter, before agreeing to assist prosecutors, the report says.

This is old news, and the only reason to bring it up is that this is not Lewinsky’s version, or Linda Tripp’s version, or Bill Clinton’s version. It’s the special prosecutor’s own version. It was written by lawyers working for Robert Ray, who took over the case after Ken Starr quit.

I have a question for any practicing defense lawyers in the audience: does it ever hurt to refuse to talk to police or prosecutors until you have a lawyer present? Is it ever the case that you lose, say, a chance at immunity if you demand to have your lawyer present before you say anything? And is it considered prosecutorial misconduct to repeatedly try to talk someone out of speaking to their lawyer, even after they’ve said they want to?

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate