Yale Galanter Takes the Stand!

Yale takes the hotseat in the OJ ineffective assistance proceedings out in NV:
Galanter, a veteran Florida criminal defense lawyer, is a key state’s witness in a hearing that, since Monday, has revolved around his promises, payments and performance in the 2008 trial that sent the 65-year-old former football hero to prison for nine to 33 years for armed robbery and kidnapping.

Galanter faces some uncomfortable questions about his trial preparation, the nearly $700,000 he was paid but allegedly didn’t share with the Las Vegas lawyer at his side and why he didn’t try to block prosecutors from playing for the jury secret recordings that amounted to a soundtrack of Simpson and his five pals confronting two sports collectibles brokers and a middleman in a cramped casino hotel room.

Key among Simpson’s 19 claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and conflict of interest being considered by District Court Judge Linda Marie Bell is the allegation that Galanter should have provided witness testimony supporting Simpson’s contention that he didn’t know he was breaking the law.

Simpson says the two even talked about it over dinner the night before the ill-fated confrontation in September 2007, and that Galanter told him that if Simpson recovered the suit he wore the day he was acquitted in Los Angeles, Galanter would like to have it.

Bell has made no indication whether she plans an immediate ruling or will issue a written decision later.

The most damaging testimony about Galanter’s performance came from three other lawyers involved in the case: Gabriel Grasso and Malcolm LaVergne, who represented Simpson, and Brent Bryson, who represented a Simpson co-defendant who also was convicted.
Each said Galanter seemed more interested in what he was paid and protecting himself from having to testify than in fully representing his client.

And you thought you were having a bad day.


  1. a tragic clown

  2. an unmitigated scumbag.

  3. Happy Friday, SFL.

  4. I'll sign my name to my comment. He is an awful lawyer and I have personally seen the after effects of his unethical behavior. He abandoned one client who hired me after he got 30 years because of Yale's abandonment, and luckily the appellate court reversed his sentence, and when that opinion was published, (Davalos v. State) other people contacted me to say he had done the same thing to them or their loved ones.

    Justice will be done if he gets his due and his conduct is exposed for what it is- self serving at the expense of any client unlucky enough to hire him.

  5. Really, a good attorney is all about the hair.

  6. This trial will end up just like th last one. Rare chance his sentence will be reduced.

  7. Why visitors still use to read news papers when in
    this technological globe all is presented on web?

    Here is my web blog :: http://www.gonzologic.com


Post a Comment