It’s true we broke news of and have been actively covering the Luke Campbell case that Richard Brodsky masterfully tried before Judge Cooke, but now Uncle Luke, a columnist at the very fine Riptide, breaks his silence over the controversy and has some harsh words for Judge Cooke:
When I finally heard about the allegations, I fought to vacate the judgment and dismiss the case. The judge refused me, ruling there was enough evidence to send the case to trial. It didn’t look good for Miami’s favorite uncle. So I hired Richard Brodsky, former attorney of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to defend me. At that point, I had spent a lot of money, and knew I would have to spend a lot more.
When the trial began two weeks ago, Butler was allowed to talk about her job, child, and community service. The photographer was afforded the same opportunity. But when I was on the stand, the judge instructed my lawyer to stop asking me questions about myself. She said that information was irrelevant.
I respect some judges, but not all of them. There is always a chance you’ll get one who doesn’t like you, your political leanings, or your core values. I would rather face a jury of my peers, who can debate the merits of the argument and come to an unbiased conclusion. In my case, the jury saw through the judge’s power play.
Me: Be a gracious winner. You won the case, for chrissakes! You don’t need to slam Judge Cooke for her “power play,” whatever that means. Litigants don’t really hold equal power with the presiding judge in a federal case, anyways. Also, and I’ll let my buddy Brodsky weigh in on this if he’s so inclined, but maybe the judge let in evidence of the plaintiff’s background because it went to her damages? Just take the “W” and move on.
BTW, I’m happy Luke spent a lot of money on Richard — it was evidently worth every penny.