[ad_1]
The Manhattan district attorney’s office in 2022 charged rock auctioneer Edward Kosinski, rare book dealer Glenn Horowitz, and Craig Inciardi, former curator of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, of acquiring pages from the Eagles’ manuscripts after they were stolen in the 1970s. Prosecutors accused Kosinski, Horowitz and Inciardi of conspiring to auction off the manuscripts , valued at more than one million dollars, in 2016.
But the trial changed over the weekend when lawyers for Eagles leader Don Henley released about 6,000 pages of documents mid-trial that defense lawyers said established perjury on the part of several witnesses they had already cross-examined. and blew a hole in the state’s prosecution. On Wednesday, prosecutors admitted that the defense had not been given time to review the major revelation of new evidence and decided to dismiss the case.
The drama did not go unnoticed by New York Supreme Court Justice Curtis Farber, who praised the district attorney’s office for “eating a piece of humility pie” and suggested it had not adequately investigated the case before filing charges.
Lawyers for Kosinski, Horowitz and Inciardi, all of whom have pleaded not guilty, applauded the decision and said their clients should never have been charged.
“We are glad that the district attorney’s office has finally made the right decision and dismissed this case,” Jonathan Bach, Horowitz’s attorney, said in a statement to the Washington Post. “It should never have been brought in.”
The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment beyond its statements in court.
Dan Petrocelli, Henley’s attorney, said in a statement that the result was “unfair” and added that his client “will defend all of his rights in civil court.”
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office in 2022 alleged that Kosinski, Horowitz and Inciardi purchased about 100 pages of the Eagles’ manuscripts, which included Henley’s handwritten notes and lyrics of songs from the band’s 1976 album, “Hotel California,” including the title track, “Life in the Fast Lane,” and “New Kid in Town” – after they were stolen. Prosecutors accused the trio of working for years to prevent Henley from recovering the manuscripts and attempting to auction them for profit, and charged them with conspiracy and possession or attempted possession of stolen property.
Lawyers for all three men maintained the trio’s innocence at the time. The intrigue continued depending on the case. went to trial in late February, with Henley divulging details on the stand about his career and the origins of the Eagles’ most enduring song.
Arguments in the case centered on whether the manuscripts were stolen before Kosinski, Horowitz and Inciardi obtained them. Defense attorneys said Henley voluntarily gave the pages to an author hired to write a biography of the band, who then passed the pages to Horowitz. Henley responded that they were initially issued under a book contract that said the tickets remained the property of the Eagles. The perpetrator has not been charged.
Defense attorneys said Kosinski, Horowitz and Inciardi were never told about the contract, and questioned why Henley’s lawyers never told them about the contract and instead called the robbery a robbery when they wrote in 2012 to the defendants. to demand the return of the manuscripts. Bach said.
The trial took a turn on Saturday, when defense attorneys suddenly received thousands of pages of previously undisclosed documents, including attorney-client communications, Bach said. They were belatedly released after Henley abruptly revoked their attorney-client privilege upon testimony from one of his attorneys. Henley had previously invoked his attorney-client privilege to withhold information when the defense questioned two other attorneys, before changing course.
That led to the sudden release of a large amount of material that contradicted the testimony of the first two attorneys, said Stacey Richman, Inciardi’s attorney. She said the scenario looked like something out of a crime drama.
“Every time we turned a page, we were like, ‘What? Oh Lord. This is eye-opening,’” Richman said.
Bach said in court Monday that the newly unsealed documents indicated that Henley’s lawyers recognized the contract was critical to the case. The first two attorneys testified that they did not believe the contract was important in explaining why they did not cite it in demanding the return of the manuscripts, he said.
Bach argued that he and his colleagues were denied the opportunity to cross-examine previous witnesses about the large amount of new material and requested a mistrial. The situation stunned lawyers for both sides, he said.
“All of the defense attorneys at trial noted that this was unprecedented in their collective experience,” Bach told The Post, adding that prosecutors had said the same thing.
Prosecutors initially challenged the motion, but on Wednesday admitted that defense attorneys had not been given the opportunity to review the delayed disclosures and proposed dismissing the case, according to court transcripts. Farber, the judge in the case, concluded that Henley had used his attorney-client privilege to evade thorough cross-examination and criticized the district attorney’s office for not thoroughly investigating the case before filing charges.
“I commend the prosecution for refusing to allow itself or the courts to be further manipulated for anyone’s personal gain,” Farber said.