Cobble Hill letter to klein - Special Commissioner of Investigation

Hon. J. I. Klein -39- June 26, 2007
• April 26, 2006 at 11:29 p.m. – Nobile e-mailed Rodriguez “work product
for Mr. George hearing” with his thoughts about “Re: Mr. George’s
Motive.”
• May 11, 2006 at 4:16 p.m. – in an e-mail to Rodriguez, Nobile questioned
the argument by George’s defense counsel for “inclusion” of Nobile’s file
because his credibility was in question. 114 Nobile wrote: “In what sense
is my credibility at issue? Zeal maybe, but credibility? Doesn’t that
imply that some of my claims have been previously unfounded or
contradicted?” He suggested that Rodriguez reargue exclusion of the file
and offered ideas. 115
• May 11, 2006 at 6:01 p.m. – Nobile e-mailed Rodriguez: “Hope the
honeymoon is not over.” Later, he added: “With more preparation and
brainstorming I feel that I could have been a better witness.” He also
wrote: “You’re the lawyer, of course. But I’m the expert. You’ve got a
lot of other cases on your plate. I’ve made this one and lived it laser-like
for two years.” He concluded with: “I have slamdunk questions for Mr.
George’s cross-examination and possible arguments and gambits for your
summation. You have already received some suggestions in my emails.
But we’ve never discussed them. We should.”
• Sunday, May 14, 2006 at 4:44 p.m. – Nobile e-mailed Rodriguez: “As
part of my witness preparation, especially for the all important cross
tomorrow, I should be aware of which documents of mine are in evidence.
Why be surprised by Mr. George’s fiesty [sic] counsel who is out to
destroy my credibility?”
The Prosecution Team
• Sunday, July 2, 2006 at 10:03 p.m. – in a “Dear Prosecutorial Team”
e-mail to Rodriguez, Best, and Europe, Nobile wrote: “I hear that the
BOE’s case against Mr. George has not gone well and that you will
probably lose. Hard to believe granted the amount of incriminating
evidence.” Later in the message, he said: “Cross-examining Mr. George
should have been a lay-up for Eddie [Rodriguez]. Apparently, he did not
114 Nobile began his testimony at the George proceeding on May 9, 2006.
115 In his response that same day at 5:01 p.m., Rodriguez explained that the colloquy at the hearing was
about “discoverability” of his file, not “‘inclusion.’” He reminded Nobile that he was prosecuting the
matter and Nobile was a witness.