Reuland v. Hynes takes to the courts

The saga continues, as dethroned Brooklyn prosecutor turned acclaimed crime writer Rob Reuland faces off against his former boss, Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes, in court. (For the background, read this earlier post, which sums up how the relationship became so bad that Reuland sued his superior, as well as last month’s motion by Hynes to dismiss the case outright) Based on opening arguments, things are going to get fairly nasty very quickly:

In opening statement yesterday to the jury, attorney Jane Gould, who is representing Reuland, said Hynes was angered by remarke Reuland made in a March 2001 magazine article profiling ten lawyers. She also noted that Hynes believed “Hollowpoint”, which portrayed a fictional Brooklyn prosecutor, reflected poorly on his office.

Commenting on why he liked working in the homicide bureau, Reuland said it was a good place to work because “we have more dead bodies per square inch here than anywhere else,” Gould noted.

After Hynes received any angry call from then-state senator Marty Markowitz, the prosecutor gave Reuland a tongue-lashing about the article, calling him an “effete snob” and then told him to take a reassignment out of homicide or else resign, Gould said.

But Assistant Corporation Counsel Pam Miller told the jury that the suit was all about Reuland’s “personal interest and publicity.”

Miller portrayed Reuland as a “spoiled child” who “pouts, is condescending and disrespectful to supervisors.” Reuland’s job performance after he transfered out of the homicide squad was “disgraceful,” Miller contended, adding that he failed to notify two defendants of their right to testify before a grand jury.

Whoo-ee. Suffice it to say that I’ll be posting further developments as the court case continues on. It remains to be seen, of course, whether one–or both–will benefit in terms of book sales…