Hopefully the way I phrased this without violating Rule #2, but can someone succinctly explain what a “special master” is and what their impact is on a legal proceeding?
In: 1
There are cases where a search warrant might end up seizing a collection of privileged documents/evidence they’re not allowed access to along with the actual evidence they can use – for example they might seize a safe and inside that safe is folder that contains correspondence with the persons lawyer. This is evidence they’re not allowed access to (barring extraordinary circumstances). But they need to be able to go through the folders to get the evidence they are allowed access to.
In these sorts of cases the Judge will appoint a “special master” whose job is to go through all the documents and decide which are privileged and which aren’t, and then the prosecution gets the evidence without the info they’re not allowed to have.
There’s a case currently that may have prompted this general question, and that’s a weird one as the Judge is a different one than is running the actual case, arguably doesn’t have jurisdiction, is weighing in after all the evidence has been reviewed already, and is basing their assessment of privilege on the theory that a past president can override the current president’s claims over Executive Privilege.
Latest Answers