And I’ll bet you don’t say “Crown” either! 
Sorry, let me link to this page and two relevant quotes:
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-5000-issues-related-trials-and-other-court-proceedings
This is still very far from mentioning every person talked to.
Our rule is broader than Brady, which uses the “exculpatory” concept. We have a general Crown disclosure based on relevance, without any inquiry into inculpatory or exculpatory. The was set out by the SCC in the Stinchombe case:
Initial disclosure should occur before the accused is called upon to elect the mode of trial or plead. Subject to the Crown’s discretion, all relevant information must be disclosed, both that which the Crown intends to introduce into evidence and that which it does not, and whether the evidence is inculpatory or exculpatory. All statements obtained from persons who have provided relevant information to the authorities should be produced, even if they are not proposed as Crown witnesses. Where statements are not in existence, other information such as notes should be produced. If there are no notes, all information in the prosecution’s possession relating to any relevant evidence the person could give should be supplied.
Except a negative may be relevant. If the police talk to 15 people, and 14 of them have no evidence incriminating or clearing the accused of an allegation of misbehaviour (eg at a party), that is relevant evidence.
Far safer for the Crown to disclose every conversation, even if nothing comes from it.
It should be noted that while Trump says he wants the affidavit released he’s not actually doing anything to make that happen. His lawyers were present at the hearing concerning releasing the affidavit, but they never addressed the court. They have filed no motions concerning the release of the affidavit either.
Frequently with Trump what he’s says is at odds with what he does and what he does usually tells us more about what he wants than what he says does.
Just a week or two ago he was demanding that the search warrant be released when he was in possession of a copy of it.
I didn’t see that. Interesting…
He wants it released, not that he’s actually gonna do it himself. No, no, NO, he “wants it released to the public”, so his allies can spin it in his favor, and all the while he can denounce what the lamestream media says about it, without really having to “do” anything. It’s better for other, little people to push buttons that make things happen, so he can be the victim here.
For the FBI to investigate Trump must be by far the juiciest and easiest investigation of all time. Rather than spending a year digging for one gold nugget of evidence, the feds find that Trump is dropping massive golden boulder stones left and right.
It’s another one of those times when he says he wants something to happen (that he really doesn’t want to happen) so that he can bitch and moan about other people obstructing him and keeping him from doing stuff that needs doing. And like that.
Like the guy in handcuffs who shouts, “Just take these cuffs off of me so I can pound that 6-ft-7 musclebound wrestling champ to a pulp!” Meanwhile praying they’ve lost the keys to the cuffs.
Well, he’s dropping golden somethings!..
Pro se:
OK, it actually seems like a clerical mistake may have been made, unusual given the caliber of people who usually work for the man.
He’s also representing himself in his lawsuit against the US government.
https://twitter.com/SpiroAgnewGhost/status/1561818639791116289/photo/1
There are lawyers signed on to that filing. It looks like this is filed ‘pro se’ so those lawyers don’t have to file a notice to appear or act as officers of the court or something. I’m not a lawyer so i don’t really get it.
Lindsey Halligan, James Trusty, and Evan Corcoran have all signed on.
Pleadings in the US federal courts are a lot more … inflammatory … than I’m used to in Canadian courts.
A lawyer named ‘Trusty’, the screenwriters are getting lazy.
never mind
That’s too bad. Trump representing himself would be the best lawyer ever, because no one knows lawyering better than Trumpie – no one …
This one was ridiculous (and not typical). You can tell Trump told them to throw in a bunch of stuff as “background” that has no business being in there. Their actual request for a special master would be worth consideration. This is not the time to complain about the Mueller investigation or the validity of the search warrant. Just say they took a lot of stuff, and someone needs to make sure privileges are protected. I was also put off by the repeated references to “President Trump,” as if he was currently president.
And if it actually is released, then he can just keep on going on complaining about how it hasn’t been released. See also Obama’s birth certificate.
Sure, but are there no sanctions for acting on such bad instructions? Motion to strike as frivolous and vexatious comes to mind.