A major development has emerged in the criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey, as Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick has ordered prosecutors to turn over grand jury records to Comey’s defense team. The defense is currently seeking to dismiss the false-statement and obstruction-of-Congress charges filed in Alexandria, Virginia.
In his ruling, Fitzpatrick said possible “government misconduct” may have affected the grand jury process, specifically pointing to a series of errors involving lead prosecutor Lindsey Halligan.
Judge Calls Disclosure ‘An Extraordinary Remedy’
Fitzpatrick described his decision as “an extraordinary remedy,” writing in a 24-page opinion: “Given the factually based challenges the defense has raised to the government’s conduct and the prospect that government misconduct may have tainted the grand jury proceedings, disclosure of grand jury materials under these unique circumstances is necessary.”
He reviewed the grand jury proceedings that led to Comey’s September 25 indictment, which was signed by Halligan—a prosecutor appointed by President Donald Trump through Attorney General Pam Bondi after other prosecutors resisted taking the case.
What Did Lindsey Halligan Get Wrong in the Comey Case?
Halligan’s Appointment Under Scrutiny
Beyond procedural issues, Halligan is also facing challenges regarding the validity of her appointment, a factor that could potentially disqualify her. Fitzpatrick’s findings raise the possibility that Comey’s case could be dismissed before trial.
Discrepancies in Grand Jury Timeline
Fitzpatrick questioned whether the Justice Department fully disclosed interactions between Halligan and grand jurors. He highlighted conflicting information in Halligan’s timeline, noting she claimed her final contact with the grand jury occurred at 4:28 PM, even though jurors were still deliberating at that time.
He also noted that the grand jury initially rejected one of the charges, prompting prosecutors to prepare a new indictment that Halligan later signed. However, there is no recorded evidence of the grand jury’s first vote or its discussion of the revised indictment.
Fitzpatrick wrote: “The short time span… could not have been sufficient to draft the second indictment, sign the second indictment, present it to the grand jury, provide legal instructions… and give them an opportunity to deliberate and render a decision.”
Legal Misstatements That Could Undermine the Case
Halligan, who had never prosecuted a case before this one, allegedly made two fundamental misstatements of law:
- She implied Comey might need to testify to prove his innocence.
- She suggested jurors could assume the government had additional evidence beyond what was presented.
Both statements are considered improper and could jeopardize the entire indictment.
Fitzpatrick noted: “The record points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps.” He added these issues may have “potentially undermine[d] the integrity of the grand jury proceeding.”
Concerns Over Privileged Information
The judge was also troubled that Halligan relied solely on testimony from an FBI agent who may have reviewed attorney-client privileged material belonging to Comey. Despite being warned, the agent “proceeded into the grand jury undeterred.”
Fitzpatrick described the government’s decision to allow that testimony as: “Highly irregular and a radical departure from past DOJ practice.”
He added that investigators showed a “cavalier attitude” toward privileged information and suggested they skipped the usual step of seeking a new search warrant—likely due to pressure from an approaching statute-of-limitations deadline.
Statute of Limitations Still in Question
Prosecutors argue that if the indictment is dismissed, federal law would extend the statute of limitations for six months. Comey’s legal team, however, disputes this interpretation.
